At 8:30 a.m. Saturday, in an event hall filled with women, one stranger turned to another and asked: "What made you get out of bed to be here?"
Vallerie Wagner took a deep breath.
"Well," she said. "I've often toyed around with the idea of running for office."
Many of the women around her had done the same. The purpose of Saturday's seminar was to persuade them to take the next step.
For years, women's groups have hosted boot camps across the country to instruct women in the art of campaigning and the realities of public office. Such efforts have increased in Los Angeles recently, partly because of the dearth of elected female officials in city government.
One woman sits on the 15-member Los Angeles City Council, a statistic that one of Saturday's speakers, Assemblywoman Betsy Butler (D-Marina del Rey), called "so depressing."
The picture at the national level is also distressing, she and others say. This year, the number of women sworn in to Congress fell slightly for the first time in 30 years. And the number of female lawmakers in state capitals nationwide decreased by the largest percentage in decades.
"We are not making the gains we should be making," West Hollywood City Councilwoman Abbe Land told the audience, gathered at an event center in Plummer Park. The city of West Hollywood co-sponsored Saturday's event, along with several women's political groups and the California Commission on the Status of Women.
Outside, children ran through the park and elderly Russian immigrants played cards. Inside, the tone was serious.
"You're not going to change the number of women elected to office until you change the number of people who run," said Rachel Michelin of California Women Lead.
Speakers offered practical tips on how to organize campaign volunteers and ways to spend donations effectively. (One hint: Don't waste campaign funds on business cards; instead, hand out envelopes printed with your name and information to make it easy for people to contribute.)
They also stressed the importance of getting women appointed to government commissions and state and local redistricting committees, helping to ensure that there are women well positioned to run for office in the future.
Event speakers included Jan Perry, the lone woman on the Los Angeles City Council, and City Controller Wendy Greuel. Both are seriously considering runs for mayor in 2013.
And both said that while campaigning for office, they faced naysayers who told them they would never win.
But women are resilient, Greuel said: "We give birth."
In the end, Wagner said she was "inching a little closer" to a run for office, perhaps the Westside seat currently held by L.A. City Councilman Bill Rosendahl.
A longtime community activist who works at AIDS Project Los Angeles, Wagner said she planned to accept the offer from one of the day's speakers of a free political consultation and had taken notes on building an effective social media profile.
But she said that before she makes any announcement, "I've got a lot of homework to do."
kate.linthicum@latimes.com
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Drugs: a danger and pollutant
The US war on terror is now increasingly focused on water and underwater invasions. Not only are terrorists being viewed as a threat, but drug traffickers, long users of boats for trafficking, are also using submarines in murky water to access the states. So, the submarines are quiet and not visible by regular observation. While these drugs are moving in our waters, they are also polluting everyone's water. Whenever the traffickers dump their tons of cargo for security reasons, our fish and water become polluted and anyone using them will be exposed.
While we spend billions to decrease US drug activity, the users of these drugs must also be held accountable for the huge financial and societal costs. Without user demand, the drug-related problems would decrease.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
China emerges - China Summit
I attended the China Summit today and certainly came back with the message that China wants to do business and that China has "worldwide" goals. What these goals are, were left unstated. During the meeting the participants listed a number of problems with the China-US relationship.
I noted during the meeting that the US participants were not fully on board with resolving our US financial problems within the next two years. They had a goal of 3 to 5 years.
This disturbed me because the American people are clammering for jobs and business. Even one Chinese participant said, if you don;t have anything planned now, why not try something with China? One of the US participants answered saying the US is not very welcoming of Chinese investment in the US for various reasons.
It was during this part of the discussion that I realized that the youth of America must make these old millionaires move on or move over. Most families in the US do not want to wait for three years to improve US business and develop jobs. China also has a lot of older immobile people as business and political leaders who are reluctant to change. The youth will have to prepare themselves mentally to take on business and develop these obvious needs of both countries.
This can not be done with ignorance, as Google found out when it tried to develop a Chinese component of Google. The participants agreed China spies heavily on visitors and steals technology from China-based businesses. It was admitted that, in China, if you are not carrying your important papers, someone is probably copying them.
It was stated the US is hesitant to deal with Saudi Arabia, Russia and China due to cultural and policy differences and the large amount of crime. Of course, many had that same statement about American crime for many years. True, the trust is not there.
China is an emerging giant and it will be up to the youth in both countries to develop the international relationships needed. Oh yes, and American youth must learn Mandarin Chinese.
Labels:
Africa,
China,
deficit,
exports,
Google,
imports,
Mandarin,
Saudi Arabia,
South America,
US
Syria torturing its citizen protesters
Zainab, Syrian teen killed while in custody. Her body had been burned and mutilated in areas. Decapitated with her arms severed, her body was returned to her family. Zainab was held because her brother was a activist sources say. Her brother was also killed. His body also showed signs of severe torture and gunshot wounds to multiple body areas.
A Bankrupt Uncle Sam Hypocritically Lectures Europe on Debt
A Bankrupt Uncle Sam Hypocritically Lectures Europe on Debt
by Doug BandowThis article appeared in Forbes on September 26, 2011.
Europe's worsening debt crisis, highlighted by the threat of default by Greece, was the top topic as finance ministers from around the world gathered in Washington for the annual International Monetary Fund meeting. Despite frantic European efforts to prop up the Athens government's finances, investors have been fleeing to safer investments, driving German bond yields down to record lows. European governments remain divided, lacking answers and time.
Uncle Sam should declare bankruptcy. The government faces debts and unfunded liabilities on the order of $211 trillion, according to economist Laurence Kotlikoff. That's about 15 times America's official national debt — and GDP. Yet the Obama administration continues to lecture the rest of the world on how to get its economic house in order.
President Barack Obama has been pressing European leaders, most importantly German Chancellor Angela Merkel, to follow his profligate policies in the U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner even attended the recent European Union summit on the continent's economic crisis to lobby his counterparts.
Geithner gave his hosts the benefit of his thinking whether they wanted it or not. Some did not. Maria Fekter, Austria's finance minister, noted archly: "I found it peculiar that even though the Americans have significantly worse fundamental data than the Euro zone that they tell us what we should do." Jean-Claude Juncker, both prime minister and finance minister of Luxembourg, declared: "We are not discussing the expansion or increase of the [financial stability fund] with a non-member of the Euro area."
To be fair, the administration was not without something to say. But any advice should have been what not to do.
Don't engage in counter-productive, large-scale bail-outs. Don't waste hundreds of billions of dollars on ineffective "stimulus" programs. Don't initiate massive new regulatory programs that create expense and uncertainty without addressing the most important causes of the last crisis. Don't put off tough budget decisions involving domestic entitlements and military outlays.
However, that's not what Secretary Geithner said. True, he admitted that "we're not in a particularly strong position to provide advice to all of you." But that didn't stop him from doing so.
He warned of "catastrophic risk," as if his European counterparts were blind and deaf. He insisted that "the big countries in Europe, the leaders in Europe must meet and take a decision on how to coordinate monetary integration with more effective coordinated fiscal policy," as if the EU was a centralized nation state like America.
He told the other participants to act "decisively" even though the administration in which he serves has failed to address this country's toughest spending issues. He urged the EU members to stimulate their individual economies and expand their continental bail-out fund, even though the Obama administration's comparable domestic efforts have failed. The Europeans have the capacity to deal with their problems, he declared: they "just have to choose to do it." As Americans have not done.
The Europeans face severe economic difficulties. Successive bail-outs increasingly seem unlikely to prevent default by Greece, which would threaten banks across the continent, including in Germany, heretofore Europe's growth engine. Some investors worry about a reprise of the 2008 financial crisis.
Contagion threatens to spread well beyond Greece: Ireland and Portugal already have collected a hand-out from their European brethren. Worse, Spain and Italy, with far larger economies, face uncertain futures.
EU heavyweights, like President Obama, have lined up to demand that Chancellor Merkel show "bold leadership" — meaning commit more of her countrymen's money to prop up Europe's most improvident states. However, German citizens have begun to shout Nein! A majority wants to abandon their spendthrift friends and bring back the hallowed Deutsch Mark.
The normally sober Economist magazine declared that she just "needs to explain to her people" that the alternatives are worse. But even the fabled German economy can't forever underwrite the rest of Europe. No wonder Germans are worried, punishing Angela Merkel's governing coalition in regional elections despite a growing economy.
Nevertheless, so far the Eurocratic elite, a motley collection of politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, businessmen, and academics which dominates the European Union, is determined to save the Euro zone by strengthening continental control over national budget and economic policy. In essence, this group is hoping to create a Europe more akin to that of the United States, a quasi-nation state which will take its place as a Weltmacht alongside America and China.
There's nothing wrong in principle with such an ambition — except for the fact that no one in Europe other than the Eurocrats wants to turn Brussels into Washington. Most Europeans, at least the ones working, paying taxes, and suffering under the EU's regulatory dictates, are either indifferent or strongly opposed to further continental centralization.
Indeed, the only way EU leaders were able to win ratification of the so-called Lisbon Treaty, which further concentrated political authority in Brussels and created a European president and foreign minister, was to press the Irish to vote twice, after they defeated the agreement the first time, and prevent anyone else from voting. Polls indicated that citizens in half of the EU countries would have rejected the treaty if given a chance.
Today expanding Brussels' authority over national budgets faces resolute opposition, including from many governments. Yet without a more unified European fiscal policy, the Eurozone — to which 17 of the 27 EU members belong — could shrink, if not collapse. The costs of a messy economic divorce likely would be huge.
Europe's total debt to GDP is around 80%, but several nations have more serious problems. As of last year Greece's ratio hit 143%. Italy's was 119%. The debt ratios for Belgium, Ireland, and Portugal all exceeded 90%. Other countries like Great Britain are making painful budget cuts to avoid their own debt crises.
There are no easy answers. Nor are there any painless ones. Who should pay for whom? Who should have political authority over whom? Certainly the U.S. has no answers. Washington should offer Europe good wishes and little more.
There's an even better reason for U.S. officials to shut up. They have no credibility to instruct the Europeans. Maria Fekter observed: "I had expected that, when [Secretary Geithner] tells us how he sees the world, that he would listen to what we have to say."
First, the U.S. has struggled with the issue of political centralization even though the American colonies shared a common culture, fought a war together to win their independence, and only once battled among themselves. Even today, political centralization remains controversial — for good reason, given Washington's many manifest policy failures.
Second, the U.S. has an abysmal fiscal record. Total federal debt, which includes "loans" from the Social Security Administration to the Treasury Department, approaches 100% of GDP. These intra-government debts are artificial, but over time their "redemption" as the government pays Social Security benefits will add to the publicly held debt, which accounts for about 67% of GDP today.
Moreover, the U.S. has its irresponsible states which don't know how to say no. In terms of debt/GDP, Massachusetts leads the pack, at 20.43% (2009 figures). Rhode Island follows at 19.19%. Despite its oil wealth, Alaska is at 14.42%. Supposedly frugal New Hampshire is at 14.16%. Vermont is at 13.47%. Montana stands at 13.25%. Connecticut comes in at 12.49%.
In recent years California has made a practice of borrowing to fund its profligacy. Its debt/GDP ratio is "only" 7.12%, but $134.6 billion in official debt is supplemented by $62.4 billion in unfunded health care and other liabilities and $59.5 billion in unfunded public pensions. Illinois has $57 billion in debts and, following Washington's lead in creating unfunded liabilities, another $54.4 billion in unfunded public pensions. New York suffers from a debt/GDP ratio of 11.22%; its $122.7 billion in official debt is augmented by $56.3 billion in unfunded health care and other liabilities.
Neither Republicans nor Democrats offer real solutions. This year's vaunted budget deal focused on domestic discretionary spending, yet these outlays make up only about 15% of the federal budget. Democrats hate cutting even these programs, while Republicans bridle at proposals to simply slow the growth of military outlays. And no one wants to take on the great budget boulders, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
The Congressional Budget Office sees only more red ink and debt. The most positive alternative fiscal path is merely horrible. According to CBO: "Even with declining deficits, debt held by the public would continue to grow in the near term relative to the size of the economy — from 67% of GDP this year to a peak of 73% by the end of 2013. After that, debt held by the public would gradually fall to 61% of GDP by 2021, an amount well above the annual average of 37% recorded over the past 40 years."
That's not all. "That substantial debt, coupled with rising interest rates, is projected to cause the government's annual net spending for interest to nearly double as a percentage of GDP between 2011 and 2021." Worse, so-called "mandatory" spending will continue to increase. In the next few years other spending, such as unemployment compensation, is expected to drop (assuming Congress doesn't up outlays, as it has in the past), helping to mask the impact of the entitlements increase. But in the latter years of this period, "rising spending on those health care and entitlement programs will cause mandatory outlays to increase again at a faster rate than the economy."
That is, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will continue racing upward, threatening to swamp the rest of spending. Or as CBO put it: "the aging of the population and rising costs for health care would almost certainly push federal spending up sharply relative to GDP after 2021 if current laws remained in effect." This is supposed to be the good news!
The more realistic scenario is frightening. Simply assume that Congress does what Congress normally does: refuse to make hard decisions and retreat from any hard decisions it made in the past. If "revenues remained near their historical average of 18% of GDP" while spending increased as past experience suggests, noted CBO, "debt held by the public would balloon to nearly 190% of GDP by 2035. Although new long-term projections reflecting the latest 10-year projections would differ, the amounts of federal borrowing that would be required under those policy assumptions clearly would be unsustainable."
Indeed, such a fiscal policy would shrink the economy. Economist Carmen Reinhart warned Congress last year that "across both advanced countries and emerging markets, high debt/GDP levels (90% and above) are associated with notably lower growth outcomes."
The CBO similarly predicted that "Large budget deficits and growing debt would reduce national saving, thus leading to higher interest rates, more borrowing from abroad, and less domestic investment — which in turn would lower real GDP and income in the United States relative to what would otherwise occur. Furthermore, paying for the rising costs of interest through higher marginal tax rates could discourage work and saving and reduce output even more." Finally, such a debt increase "would boost the probability of a sudden fiscal crisis, during which investors would lose confidence in the government's ability to borrow at affordable rates."
America's debt crisis is not a partisan issue. George W. Bush and his GOP congressional allies were extraordinary wastrals, upping federal outlays on most everything. His Medicare drug benefit was almost as large a budget-buster as was President Obama's health care "reform" bill. During the financial crisis the Bush administration encouraged the presumption that everyone everywhere would be bailed out for everything. The national debt doubled on President Bush's watch.
Under President Obama the bail-outs continued, money was wasted on ineffective economic "stimulus," welfare reforms were abandoned, and an expensive new entitlement, subsidized health insurance, was created. Each new budget has forecast higher outlays, debt, and interest payments. The administration pressed for "financial reform" while ignoring the epicenter of the 2008 disaster, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which degraded lending standards and securitized bad mortgages. These two bodies are still operating, losing ever more money. Wall Street rampent with greed and fraud took advantage of access to financial markets and engaged in Ponzi schemes which crashed upon everyone in the US - but the people who headed the scams were still hugely financially rewarded.rest of the world.
The administration is now pushing the same policies overseas. It's unfortunate for Americans; we have learned so little from our experience over the last three years. It's unfortunate for people elsewhere that the denizens of Washington believe themselves qualified to lecture the rest of the world.
Congress adjourns for week with no help to citizens
Congress is unable to function and will lead our country into further disaster.The dysfunction and political division has made Congress a place for grandstanding and hot rhetoric, but at the cost of national unemployment and no confidence in the economy. Politicians can't even decide if the federal government should give FEMA money to help citizens who are victims of national disasters. Republicans say they will vote to fund FEMA, if the money comes from current programs that help US children and the poor.
I think most Americans want to help people who suffer from natural disasters. The stagnation in Congress is hurting us all - a different type of national disaster. Republicans had hoped they could force Senate Democrats to accept a partisan budget cut on the threat that disaster victims would otherwise be deprived of assistance for days or even weeks.
We in the valley must assuredly work to get Denham out of the valley as a representative. We will never get a reduction in the deficit via the congressional super-committee with this group in office - that means cuts in Medicare, social security, medicaid, etc.. We must vote the obstructionist Republicans out in 2012, so we can move forward.
Then, after spending billions of dollars fighting whether to fund FEMA or fighting to suspend clean air and water regulations and spend billions on studies to see if clean air improves health, the Congress adjourns for a week-long vacation.
This Congress takes too much time arguing and needs to spend more time in DC in session working and attempting to come to some needed agreements.
Americans are suffering, but congressmen are deaf to the cries.
I think most Americans want to help people who suffer from natural disasters. The stagnation in Congress is hurting us all - a different type of national disaster. Republicans had hoped they could force Senate Democrats to accept a partisan budget cut on the threat that disaster victims would otherwise be deprived of assistance for days or even weeks.
We in the valley must assuredly work to get Denham out of the valley as a representative. We will never get a reduction in the deficit via the congressional super-committee with this group in office - that means cuts in Medicare, social security, medicaid, etc.. We must vote the obstructionist Republicans out in 2012, so we can move forward.
Then, after spending billions of dollars fighting whether to fund FEMA or fighting to suspend clean air and water regulations and spend billions on studies to see if clean air improves health, the Congress adjourns for a week-long vacation.
This Congress takes too much time arguing and needs to spend more time in DC in session working and attempting to come to some needed agreements.
Americans are suffering, but congressmen are deaf to the cries.
Denham wants EPA out as he violates ethical standards
Rep. Jeff Denham (CD 19 Stanislaus,Fresno, Turlock, Madera, Sonora) spoke in the House on Sept. 23rd urging the House to pass the Train Act and give the job of information gathering required in the Act to his friends in the House balcony. Republicans feel the EPA is a rogue agency and want to end the regulation of mercury, etc.
HOUSE’S TRAIN ACT THREATENS TO DERAIL CLEAN AIR | “The House is slated to vote this week on a proposal that mandates at least a years-long delay of two major air pollution rules and, senior Democrats say, badly weakens EPA’s ability to limit mercury and other air toxics from power plants,” E2 Wire writes. The White House has threatened a veto. Last night, the House Rules Committee set the rules for debate on the TRAIN Act (HR 2401), a “bill that mandates interagency economic analyses of EPA rules, and delays two rules on power plant emissions.” The White House has threatened a veto.
Paying for a huge study to report the effects of muecury, etc. is a huge waste of public money. WE MUST CUT UNNECESSARY COSTS AND WASTE - not continue the old wasteful ways of spending and increasing the deficit - especially when Denham stated on the House floor that he had a pecuniary, unethical interest which is related to his political campaign.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Pharmacies make a move for control and cash
Pharmaceutical companies were given a huge advantage in the asthma market to push OTC asthma medications off the shelves. The FDA stated the OTC asthma inhalers would no longer be sold - they are now considered dangerous - and all inhalers must be by prescription. The OTC inhales cost around $20 - the prescription inhalers cost around $60 to $80 plus the cost of a medical visit and any tests the doctor/nurse/PA may order. As the pharmacies agrued in front of congress last week for the approval of a large pharmaceutical merger, it is clear the pharmacies, as they attempt to have more say in medical care by assuming some clinic responsibilities, are also trying to sharply increase corporate profits at the expense of those who can least pay the inflated prices and are just struggling to live. The merger, if it goes through, will also push out smaller pharmacies, who may be ensuring the contaminated meds from abroad do not reach American consumers, and give large corporate pharmacies access to almost everybody's medical information.
Republicans angry at minorities and women
(CNN) -- Campus Republicans at the University of California Berkeley have cooked up a storm of controversy with their plans for a bake sale.
But it's not your everyday collegiate fundraiser they've got in mind. They've developed a sliding scale where the price of the cookie or brownie depends on your gender and the color of your skin.
During the sale, scheduled for Tuesday, baked goods will be sold to white men for $2.00, Asian men for $1.50, Latino men for $1.00, black men for $0.75 and Native American men for $0.25. All women will get $0.25 off those prices.
"The pricing structure is there to bring attention, to cause people to get a little upset," Campus Republican President Shawn Lewis, who planned the event, told CNN-affiliate KGO. "But it's really there to cause people to think more critically about what this kind of policy would do in university admissions."
Lewis says it's a way to make a statement about pending legislation that would let the California universities consider race or national origin during the admission process.
But the young Republicans have been on the receiving end of a fierce backlash. Reaction has been so negative they've been forced to cancel their customary lunchtime tabling duties, according to KGO.
Lewis told CNN's Don Lemon that they expected a certain amount of opposition but not the level of outrage they experienced.
"We didn't expect the volume, the amount of response that we got," Lewis said. "In the first few hours, hundreds of posts on our Facebook page. And the tone of some of the responses -- we expected people to be upset. We didn't expect personal threats to be made. They were implicit and explicit threats made to the organizers of the event, from burning down the table to throwing our baked goods at us and other kinds of physical threats."
Tim Wise, author of the book "White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son," calls the bake sale a "sarcastic and rather smarmy slap at people of color."
"There are a lot of ways to make a point about your disagreement with affirmative action," Wise told Lemon Saturday night.
"I get the joke," he continued. "How very original. It's been done for 15 years. The point that I think needs to be made ... is that by the time anyone steps on a college campus ... there has already been 12- to 13-years of institutionalized affirmative action for white folks, that is to say, racially embedded inequality, which has benefited those of us who are white. And it's only at the point of college admissions that these folks seem to get concerned with color consciousness."
Lewis insists, however, that Campus Republicans will go ahead with their bake sale and are committed to their controversial pricing structure.
------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT: The irony is that Asians have for years out-performed whites in placement testing. So, more Asians would have gone to their first-choice schools, if not for racial bias which limited the Asian admissions.
Blacks have been excluded from quality education at all grade levels for over 200 years. The civil rights movement was able to change laws in the sixties, but racial hatred and discrimination persisted - and continues to this present day. Blacks will need at least three generations of education security to reduce the damage done by slavery, systematic exclusion and institutionalized racism. I feel it will take until 2055 to eliminate the imposed educational achievement gap and special race considerations and assurances will be needed for approximately fifty more years.
As we get closer to 2055, whites will feel all of the damage is gone and feel jealous that Blacks have an "educational advantage." Learning, education and cultural development goes deep - cytoplasmic. It can not be rushed. Many Blacks are still caught in the web on the 1950's. Their cytoplasm is still untouched. Reversing the evils of the past will produce benefits in the future for all Americans and is necessary. As you enjoy the TV show "Pan Am" today, remember those glorious Pan Am days depict a time when Black women we not allowed to work as a stewardess, Black males were allowed to be porters or skycaps. I imagine Black women were allowed to be janitors. Blacks were forced into the lower class and, for most Blacks, education was not a reality. White universities would not accept more than a few Blacks as students and most Blacks were educated at segregated institutions. Yes, this was America. Don't forget US history just because you are at Berkeley.
Just as current adults are leaving a debt for our children's children, the adults of early American created a huge debt for you and your children to pay off. No one wants to pay their debts. But, they must be paid, and once paid, all is well in the US again.
Example: Consider the life if racism and obstruction incurred by First-lady Michelle Obama: Luckily, she was smart and succeeded. http://womensissues.about.com/od/influentialwomen/p/MichelleObama.htm
Consider her generation 1, her children are generation 2,and their children will be generation 3.
Example: Consider the life if racism and obstruction incurred by First-lady Michelle Obama: Luckily, she was smart and succeeded. http://womensissues.about.com/od/influentialwomen/p/MichelleObama.htm
Consider her generation 1, her children are generation 2,and their children will be generation 3.
Republicans boo military
At the Republican debate for presidential hopefuls, a huge wave of BOO's were heard when a gay soldier spoke. As he risks his life for his country and our freedom, they BOO'd him because he wants to be with a male. I hope they will more strongly boo the male multimillionaire who was found guilty yesterday of killing his wife. Is he better because he is heterosexual?
I respect and honor every soldier, regardless of race, gender or religion. I want to hear their words and feelings. I hope one day we will move from a nation divided by hate, to a nation unified for a better tomorrow.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Poor Not Able to Pay Deficit
CNN) -- There is a war going on in Washington, and the politicians waging it can't even agree on what kind it is.
To Republicans, President Barack Obama and Democrats are waging class warfare by proposing tax reforms that would make wealthy Americans pay more than they do now.
"When you pick one area of the economy and you say, 'We're going to tax those people because most people are not those people,' that's class warfare," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."
Democrats refer to political warfare, with Republicans blocking the Obama administration's initiatives to better their chances of defeating him in next year's election.
"I don't think people like that style of politics and that's the reality ... we'll be facing in November 2012," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, said on the same program.
The result for now is a rehash of the same arguments that have dominated the national debate of the past two years on how to cut the federal deficit and national debt.
On Monday, Obama will make public his deficit reduction plan with an expected call for tax reforms and changes to the Medicare and Medicaid government health care programs for senior citizens, the disabled and the elderly.


Aides leaked one of his proposals Sunday -- a new tax rate for Americans earning more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings in taxes as middle-income Americans.
Coupled with his $447 billion jobs bill announced last week, the president seeks to stimulate economic growth and hiring now, then pay for it by reducing long-term costs and increasing tax revenue down the road.
Republicans reject the president's approach, saying it amounts to pitting different segments of society against each other.
Graham and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, both uttered the phrase "class warfare" on Sunday, showcasing what is certain to be a prominent GOP theme through the 2012 election.
"We have a difference of opinion on how best to fix these problems," Ryan told "Fox News Sunday."But when the president does things like this, it leads you to believe that he's not in bipartisan consensus-making mood. He's in a political class warfare mode and campaign mode. And that's not good for our economy."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that Republicans have no problem with tax reform that produces increased revenue, but they want the additional money to come from economic growth rather than higher taxes on a particular group.
Even Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, a former business executive with no political background, got in the act, telling the Fox program that raising taxes on investment income and other targeted areas was "a bad idea."
"You tax something more, you get less of it," Cain said, adding "if you were to tax the millionaires more using that bad idea, it still doesn't solve the problem of how to reduce the spending. So, that's just class warfare flowering in my opinion, and it's not going to help."
Former President Bill Clinton, however, had a different take, saying that fellow Democrat Obama was putting forward good proposals that deserved to be passed.
Tax reform is necessary, Clinton told the NBC program, adding that "the least harmful tax increases are the ones that Sen. McConnell and people who agree with him hate the most." He was referring to ending the tax cuts passed in the administration of GOP President George W. Bush.
"Right now we don't need what the Republicans want, which is further spending cuts," Clinton said. For Republicans, he added, "conflict seems to be better politics," but overall, "cooperation is better economics."
Congressional action on deficit reduction is moving on multiple tracks now. Durbin said on CNN that the Democratic-majority Senate would take up Obama's jobs plan next month, while leaders in the Republican-controlled House have rejected some parts of it.
Meanwhile, a special deficit reduction commission created under last month's debt ceiling agreement has started its work amid the longstanding political divisions on key issues.
The 12-member committee, evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate, has until November 23 to draft a $1.5 trillion deficit reduction plan that can win congressional approval by December 23. Otherwise, more than $1 trillion in across-the-board spending cuts will go into effect, on top of $900 billion in cuts already mandated under the debt ceiling deal.
So far, more than a year of rancorous negotiations on deficit reduction have failed to resolve a fundamental dispute between Republicans and Democrats involving the size of government and whether to raise tax revenue while cutting spending.
The brinkmanship of the negotiations, with uncertainty over whether the government might default if no deal was reached, was one reason that ratings agency Standard & Poor's downgraded the U.S. credit rating from AAA to AA-plus in August.
Calls increased last week for the new deficit committee to work out a comprehensive deficit reduction deal much larger than its $1.5 trillion target.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who twice pulled out of talks with Obama on a broad deficit deal this year over the tax increase issue, has said he too would prefer a large and far-reaching agreement.
However, Boehner gave a policy speech Thursday that rejected any tax increases as part of a solution to the deficit reduction issue. Durbin sharply criticized Boehner's stance on Sunday.
"I wonder if John Boehner knows what it sounds like when he continues to say the position of the Republican Party in America is that you can't impose one more penny in taxes on the wealthiest people," Durbin told CNN. "I wonder if he understands how that sounds in Ohio to working families who are struggling paycheck to paycheck."
Durbin offered a stark assessment of the differences between Obama's policies and what he said Republicans wanted.
"They would make sure that we have no new tax burden on the wealthiest people in America, and they would continue to criticize any effort to step forward and do something positive to move this economy," he said.
Ryan, meanwhile, endorsed a conservative call for the new deficit panel to focus on the specific target set by the legislation that created it, rather than seeking the broader deal pushed by Obama and others from both parties.
"If we are just going to do class warfare and trying to get tax increases out of this, I don't think much will come of it," he said on Fox. "But if we come together and get a $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion spending cut, then I think we have a shot at actually getting something done. We should hold our expectations down on the select committee and let's just get another down payment on debt. There's so much spending that needs to be cut."
Goodwin Announces Run For Congress
Goodwin Announces Run for Congress
AAAH! The ignorant spew racism and hate in the newspaper - it must be election time again in the valley.
As the old-time Madera bigots regurgitate their frothy, green fowl-smelling words and accusations filled with hate, they hope to keep minorities and women out of elected office. They offer no answers for our global problems, just attacks for attempting to make the Central Valley a better place.
We must prepare our children to recognize that smiles and head nods can bring a continuation of suppression and joblessness. Only true INCLUSION will make the valley a better place. As a teacher, I want to reassure our Central Valley kids that these "haters" should not deter you from running for any elected office you wish to pursue. Much like the idiots we have in Congress now, who speak in TV sound bites and regurgitate party lines, they only serve to act as a blockade, but offer no real hope or ideas for the future. They only show up for fundraising parties.
I hope no one will feel losing an election, especially when you are not a professional politician, is a bad thing. Denham, my opponent, had been in state office for over ten years. He had several fully staffed offices and banked funds. I, in contrast, was in my first big election and had no local Democratic structure. I was expected to lose, but I was learning. Losing was not a bad thing. The only bad things are: not showing up when we have our elections; not expressing your views in a civil,honest, respectful and intelligent way; and not voting for the best candidate, regardless of race or gender. I hope in the near future, we will be able to elect a minority representative to Congress in the Central Valley. We have had only white congressmen representing us for over two hundred years and the valley needs help. Old water wars still rage on and money is slipped under the table.
United we are stronger. I am seeking to build communities in Madera and Merced that value diversity, compassion, and inclusion. I want the people in the valley to value education and the positive future changes it can bring.
I was able to help integrate the Madera Unified school board, and we now have 5 of the 7 board seats filled by Hispanics. Due to “white flight,” MUSD has had a 60% to 80% Hispanic student population for many years with high dropout, suspension and expulsion rates and a wide achievement gap. A costly failing system. We needed better representation on the board by parents of children who are most affected by the school district.
In 2007, my first year in office, I was able to create the MUSD Farm-to-School Program which ensures Madera kids enjoy the valley agricultural produce on a regular basis at school. I had to fight hard to create the Farm-to-School Program because the superintendent was against it. It is now a tremendous success. I hope in the future many more people will decide to run for a school board position - political office is NOT meant to be a career.
The “haters” want to keep us all out of office, regardless of our qualifications, demean our efforts towards UNITY, COMPASSION and INCLUSION, and keep minorities divided. I know we can and will do better for our Central Valley communities in 2012. UNITED WE ARE BETTER!! We must encourage our kids to seek higher education. As we all know from 9/11, hatred kills.
For my supporters, 64,000 strong, yes, I will run for Congress again and you can follow me and contribute via www.ActBlue.com or via my website: www.drgoodwin.info. Remember:register to vote.
Dr. Loraine Goodwin, M.D.,J.D
Physician, Attorney Arbitrator, Hearing Officer, Teacher, Role Model for Kids
Candidate Congress 2012
Tuesday, September 06, 2011
Feds approve casinos for 2 Calif. tribes
By SUDHIN THANAWALA Associated Press
Posted: 09/03/2011 11:22:52 AM PDT
Updated: 09/03/2011 04:16:06 PM PDT
SAN FRANCISCO—The Obama administration has approved casino proposals from two California Native American tribes under a rarely-granted exception to the federal law that prohibits gaming on reservations established after 1988.
The U.S. Department of Interior on Friday approved the Enterprise Rancheria of Maidu Indians' proposed 1,700-machine casino and 170-room hotel near the Northern California city of Marysville and the North Fork Rancheria's 2,500-machine casino and 200-room hotel in the Central Valley city of Madera.
Both the tribes' proposed gaming sites are dozens of miles away from their current reservations and put them closer to urban centers. The Enterprise Rancheria casino would be 40 miles north of Sacramento. The North Fork proposal would put it 30 miles north of Fresno, according to the Department of Interior.
Federal officials said the projects would benefit the tribes economically without hurting the surrounding community.
"Both tribes have historical connections to the proposed gaming sites, and both proposals have strong support from the local community, which are important factors in our review," Larry Echo Hawk, assistant secretary of the interior for Indian Affairs, said in a statement about the decisions.
But Doug Elmets, who represents half a dozen California tribes that already have casinos, said the decision sets a dangerous precedent.
"It's a horrible, flawed policy that is now going to allow tribes to
Advertisement
Under the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, tribes can build casinos on reservations that existed before Oct. 17, 1988, but not on lands taken into trust after that date.
The law allows the Secretary of Interior to make an exception in cases where the off-reservation acquisition is in the tribe's best interest and does not hurt the surrounding community.
There have been only a handful of such exceptions granted since 1988, according to Kathryn Rand, co-director of the Institute for the Study of Tribal Gaming Law and Policy at the University of North Dakota.
Rand said Friday's decisions by the Obama administration reflect a change in the federal government's approach to off-reservation gaming from the Bush administration.
The Bush Interior Department in 2008 all but ruled out approval of tribal casinos that are not within commuting distance of reservations. It rejected applications from more than 20 tribes, including one for a casino 1,400 miles from the reservation.
"The Bush administration was leaning in the direction that distance mattered more than anything else," Rand said.
Distance from the reservation remains a factor for the Obama White House, she said. The Interior Department on Friday also rejected a casino proposal from the Pueblo of Jemez, which had proposed a casino on land close to El Paso, Texas, nearly 300 miles from its reservation in New Mexico. Federal officials cited concerns about the tribe's ability to oversee land that was so far away. Tribal officials have said they are reviewing their options.
But Rand said overall, the administration appeared to be taking a more pragmatic, case-by-case approach.
The Enterprise Rancheria and North Fork Rancheria proposals are now before California Gov. Jerry Brown, who has one year to decide whether to approve them. The projects would also need state legislative approval, according to Charles Banks-Altekruse, a spokesman for the tribes.
"We're confident that the governor shares our goal of bringing jobs and business opportunity and community investment to California," Banks-Altekruse said.
Evan Westrup, a spokesman for Brown, said the governor will review the decisions in the months ahead.
"Each proposal will be assessed individually, and our office will continue to engage all stakeholders to ensure the interests of the tribes, local communities and the people of California are all considered," he said.
The Interior Department on Friday also rejected a casino proposal from the Guidiville Band of Pomo Indians, which had sought a gaming facility in the San Francisco Bay area city of Richmond, more than 100 miles from its existing tribal lands.
The Guidiville proposal already appeared to have been scuttled earlier this year when the Richmond City Council rejected it.
The Interior Department said in its decision that Guidiville did not have a modern connection or a significant historical connection to the proposed site.
A call to a tribal spokesman on Saturday was not immediately returned.
Labels:
.Madera,
california,
gambling,
indians,
north fork,
tribes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)