Healthcare Reform Finally Emerging ?

Many of us had resigned ourselves to the probability that it wasn’t going to happen at all, that Healthcare Reform was dead, yet again. Every indication up until yesterday going back until March clearly pointed to a less than satisfactory outcome to the Healthcare Reform initiative. So why has this critical issue been so difficult to move forward? Folks on the Left tend to blame the Republicans, but I think the answer is deeper than that. Two words came close to killing any reform effort this year, those two words were “Public Option.”

I’m willing to bet that if any serious polls were done asking people what they thought the Public Option was, far more than 50% wouldn't guess the correct answer. Now the fact that the Public Option kept changing every five minutes didn’t help any, but the fundamental premise was the same – the US government would create its own insurance company to compete with the private Health Insurance companies. Beyond that, the details began to get a lot murkier. We certainly know what it was not, though - the Public Option was not:

• Medicare
• Medicaid
• The VA
• Tricare
• Any type of Single Payer System
• Free clinics
• Any sort of aggregated buyers’ collective that could bargain down prices (especially for prescription drugs).
• Any sort of oversight agency for the private health insurers

It was never clear exactly how the Public Option would help cover the uninsured or help lower costs. It was always being viewed from a narrow sense and was essentially targeted towards people who can’t now get health insurance so it seemed highly unlikely that any competition at all would occur (the private insurers weren’t going to compete for business they already turned down).

So, let’s round up all the reasons that the Public Option was gumming up the works:

1. It was confusing as hell.
2. It didn’t represent any type of real reform at all.
3. It failed to address cost containment.
4. It failed to ensure affordability (contradicting the name of the bill).
5. It failed to ensure coverage.
6. It was assailed by the Right as being something it wasn’t, because it was so confusing.
7. It deflected serious discussion of every other option from March through December.

Finally, this week, the Democrats introduced tangible reform measures. Senate Democrats introduced an expansion of Medicare to include Americans between 55 to 64 years old. The President announced that $600 million of the Stimulus bill would go towards establishing 85 free clinics across the country. Neither provision represents comprehensive Healthcare reform, yet both are real, easily understood and tangible. We know exactly how these will work and they can be enacted next year instead of 3 or 4 years from now.

This is a giant leap in the right direction. The initial reaction among Republicans has thusfar been negative, but they will have a much more difficult time confusing the electorate about Medicare and free clinics than they did about the Public Option. This begs the question, why didn’t Democrats start with an easily understood position in the first place? Perhaps we’ll never know why it took until December before Democrats jettisoned the counter-intuitive Public Option that was neither Reform nor based on any existing working models. I certainly hope that the Democrats continue to rediscover their common-sense and approach the rest of the President’s agenda with some political pragmatism – pragmatism that involves explicitly following the mandate that swept them into office.


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Political Perspectives – Daily Quotes 5

1 – Cheating Tiger, Swinging Dragon…

2 – The Senate working on a Sunday is quite remarkable, the Senate doing anything most days is hard to believe.

3 – Let’s go get Al Caida, by attacking all of the places they’re not located. That’s the last thing they’ll least expect, taking them by surprise, right?

4 – The decline of the decline is declining, that’s a very positive and uplifting trend.

5 – Economic Progress in the 21st century consists of wage reduction, devolution of working conditions and an industrial exodus to cheap labor markets. This progress is rapidly helping us achieve our goal of returning to the glory days of the 19th century.


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Political Perspectives – Daily Quotes 4

1 – The lessons of history are often lost in the self-delusion of expediency.

2 – An economy without jobs is like a book with blank pages, beneath the façade the emptiness is deafening.

3 – How can man accept responsibility for global warming, when we still haven’t taken responsibility for pollution, war and poverty yet ?

4 – Shaming Wall Street is about as likely as a newly elected President getting the Nobel peace prize and then launching a new war, right?

5 – We didn’t start the fire, but that’s no reason to throw a gas can into it…




Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Political Perspectives – Daily Quotes 3

1 – A Public Option that isn’t public and isn’t an option is the only one we’re willing to support, perhaps we should call it something else?

2 – Recalling a history of bad decisions does little to support a future of bad decisions.

3 – Dare to hope, but don’t be a dope…

4 – When after the first 8 years you don’t succeed, double the number of troops.

5 – Where is the Moral Hazmat team when you need it?



Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Political Perspectives – Daily Quotes 2

1 – The Democratic Party is for the people, they’re just not sure which people those are…

2 – War to end war is not a new idea and perhaps in 1917 it made for a catchy slogan. 90 years later, 100’s of wars later, billions of dead later it shouldn’t be too surprising that most folks are bit skeptical about it now…

3 – Not since Cicero has political suicide been this eloquent.

4 – Terrorism is a cancer and we’re the radiation, just don’t get too close to us because right now we’re radioactive.

5 – I’m a reformed Reformer, so that still makes me a Reformer, right?


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Democrats are in Big Trouble

Last night’s speech and the president’s decision on Afghanistan have put the Democrats in a serious bind. The decision to escalate a war even Bush did not want to fight combined with the lack of results on the rest of the president’s agenda couldn’t have come at a worse time. Poll after poll is showing the Democratic base rapidly peeling away from the president and this trend is also indicating that Democrats might not come out and vote in 2010. This shouldn’t come as a surprise. That base was mobilized last Fall and Independents were mobilized to elect Obama on the premise that Obama represented a significant departure from G.W. Bush. Instead of change we’ve gotten a lot more of the same things we saw from 2001 to 2008 and nothing thusfar indicates that we are ever going to get change, at least not from the Democratic party.

Folks have stopped believing because actions speak louder than words.

The Democratic party is now likely to lose their majorities in the 2010 mid-term elections and it is looking increasingly doubtful that Obama will win re-election in 2012. Fighting in Afghanistan will intensify over the next two years and maybe, just maybe some type of withdraw will take place in 2012, but by then the American public and the Left in particular is going to be so sick of these wars (which will be more than a decade old by then) that Obama will never again be able to mobilize the coalition he formed to sweep into office in 2008.



The "Democrat" has just been placed on the endangered species list...

President Obama has just consigned himself to the fate of Lyndon Johnson; he’s taken ownership of a flawed war that he did not start, one that cannot be won and that will divide the nation and destabilize the region where it is being fought. He will be a one term president. The only folks made happy by yesterday’s speech and policy decision were the same Republicans who started the war (except for Cheney of course, who has gone rogue – lot of that happening lately).

The fact that Karl Rove and Michael Steele were the only folks congratulating the President ought to be as reassuring as being dropped into a pit of vipers. There’s no doubt about it, last night’s speech was a historical event; we witnessed Barack Obama commit political suicide. The big problem for the Democrats is that he’s taking the party with him as he speeds over the cliff. I never thought I’d say it, but I’m beginning to think that Ralph Nader was right in 2000.

The worst part of what’s happened though is that last night’s policy opens a door to chaos that most people aren’t really thinking about. That chaos will make the current situation in Afghanistan look rosy in comparison. Here’s my prediction of what’s likely to happen: the increased scope of operations in both Afghanistan and Pakistan will further destabilize the already tenuous Pakistani regime and lead to a real crisis – the US may have to decide about entering into a third war to prevent the terrorists and rebels in rural Pakistan from taking over that government and getting their hands on nuclear weapons. If Pakistan falls, it will be the direct result of escalating this conflict and the Democrats will be held responsible for that, not Bush.

My own personal opinion is that this policy decision is the single worst foreign policy blunder that our country has made in the last 40 years. Say goodbye Democrats, you had your chance and blew it. A lot of folks, myself included may never vote Democrat again.


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Political Perspectives – Daily Quotes 1

Daily Quotes will become a regular feature on the Political Perspectives web magazine. The new section was inspired by an effort I started this Summer on Twine.com; however, this version will include only original quotes based upon current events.



Today’s quotes are:

1 – The Obama Doctrine: Make your friends miserable while placing your enemies in the driver’s seat.

2 – “Escalation” means never having to say goodbye.

3 – Wars are just only when they are necessary, fighting when there is no necessity is just a war.



Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Don’t Blame the Military

Last night I watched Countdown and Mr. Olbermann’s special comment on Afghanistan. I was highly disappointed when he decided to shift the responsibility on the decision making process from the president and secretary of state (who wasn’t mentioned at all) to the generals at the pentagon. The orders given last night to escalate the Afghanistan war came not from the pentagon but from the president. Foreign policy is not developed or dictated by the Pentagon but rather by the civilian administration. The military follows orders and when asked to provide plans or military strategies they do what they’re told.

To try to place the blame for what’s happening now on the military is rather absurd. The military did not decide to invade Afghanistan and when they were given what can only be described as a very confused mission and a no-win situation, they did the best that they could. The same holds true for Iraq. The military has bent over backwards trying to accommodate a series of nonsensical foreign policy decisions since 2002. These decisions have had the hardest impact on the military itself, pushing it to the breaking point. Soldiers are committing suicide at unprecedented rates, getting divorced, suffering from the impact of traumatic stress as they have had to serve many more tours of duty that than they should have. We are wearing down and wearing out valuable and even irreplaceable military hardware fighting these conflicts, thereby weakening our long-term defense posture.

The responsibility for going to war ought to reside in the Congress, unfortunately these days it is too easy for Presidents to make such decisions and then force the legislature to go along with them. Whatever happens though, we need to recognize that the mistakes being made are coming from the civilian leaders – leaders who instead of asking for diplomatic solutions to issues tend to request military options.

When you only ask for military options, that’s all you’re going to get in return.


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Just Say No, to more War…

Tonight’s speech is not meant to gain approval or to persuade us, it is the rationalization after the fact of a decision that’s already been carried out. For the second time this year, the Obama administration has ordered a major escalation in the Afghanistan war. The combined total of both decisions has led to 55,000 more troops being sent into the conflict.

The President asked his advisors for options and was presented several. It is worth noting however that none of the options included handing off the mission to U.N. peacekeepers and replacing the corrupt government we helped install in Kabul. The administration has decided instead to pursue the most aggressive option that was available – an increase of 40,000 troops, mostly from the US but also including NATO forces.

It’s true, the president did campaign on taking a more aggressive stance on Afghanistan; however he also campaigned on common sense foreign policy. In other words, then candidate Obama explained on many occasions quite eloquently that fighting a war for the sake of war didn’t make sense and that making the right choices in these conflicts required more than military strategy – it does the US no good to create new generations of hatred against us by fighting unjust or meaningless conflicts. At least that’s what I thought I heard him say, maybe I was wrong, maybe I was telling myself what I wanted to hear. In any case, what’s happening now is radically different than I anticipated

Flashback to 1972; President Nixon, who campaigned on the promise to end the Vietnam War through an honorable secret plan announces attacks and bombing campaigns on Cambodia. Peace through escalation – if we could just cut off their supply lines, bomb the north into submission we could withdraw and leave a stable South Vietnam to fend for itself. That policy led to three more years of war and a decade more of regional instability. It didn’t work.

And this escalation has no chance of working either. Why?

1. Because we don’t know why we’re fighting there and have no clear objectives.
2. Because we’ve set up a corrupt regime that no one in that country believes in and have made the Taliban more popular than ever through our occupation.
3. Because winning in Afghanistan if it could ever occur would require between 300,000 to 500,000 ground troops. The Soviets realized this, but too late…

So, based on this decision, we can expect the following outcomes:

1. An ever-increasing toll in Americans lost or wounded.
2. An ever-increasing toll of dead Afghans and an ever increasing resentment of America.
3. A debt surge as we have to pay for this ill-conceived conflict.
4. A nebulous exit strategy at best.
5. A general weakening of our over-all defense posture as the military is further drained of men and materials and stretched to its breaking point.

While I did not agree with President Bush’s policy on starting these conflicts, I must credit him with at least providing an exit date for Iraq and not getting sucked further into the Afghan quagmire. I’m pretty sure that for all their faults, the previous administration understood clearly that Afghanistan was a no-win situation.

President Obama had an opportunity to stand up for his political base, to do the right thing for the US, to make a decision here that would have helped end a decade of misguided adventures, to say No to more war for the sake of war. This is the defining moment of his presidency, the moment where he took ownership of the last piece of the Bush legacy.


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

It's the Jobs, Mr. President

As of today, only $158 billion of the nearly $787 billion stimulus package has been spent. [ Source http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/Pages/home.aspx ]



Of the $787 billion allocated for the stimulus package, more than a third of it for $288 billion was designated for tax benefits rather than job creation. That $288 billion was placed there to get one or two Republican votes. Out of the three major categories of stimulus funding, the tax benefit category is the largest and has distributed the most money thus far. According to the latest charts on the recovery.gov website, only $57 billion has been allocated to actual contracts were work might be done in jobs might be created.



Is it any wonder, that the Recovery Act passed in February hasn't had any impact on the economy as yet? Hardly any money has been distributed to projects or to creating new jobs. The estimates given by recovery.gov about how many new jobs have been created or saved seem wildly inflated. So, how did this happen?

The first mistake was making stimulus to small. The second mistake was directing the stimulus randomly and giving into demands from the Right for more tax breaks when tax breaks were the last thing that we needed. The third and most important mistake of all seems to be the relative inability to release the funds and get things started. We are closing in on 10 months since this bill was passed and it seems as though nothing has happened. What could possibly justify this type of delay?

Countless jobs are being lost every month in the United States as we plunge ever deeper into what can only be described as an economic depression. As more people lose jobs or have concerns about job security, confidence in the economy will continue to fall and with that spending will continue to drop. This is a vicious circle which will play out shortly over the holiday shopping season. Without jobs, without money and without any clear indication of recovery or decisive action that might encourage recovery it is altogether likely that the economic downturn will only continue to feed upon itself.

The main reason that President Obama was elected last fall was due to the enormous economic crisis that we were facing. The American people understood that we were standing upon a precipice and without decisive and vigorous action disaster loomed ahead. So the country voted for change, not just Democrats but many independents and Republicans as well. But we didn't get change, so far we've gotten the same old tired arguments and policies that have been tossed around for years. We were looking for Roosevelt and we got another Hoover.

In an economic crisis such as the one that we're currently in, only one factor matters and that's jobs. Without significant job creation, we will be stuck in a permanent downward spiral. It's the jobs Mr. President, we needed a stimulus that was all about creating jobs and creating them right now and not just a few thousand jobs either, but millions and millions of jobs.

This economy requires at least 5 million new jobs right now.

So what types of jobs could we create, and how should we create them? First of all, instead of having a stimulus based upon a further round of tax cuts or a stimulus based solely upon the approval and execution of specific projects, why not hire people directly just like we did during the first Great Depression? Argentina used the same strategy in 2002 in the same situation for the same reasons and it worked. The US government instead of extending unemployment benefits forever, could use those same funds and stimulus money to create a wide variety of jobs to support a myriad of critical tasks.

The following is the breakout of what types of jobs might be created:

* 1 million teachers - over the past few years countless teachers have been laid off in schools across the country as state and local governments have gone bankrupt. There is a need and this need can be fulfilled immediately.

* 1 million community service workers - similarly an entire spectrum of community services have been cut over the past few years as state and local governments budgets continue to shrink. We need more firemen, more police, more sanitation workers, etc.

* 1 million infrastructure support personnel - we can begin rebuilding roads, bridges, sewers systems, aging schools and so forth right now if we have the personnel. We do not need to go through elaborate acquisition processes for every single project. That was the way we got much of this country built in the 1930s and we can do it again.

* 1 million green economy workers - there is a need right now to make this country more energy efficient, to protect us from the onslaught of peak oil pricing and global warming consequence. We can start by making every government facility; federal, state and local more energy-efficient by installing insulation, putting in solar panels, using windmills were practical and so forth. This energy corps can also help to modernize our energy grid.

* 1 million healthcare support workers - instead of depending on healthcare reform legislation that is doomed to either fail or be chocked full of loopholes, why not set up a system of free clinics for the people who aren't covered properly under their current insurance or have no insurance at all? These clinics would operate as nonprofits and provide primary care for the 50 to 75,000,000 Americans who aren't getting it right now.

What's listed above is a good start, but we also need a way for private industry to go from those 5 million jobs to 20 million new jobs. We have to start somewhere, though. Right now our economy is shrinking, opportunities are disappearing and the American middle class is shriveling. Our primary economic focus should become American jobs that reside in America and stay in America.

It's the jobs, Mr. Obama, the jobs.


Copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Glenn Beck's Revolution, And Ours

All sides in every debate are susceptible to propaganda - this is true in every nation on earth and has been in every time period across history. While getting mad at folks for falling for such nonsense is perhaps therapeutic it never solves the problem and in fact usually just makes matters worse because the divisions created by propaganda are usually the number one goal of such efforts.

What we need to ask ourselves is this - what type of culture or society are we building where citizens are encouraged only to seek out opinions similar to those they already possess and to disdain investigation and critical thought when it contradicts orthodoxy - this is now happening on both sides I'm afraid...
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The “G” Word

The “G” word is a word that is seldom spoken in American politics.

Despite hundreds and even thousands of articles on our current economic situation it is nearly impossible to find any references to this mysterious word. More than a decade ago the “G” word was spoken quite often even in polite company but now the word has been banished - it exists in some dark corner of our collective memory, yet no one seems to be able to enunciate it.

The “G” word is Globalism. So why is it that no one wants to talk about Globalism these days? Why is it that in the middle of discussing the global economic collapse that the term Globalism is never heard? It seems really odd considering that about a decade ago everyone agreed that we were living in the new golden age - the global economy and that this global economy would change everyone lives. Well it did change everyone's lives, but not in the way that the proponents of Globalism had promised. Instead of bringing about a new era of economic prosperity both within the United States and across the globe, we've instead experienced a global economic meltdown.

Are the two things really connected? I happen to believe that they are. I think that there is a direct correlation between the push for a global market-based economy, stripped of regulatory oversight and the subsequent collapse of global economic markets. And it's not just because of the regulatory concerns that this connection exists. There is a far more important consequence of transforming from a national economy to a global one; that difference is the distribution of labor.



As the world grows smaller, so do our opportunities it seems...

The most important single premise underlying Globalism as an economic philosophy is the ability to shift labor costs across global market suppliers. What this means in reality is that Globalism as a core concept supports exploitation of cheap labor. The freedom to shift labor requirements from first or second world nations to third world nations allows multinational corporations the ability to charge the same amount of money for products or services or perhaps a little less but pay only a fraction of the previous labor costs. This allows those companies to pocket the difference which in turn allows for a continuous and unreasonable expectation of profit margins. The result of the shortsighted practice is the decimation of working-class and middle-class jobs within the first and second world nations where labor is sourced to. The third world nations were cheap labor is sourced from do not fare much better; instead of building robust new middle-class sectors in those nations, this practice tends to exacerbate the already crushing poverty that exists there.

The reason that the United States, Europe and the other first and second world nations developed the level of prosperity that they have is based on a prior economic philosophy. That philosophy was founded on the realization that building a larger middle-class, through good paying secure jobs was the surest way towards increasing wealth in the nation. The mechanism whereby this was achieved involved helping to establish helping industries within developing nations rather than using those nations has outsourced labor pools. As a developing nation grew, the opportunities for its workers also expanded allowing them to gradually increase real wages and standards of living. Unfortunately that system, the one that worked for more than 60 years to create fantastic prosperity across much of the planet has been completely abandoned in favor of Globalism. What happens instead under Globalism is the gradual decrease in real wages and standards of living within the first and second world nations in a stalemate in the third.

There is a lot of discussion right now in Congress about whether or not financial regulatory reform will occur and whether it will work to prevent further crises. The problem is that the regulatory reform is only half the picture, without addressing the larger set of issues related to Globalism we are destined to run into economic problems. The reason why is because Globalism is systematically wiping out the American middle class and is also just as systematically redistributing wealth from the shrinking middle class to the elite. Until our politicians understand that the one and only road to true economic stability lies in the creation of stable jobs, we will continue to see ever-increasing levels of personal, governmental and corporate debt. A nation's economy cannot be based solely upon speculation and exploitation of unfair profit margins, there needs to be actual production in the economy. The United States needs to stop exporting its industries, its jobs, its innovation and its future out of the country in order so that a few people can make a quick buck.


copyright 2009, Stephen Lahanas

The Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2009

Well, it’s seems as though it has something from every major Republican Health Reform proposition in it:

• Health Insurance Exchanges
• Mandatory Insurance, amounting to an Insurance Company Bailout of $500 billion
• Interstate Insurance Company Deregulation
• (market based) Health Insurance Regulations
• Deals to ensure no negotiation on prescription drug prices (just like Medicare Part D)
• Zero cost containment (because that would mean less profits)
• Zero focus on patients

In fact, many of the previous Republican plans were better in their own rights because each of these elements represents the worst from each:

• The McCain Plan
• The Romney Plan
• The Nixon Plan

So, what are we getting from previous Democratic plans or initiatives? Well, nothing. The “Opt Out” Public Option that covers next to no one and won’t begin until 2014, maybe, is perhaps the only portion left and that may be bargained away soon along with every other bit of reform that might have been included.

The current Healthcare Reform legislation is no longer Reform, it is no longer Democratic in any sense of the word and it is not something that anyone on either side of the aisle should support.

The “sign anything,” “it’s better than nothing,” “it’ll evolve into something better” logic of the President and the leadership of the Democratic Party is counter-intuitive and ultimately self-destructive. This legislation is so bad that it is likely to make the healthcare situation worse for many ordinary Americans, just as Medicare part D has done. Many seniors now cannot afford their Medicare coverage or are using prescription drugs – yet big Pharma got a $785 billion subsidy over ten years and got a guarantee that the government wouldn’t bargain for better prices. As soon that bill passed its sponsor got a $2 million a year job as a lobbyist for big Pharma – he should be in jail, instead he is helping to write more such giveaways into the current healthcare anti-reform bill.

So, behind the Medicare Part D Pharma bailout ($800 billion) and the Wall Street Bailout ($1 trillion plus $20-some trillion in guarantees) this bill is shaping up to be the third biggest bailout in American history with at least $500 billion going to Health Insurance Companies, the very folks who created the crisis – [just as Wall Street created its crisis and Big Pharma created the prescription drug crisis]. Fix the system by rewarding those who break it. Each time we sink this much of our national treasury into “Reforms” which by their very nature, have no chance whatsoever of rectifying the problems they were supposed to address, we put our nation in further, deeper risk.

So instead of country first or helping the middle class, instead of providing care – this bill provides us with corruption and corporate Socialism on a staggering scale. For all the Republicans who are supposedly against this thing for being Socialism, you neither understand what’s in the bill nor Socialism or our current Healthcare system – your passion is being harnessed to fund another bailout. Guess what – all those same folks who have been telling you that they’re against this are absolutely thrilled at the way it’s turning out. Their theatrics have been impressive, but the Republicans and a great many Democrats have brought home the bacon that their only “real” constituents demanded – They Love This Bill, make no mistake – it’s manna from heaven to the most powerful, best funded political lobby in the nation.

And for Liberals – how many times are you guys going to let yourselves be taken for a ride? This bill is light years away from what Liberals expected, from what just about everyone expected and is nothing like what we voted for last Fall. We’re being sold this bill of goods on the empty promise that someone might fix it later on. C’mon, we’re not that stupid. It’s time to let the Democrats know that they either do what they say they’ll do or that they’re going to lose their party base.


copyright 2009, Political Perspectives

Crashing the Gates of the Status Quo

Ok, let's make this simple. This bill will not crash the gates of status quo. It will open them wider.

The main provision of this bill involves strengthening the current insurance industry stranglehold on America's Healthcare system by forcing millions of Americans to buy lousy insurance with few guarantees. We will pump $500 billion dollars into the hands of insurance companies - given what's going on with healthcare that is patently insane. Like Wall Street, we will again be rewarding the folks who created the crisis with taxpayer subsidized giveaways.

The worst part of all though is that this farce has gotten liberals defending it. Wake Up. Talk about being duped, the right wing is putting on this phony fight to get us to rally behind a bunch of non-existent seemingly reform like elements (like the no option that might go into effect in 2014) so that they can get everything they want. Our side gets nothing. These new policies will not provide decent coverage, will turn millions of Americans into criminals for not buying them - it's a nightmare scenario. And it won't contain costs either so they're won't be any deficit reduction (again Medicare Part D has proven this pattern).

Every liberal should withdraw their support for this, now before it's too late. We need to extend Medicare and or Medicaid instead, repealing Medicare Part D would pay for nearly all of it and also protect medicare from the current cost explosion associated with it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Choice Should Be Yours

I don't get it, why are fighting now for a bill that provides virtually none of the reforms that were implied when this process began last Fall (with Obama's election)? There is a very real possibility that what's being debated now if passed could actually worsen our situation. Perhaps what we need is a new strategy, one that drops Healthcare Reform from a holistic perspective and adds only the pertinent elements of reform in stages, slowly increasing the size of medicaid and or medicare, ensuring negotiating power for prescription drugs, breaking the insurance companies anti-trust stranglehold. The best way to defeat myths is to show pertinent policies in action...
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Memo to Warren Buffett: Put Down the Pom-Poms and Tell Us the Truth About the Economy

The hero worship for Mr. Buffett is most definitely misplaced. He is part of the problem - it is our bizarre dependence on advice from the folks who exploited what once was a stable financial industry to earn insane and unwarranted profits that's landed us in this mess. I'm fairly certain that Buffett's influence is one reason that Wall Street received 1 trillion in cash no questions asked last Fall over a 4 week period while after more than 7 months only $127 billion of the stimulus has been spent this year. The realization that needs to be made here is that big finance and Wall Street do not drive the economy, small banks that lend to small businesses does - and all of those banks are going under while we toss every dime to make sure Buffett's portfolio improves...
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Jobless Recovery, Defined

The following is a new term for entry into Political Perspective's 21st American Political Dictionary:

Jobless Recovery

[ synonymous to Non-employment, Corporate Socialism

Related to; Jobless Economy, Industrial Exodus, Clueless Economy, Serfing USA, Black Hole Economics, Depression 2.0 ]

The economic process whereby disingenuous politicians claim an economic recovery is underway simply because the rate of economic decline has declined rather than there being any recognizable economic progress. Economic progress is usually defined as economic growth, and economic growth is usually defined as an increase in employment and spending within the economy.

However, in a Jobless Recovery, there is little consumer spending because few people have stable employment. Those who aren’t already unemployed are asked to make benefit concessions, to work longer for less and to forget about the antiquated notions of upward mobility and career growth. In a Jobless Recovery, the only considerations which matter are those of the multi-billion dollar corporations which have used their influence to receive Trillions in taxpayer bailout dollars and guarantees. These entities are too big to fail, whereas it is entirely acceptable for ordinary citizens, small businesses and even State governments to fail. The key to ensuring a Jobless Recovery is to funnel most of the economic recovery funds into the very institutions which caused the collapse in the first place, thereby ensuring their ability to earn excessive profits through speculative and monopolistic practices while everyone else becomes impoverished.



The US Chamber of Commerce has always been at the forefront of supporting employees; not...

Jobless Recoveries are sometimes indicated through increases in stock market activity largely based on speculative gains related to accurate prediction of future economic losses.


Copyright 2009, Stephen Lahanas

Paul Krugman's Advice for Obama Job Summit

Deregulation led to a global economic collapse - even Alan Greenspan admitted it last Fall, he stated that his worldview / philosophy for 30 years on the topic (that businesses would succeed if restraints were removed) was 100% wrong. This is not an academic discussion - it's happened twice now in 75 years, complete deregulation leads to catastrophic economic failure.



Beyond that, the other big issue that no one is addressing is the fact that through Globalism we've outsourced as many as 25 million jobs in the past 25 years. Business left to its own devices has no incentive to concern itself with either national interests or the well-being of the people who live the nation - that's not its role which is why we have government. Government that by the way is usually more efficient than private industry (the great myth of the right wing). Healthcare has risen at 5 times the rate of inflation for 3 straight decades - government costs rise at the rate of inflation and provides innumerable services - who is more efficient???
About Paul Krugman
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

An Open Letter to Harry Reid on Controlling Health Care Costs

So, basically you're asking him to throw out most everything the House & Senate have done already and start over? I'm all for it...



I think the real problem here, the reason why we're in this mess now with Healthcare Reform is the starting position the White House staked out and the lackluster support they've provided ever since. Without a clearly defined set of healthcare reform priorities (a list of 5 things that everyone could refer to) and very serious lobbying effort by the President, this never had a chance.



At this point I think we're dealing with legislation as flawed or worse than the 2003 Medicare Reform Act. If we have to choose between nothing and something that makes things even worse I think going back to drawing board may be in order.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Anita Dunn Takes Parting Shot At Fox, Hannity And Beck

The confrontation with Fox News is a distraction, they are not the real problem. The president had a super-majority this year and a strong mandate to move forward with aggressive reforms and stimulus. The year is nearly over with very little to show for it - by not pushing through a true stimulus, by not saving and modernizing the auto industry (instead of bankrupting it), by failing on Healthcare reform - the President has missed multiple golden opportunities to turn this situation around. The money the government is spending is not reaching the real America - it's not working for us, and in the case of money invested in Wall Street bailouts it is actually working against meaningful recovery.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Veterans Get Lip Service, Bankers Get Billions

The difference between a populist and a progressive movement is the focus for Social Justice. Things have gotten so bad in this country that we've now entered a 2nd Gilded Age. We must fight for social justice for all, not just the few. There can't be "Progress" until the backward slide has been halted.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Another Letter About Afghanistan the President May Not Be Reading

The one strategy that makes the least sense is the one we're pursuing - pushing the Taliban into Pakistan. We've managed to destabilize two countries (installing corrupt regimes in both), haven't come close to catching Bin Ladin and are wasting lives and national wealth on something that defies justification. If we pulled out and let the Taliban takeover, we'd at least be able to know where to hit them later (and get them out of Pakistan). The path to catching Bin Laden lies in Saudi Arabia (and doesn't require any military action). This isn't just about war versus peace, it's about achieving measurable objectives through intelligent foreign policy.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Protecting a Woman's Right to Choose

The Abortion issue has for all intents & purposes wiped out every other liberal reform effort for the past 30 years. I think it is important for folks to recognize something here, exchanging the human rights of one group of people for another is not consonant with a Liberal philosophy. What has always been needed is a framework which defines the continuity of human rights from the womb to the grave - one that is consistent throughout and accommodates the rights and needs of all. The Progressives or Democrats insistence on focusing solely on reproductive rights has cost all those who are already born an ever-increasing share of their rights. The issue of abortion is used by the Right to divide the natural middle class and working class constituencies against themselves - making 75% of the nation impotent and powerless ON EVERY OTHER ISSUE. It's time we removed this obstacle...
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Welcome to the Dark States

As evidenced by the map below, we are no longer divided between Red and Blue states, the country is gradually darkening into one color as unemployment rises ever higher with no end in sight...


Unemployment rates by county -

There is no such thing as a "Jobless Recovery." And the real unemployment rate is now 17.5%.


copyright 2009, Stephen Lahanas

Conflicted Self-Interest, Defined

We have begun a new project; the Political Perspective’s - 21st Century American Political Dictionary. Eventually this will be offered as a book but for now we will be adding terminology from the book here at the Political Perspective's blog. Our term for today is...

"Conflicted Self Interest"

[ a.k.a. Foot Shooting, Nose Cutting or Face Spiting, Non-Commonsensical, Rage Distraction
Related to the terms; “Big Lying,” “Big Dumberment,” “Circular Reasoning,” “Dark Logic” ]

This is the political process wherein seemingly rational American voters are convinced to support public policies designed to strip them of their political and economic rights by introducing concepts or subliminal influences which distract them from issues pertinent to their daily lives. The voters willingly accept these distractions and distortions as it provides a seemingly therapeutic outlet to their growing rage at being stripped of their political and economic rights and opportunities. Eventually, if exposed long enough to this process, the constituencies forget what their interests were in the first place; things like employment, healthcare and education. At this stage only the rage distraction matters.

This process requires a variety of supporting elements in order to succeed, including:

A – A growing sense of desperation among a widening audience of people who are either already disenfranchised or in the process of becoming so.

B – A set of keyword triggers that are both vague (in detail or logical construction) but strong in associating negative imagery.

C – The absence of critical thought or even cursory investigation on the part of those being influenced.

D – A complete lack of scruples and belief in Democratic processes by those harnessing Conflicted Self-Interest and using it against ordinary Americans in order to utilize the technique to further selfish / hypocritical gains or exploitation.


Copyright 2009, Stephen Lahanas