CHOICE MORSELS

CHOICE MORSELS   

IS A SELECTION OF SHORT EXCERPTS FROM RECENT POSTS, COLUMNS, COMMENTARY THAT WILL GIVE THE READER AN IDEA OF WHAT WE DO HERE. NOT EXACTLY “THE BEST OF:”, BUT SOMETHING CLOSE. IT’S A SORT Of   here’s what we can do that may interest you, without your having to scroll through acres of comments.” David Lawrence on July 20, 2013 at 11:30 am said: I am a person that was subject to the pitfalls of life, but did not fall victim! I don’t want and did not receive charity, food stamps or any government provided program until I left the service and utilized the GI bill. I never desired for someone else to subsidize my progress through life and would not now force someone who has struggled to achieve success to support those unwilling to sacrifice for success. I know this does not apply to all, because some are born into great wealth, and some stuck in the peril of poverty, but we are all in possession of abilities to rise out of bad circumstance….especially when living in the US where opportunity is so available. No one has to fall to drug use, that is a poor excuse for failure and tenacity will prevail, as we all witness with the current rise in socialism! We should never fail to the point of depending on the government to subsidize or force excess tax of labor on one to the other within society! Equal justice under the law limits the disparity of taxation, but does not equally distribute wealth. The Constitution does not dictate equal wealth but equal protection, as even the poor will not be victimized by the government. That should not be changed to victimize those that have found success.

fshiels on July 20, 2013 at 12:19 pm said:

David,
This is thought provoking and I hope others will react. A few questions: 1. what about people who Didn’t struggle, particularly, to achieve success– I mean most of us struggle– but many successful folk (less than half) were handed a whole lot from their family fortunes, born with silver spoons so to speak; and what about those who have worked very hard but, because of a combination of luck, or color, or gender, or circumstance simply were not able to provide for their own needs or those who depended upon them?,
2. Opportunity in the USA is indeed available, but did you read the piece on opportunity as experienced by a wealthy Pittsburgh youth v. that of a child of a single parent in a run down ghetto?, does the latter deserve a leg-up, help from somewhere, or is it all just about the luck of the draw?,
3. can you think of some names of people or categories of people who have been “victimized,” having found success? do you mean here high taxes?

When you speak of the current rise of socialism, to you realize that corporate and personal income taxes were far higher in the 1950s and 1960s than today– for the very rich? Are you aware that the fabulously wealthy qualify for as much or more social security (from the Government) as the modest secretary or school teacher retiring? And that If you pay into social security and retire in 2010, that all of the money you paid into the program between, say, 1960 and 2010 will be used up by the time you are 69 or 70 years old? So after that age, what you are getting is welfare, money redistributed to you from other people. You may have worked hard, but it’s still Welfare after what you put in has been exceeded. You may have served nobly in the military, but the GI Bill is still a form of transfer payment. Sharecroppers, ghetto kids, American Indians, etc. get a bit of welfare, but the programs that help them to not, on a per capita basis, approach the GI bill benefits. I could go on, but…!

Thanks for writing, feel free to respond

WHAT DO NEW PROGRESSIVES WANT?

PROGRESSIVE CLIP ARTSTATEMENT OF PROGRESSIVE FUTURE USA PRINCIPLES

 

Fifth of July—It occurs to us that, belatedly, there is no better time than now to state the big ideas of what we mean by (New) Progressivism. To date we have talked about our book, the 2012 election, Republican myths, why the future points somewhat Left. But here we need to be clearer on what is for us the meaning of basic reforms that we see the country as moving toward, slowly and fitfully at first—maybe—but inevitably.

 

To be sure, reforms always involve compromise; there will be disagreements within the Democratic Party and certainly with the Republican Party about how or whether to implement these. So consider this a kind of Progressive template or even Manifesto! Special Note and credit, citation: this draft draws  on the statement of principles of the VERMONT PROGRESSIVE PARTY… Some of the ordering of their points has been changed and we have added a few things. We are sure they will not mind our admiration for the way they lay out basic ideas! And there are advantages to using an actual organization’s points. The entire Vermont statement is given below our points. Where we have quoted from VERMONT’s Statement, we Italicize.

 

  1. POVERTY, economic opportunity– The present distribution of wealth is increasingly skewed toward the richest 10% and much of that in the richest 1%. This represents a really Increasing distance between “rich, middle, and poor”* and is not economically healthy or sane. Society’s wealth should not be concentrated in the hands of a few, and a wealthy minority should not control the conditions under which we live…

 

2. Healthcare~ No American should have to want for proper nutrition, access to healthcare, educational opportunity on as near a par to “the best” as feasible… Basic needs, including housing, food, health care, education and energy should be affordable to all and not the means for private profit. Directing more resources toward the care and development of children is essential to a health and prosperous society. Our society’s deeply rooted racism and white privilege, whether overt, subtle or institutional, need to be abolished wherever they exist. We cannot stress this last point enough!

 3. ENERGY/CLIMATE CHANGEWe need to create an economy that is sustainable and reverses the destruction of our global environment. Present measures to slow down global warming are inadequate, although some effort is being made; it is far too little and too late. We cannot now fix the “too late,” but we must change the too little, especially in the area of carbon emissions: over land, sea, and in the air—the latter by commercial  air (airline) pollution must be addressed. All this is in the interest of our children and theirs, and generations to come. We must go beyond concern for our children and grandchildren. We are responsible for curbing what we might be doing to the detriment of our Great grandchildren and generations to come

 

  1. EDUCATION- American children are all entitled to well funded education to protect this country’s future quality of life. If this means shifting the use of national resources from, say, national defense, so be it. If this means increased taxation and federal equalization of resources available to poor school districts to compensate for the local tax base of richer ones, so be it. If any other path is taken as the country comes to its senses, then Inequality of opportunity and rigidity of class lines will be insured. We stress that Progressive education reform is about Opportunity, not “one size fits all” or broad social leveling.

 

  1. INFRASTRUCTURE- The infrastructure, road repair, public transportation of many areas of the US leaves a lot to be desired. The opportunities for employment, and not necessarily a “Public Works Administration,” but economic stimulus and improvement of the above, existed but was largely lost during the near train-wreck economic crisis of 2008-2013. If the current and near future political climate is unfavorable for public works programs to improve infrastructure, then some form of federal subsidy may be what it takes.

 

  1. DISCRIMINATION- This category will be developed further but our position is that the progressive agenda will favor improving equality in certain areas for racial minorities, women, the working poor, people of all sexual orientations. In sum, creative ways to guarantee legal and social respect for all and reduction of discrimination, relentlessly, where possible. Note that all of these points are not necessarily or projected reality, but that political forces will gradually move Toward that reality. Or to put it differently: the era of Reagan-Bush and its vision of America: is Over.

 

 

Vermont Progressive Party Statement of Presumples

 

Statement of Principles- The purpose of the Progressive Party is to promote economic, social and environmental justice and sustainability through electoral and other democratic political activities, and to become the majority political party, while protecting minority and individual rights and opportunities.

 

Our country, state and localities can reach their highest social and economic aspirations through truly representative democracy. All people have a right to equal participation in society. Democracy requires empowering people not only in government, but also in the workplace, schools and in the overall economy.

 

 Society’s wealth should not be concentrated in the hands of a few, and a wealthy minority should not control the conditions under which we live.

 

 Collective organizing is essential for people of low and moderate income to attain economic justice.

 

 

Everyone is entitled to decent work at a living wage in a safe working environment.

 

 We need to create an economy that is sustainable and reverses the destruction of our global environment.

 

The burden of taxes should be shared based on ability to pay. Basic needs, including housing, food, health care, education and energy should be affordable to all and not the means for private profit. Directing more resources toward the care and development of children is essential to a health and prosperous society.

 

Our society’s deeply rooted racism and white privilege, whether overt, subtle or institutional, need to be abolished wherever they exist.

 

The prevalence of sexism, both overt and subtle, limits and damages us all. More than merely encouraging women to fully participate, we must affirmatively assure their inclusion in all aspects of economic and civil society.

 

 Seniors and people with disabilities should be able to participate fully in society without economic deprivation or social isolation.

 

 All people, regardless of sexual orientation, should be able to participate fully in society without interference.  We must affirmatively ensure their inclusion in all aspects of society.

 

 Our society’s deeply rooted discrimination against low-income people, whether overt, subtle or institutional, needs to be abolished wherever it exists.

 

 Consistent with the rights and equality of others, religious and cultural minority groups deserve respect and freedom from governmental interference. Community members should be fully integrated into decision-making about the economic destinies of their communities. Those who operate a small business or farm, or are self-employed, must be protected from the overreaching power of mega-corporations.

 

Human labor is the key to creation of wealth. We challenge the assumed right to derive vast wealth from ownership or position. No nation should exploit the labor or resources of another nation or people. Human survival requires the elimination of nuclear weapons and the redirection of military spending to human needs. – See more at: http://www.progressiveparty.org/issues/principles#sthash.Y0DDywYK.dpuf

What do we do with Inequality and what does that mean to You? Repost from 2013: It Hasn’t Improved

  1. INCOME INEQUALITY CHARTMuscootHousePITTSBURG SLUMS
  2. Blog post on What do we do with Inequality and what does that mean to You?This is the first of an ongoing series, with some dialogue and comment, we hope. It is are that we will take an extended passage from a journal and launch a discussion series based on this. But I encountered a rare passage from an author in MONTHLY REVIEW (not always the most vivid of progressive publications) that I found so compelling that I want the first “cut” to speak for itself. Imagine at a very practical level, what it is like to “grow up with advantages” in modern America—and without them. See how this passage captures that, and drawing implications should follow. Our source is from Michael Yates in the March 12, 2012 issue of MR, pp. 9-10 in an Article entitled “The Great Inequality,” … he quotes at length from his own book, Naming the System: Inequality and Work in the Global Economy (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2012) pp.58-59… (Yates is co-editor of Monthly Review and an economist, formerly of the U. of Pennsylvania): In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania where I lived for many years, there is an extraordinarily wealthy family, the Hillmans, with a net worth of several billion dollars. One of their homes, along once fashionable Fifth Avenue, is a gorgeous mansion on a magnificent piece of property. About three miles east of this residence is the Homewood section of the city, whose mean streets have been made famous by the writer John Edgar Wideman. On North Lang Street there is a row of three connected apartments. One of the end apartments has been abandoned to the elements to the rodents and drug users. This is gang territory, and if you are African-American, you do not go there wearing the wrong colors. Poverty, deep and grinding, in rampant on this street and in this neighborhood, which has one of the nation’s highest infant mortality rates. Consider two children, one born in the Hillman house and another in the North Lang Street apartment. In the former there are two rich and influential parents. In the latter there is a single mother working nights with three small children. Let us ask some basic questions. Which mother will have the best health care, with regular visits to the doctor, medicine if needed and a healthy diet? Which child is more likely to have a normal birth weight? Which child is likely to get adequate health care and have good healthcare in early childhood? If the poor child does not have these things, who will return to this child the brain cells lost as a consequence? Which child is more likely to suffer the ill effects of lead poisoning? Which child is more likely to have an older sibling, just 12 years old, be responsible for him when the mother is working at night? Who will be fed cookies for supper and be entertained by an old television set? If the two children get ill in the middle of the night, which one will be more likely to make it to the emergency room in time? Which child will start school speaking standard English, wearing new clothes, and having someone at home to make sure the homework gets done? Which child will travel, and which will barely make it out of the neighborhood?  As the two children grow up, what sort of people will they meet? Which will be more likely to meet persons who could be useful to them when seeking admission to college or looking for a job or trying to find funding for a business venture? Which will be more likely to be hit by a stray bullet fired in a war over drug turf? Which will go to the better school? Which will have access to books, magazines, newspapers, and computers in the home? Which one will wear worn-out clothes?  Which will be embarrassed because his clothes smell? Which will be more likely to have caring teachers who work in well equipped and safe schools? Which will be afraid to tell the teacher that he does not have crayons and colored paper at home? Which will learn the grammar and the syntax of the rich? Which child will join a gang? Abuse drugs? Commit a crime? Be harassed by the police because he is black? When these two children face the labor market, which will be more productive?

     

    To ask these questions is to answer them. And when we considered that the poor child in the United States is better off than two thirds of the world’s population, we must consider that most of the world’s people live in a condition of deprivation so extreme that they must be considered to have almost no opportunities at all. They are almost as condemned as a person on death row in a Texas prison.

     

     

    Strong words? Yes. Mr. Yates would not back down from a single one of them, nor would we. Please let us know what You think.

ON THEIR BLINDNESS

 Obama_0c245_image_1024w1

 

 

:

 On Their Blindness 

 

When I consider how my days are spent

In this marbled city full of plots

 And my people’s legislation rots

 As Republicans withhold consent.

 To all my noble programs evident

 To any voter with discerning eye

 And reporter knowing all’s awry

 Guns, wages, energy’s predicament

 Cry for the modest changes that I seek,

 More schools and medicine for ev’ry child

 That this great nation might enlightened grow

 And healthy like a mighty garden sleek

 With water from my policies unique

 If only Congress could that wisdom know.

Windows of Opportunity for Progressives: Includes CORPORATIONS! [draft]

bill_gates1THOMAS FRANK

One of the themes of this book is going to be: areas where what might be called Obama Clinton Democrats can pick some ripe fruit from places in the American polity and electorate thus far not fully accomplished. We offer first a draft list of both obvious and less obvious supporters whose help should be easy to get, at least at the margins, and I whose self interest backing  the progressive agenda should be clear:

 

  1. Corporations/Business– already a source of some      support for Democrats, this largest and most amorphous interest group has      traditionally been the core of Republican financial and voting support;      the GOP has been seen as the party of business, yet Business is so      diverse, ranging from Silicon Valley internet giants to huge retailers      like Wal-Mart to the main street pizza parlor owner to Big Oil, etc., that      the Democrats should always be looking for a bigger piece of the more      progressive “winnable” elements of these groups…

 

This would probably include corporations with highly educated and more socially conscious executives thinking past the bottom line and  (exclusively) shareholder concerns, to Image—like Novartis’s free pharmaceuticals for selected unable-pay-patients, useful for advertising, but also generated, very likely, by some genuine human concerns… it would be useful to scan literature on mixed motives of businesses, which stress the do-good impulses that move many of us and probe into a less mechanistic more nuanced view of corporate behavior

 

  1. The non voter– Comb the literature for      studies on why people do not vote (multiple reasons: apathy, busy-ness,      disillusionment with the system, lack of interest in politics, feeling      their single vote will not make a difference)—these voters may well yield      more progressive votes that reactionary… Obama did well with bringing the      votes of his established base, but he also reached for some adults,      perhaps especially in 2008, who did not normally go to the polls… these      voters are, again, “ripe fruit,” and changing their behavior has in all      likelihood been studied and with some conclusions
  2. Older voters– these will become more      numerous and will increasingly be made up of baby boomers and eventually      post baby boom people.. Note that the last birth year for Boomers is 1964,      and that in 2014, people born after that year will be entering their 50s,      and in 2024 their 60’s etc.  Obama’s      performance among, especially, white above-55 voters could have been      stronger, given the 1960’s-70’s influences on such voters… Right-wing      scare tactics on threats to Medicare from Obama-care may have worked      (check lit.) but in many ways, it is in the interest of these voters to      consider the advantages of progressivism: attention to the needs of the      elders in the electorate: medical care, continuing education, public      services (say libraries)  for the      large group of ‘living on a fixed, lowered budget’ Americans

 

  1. Not quite parallel, but a      central almost haunting question is why voters (sounds like Thomas Frank      here) who are middle class, seeing their standard of living stagnate or      decline or flatline, so much more numerous than the  wealthiest 1-percenters or even 5      percenters, do not come out in droves for Obama-Clinton progressives,      should be answered—maybe in this book, especially voters from more      struggling heartland states such as Frank’s Kansas, Nebraska, south      Dakota, states that are theoretically winnable, but whose gun use, church      affiliation, and rural values make them reflexively republican in most      instances: we      need to find out why Tom Harkin, George McGovern and Frank Church won      elections in such states and the potential for this type re-emerging      (probably by building a support base in Wichita, Lincoln, Boise,      university towns, and bringing home acceptable amounts of “legitimate pork      to their constituents…We now turn to a consideration of how an alliance of      progressives with some more of Business/Corporate America might work:

 

CAN A CORPORATE-PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE HAPPEN?

 

The dominant wisdom about corporate capitalism is that its lifeblood is ultimately the return on investment to the shareholders. As corporations multiplied and increased in complexity in the 20th C., it  is a commonplace that they have moved from manufacturing and transportation to finance to finance, retailing and information. It is true that manufacturing, especially in the area of transpiration  in the USA have remained strong to some extent in the aircraft and automotive industries.

 

Both major parties of received corporate largesse and money from individuals enriched by corporate leadership and investment. But the Republican party clearly stands as the corporate, private sector favoring party and has done so for decades. As Noam Chomsky noted—not far off from the Left and center, the Democrats have depended on “everybody else”, while certainly getting substantial, though less, corporate support.  Chomsky, in the same interview, November, 1988, noted that in fact the United States could be said to have only one party, The Business Party, with two wings, Republican and Democrat. Overall the Republicans are much purer in there support of and benefits from corporations, and the Democrats must compensate for lesser corporate support, but appealing to “all of the other groups.” Democrats do get reliably more support from most other groups, but Chomsky’s point is that the resources of the business sector are vaster than those of almost all of the others combined. These statements, of course, refer to gross aggregates and are hard to measure quantitatively….

 

Historically, whether one sees the party system as 2 sides of a corporate coin, or as 2 evolving discreet “brands”, there is broad agreement that about every 30-40 years, there is a national election that shifts the political geology dramatically than is normally the case. What are called critical or realigning elections occurred, moving back in time, in 1932, 1896, 1860, 1828 and 1800. A snapshot description of each of these elections would go something like this, referring only to the winner and his party: 1932, F. Roosevelt (Dem.) Great Depression; 1896, W. McKinley, Urban, industrial, Gold Standard; 1860, A. Lincoln (Rep.), Union and end of any expansion of Southern slavery; 1828,

Andrew Jackson (Dem.) , anti-elite, anti-Federal government, pro-Southern and Western interests; 1800, T. Jefferson, (Dem.-Republican) anti-Federalist agenda. The p[icture blurs after 1932 as independent voters became more numerous, and the parties became more competitive in electing presidents.

 

Some would cite either 1968, or more often, 1980, with Nixon and Reagan coming into power with increasingly conservative coalitions as roughly “critical,” and perhaps Obama’s two victories after almost 30 years of more Republican strength in the White House as a “harbionger election. But the old models of long fairly dtable periods of one party dominance do not hold up well after 1950. If one measures presidential party years in power since Truman in 1948 and move to the present 2013, we see 25 years of Democratic presidents and 29 years of Republicans, a remarkable balance when you consider A. that Democrats were in power for 24 of the 32 years between Jackson and Lincoln, 1829-1861 and the Republicans occupied the White House for 58 of the 72 years between 1861 and 1933 (Lincoln to F. Roosevelt) and B. If you add the remaining 3 years of Obama’s 2nd term the party Balance in the White House becomes almost exactly even from 1949 to 2017.

Guest Post: Prof. Art Lerman on Collective Bargaining’s Strange Troubles

scott-walker-power-to-koch-bros-no-unions-for-you1WALTER REUTHER

The Attack on Collective Bargaining

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/09/teachers_unions_remain_confuse.html

Why the attack on collective bargaining? After all, collective bargaining is a rather rational—civilized—idea: employers and employees seeking agreement on terms and conditions of employment, while listening to each other’s needs and concerns.

Moreover, there is no legal responsibility to come to an agreement. If the bargaining does not work out, each side is free to pursue its interests outside the collective bargaining framework.

So what’s the issue—especially with state governments that have been in the forefront of attacks on collective bargaining—passing legislation eliminating the “right” of their public employee representatives to collectively bargain with their governmental employer on specific issues, or on all issues?

The anti-collective bargaining argument is that collective bargaining has led to public employees forcing governments (and, therefore, citizens) to give them much too much—creating a privileged public employee class, leaving the state government and its citizens with insufficient funds for themselves.

And  enabling this theft of state government and citizen  assets  are the public employee unions—sitting on the other side of the collective bargaining table—using their electoral power—votes and financial contributions to candidates—coercing the government and the citizens it represents to impoverish themselves for the sake of public employees’ luxurious  living.

There are a few immediate observations the above argument gives rise to:

  1. There’s an assumption that public employees are getting more than they deserve, economically putting the government and other citizens in economic peril. This, however, is a debatable assumption.
  1. If there is a problem as described, it’s not collective bargaining but the power of the unions. This power is manifested at the collective bargaining table, but it is independent of it—and would exist and be used to support the demands of the employees through other channels, if collective bargaining was eliminated.
  1. And, with or without collective bargaining, these other channels remain and are also used by employers and employees to trade ideas and press their demands.
  1. Indeed, this brings us to the crux of the matter: Collective bargaining is a positive institution—perhaps the best available venue for employers and employees to negotiate with one another —all the alternatives being less efficacious.
  1. Collective bargaining is positive because it is a direct, face-to-face discussion. Each side can directly communicate to the other side its needs, wants, arguments, and its view of its own power.
  2. All the other methods that are used to communicate—and which remain—whether or not there is collective bargaining—are less efficient means of communication. They more easily lead to misunderstandings, missed opportunities and unfounded/untested conclusions.
  1. Legislative Lobbying: For example, with or without collective bargaining, both the employers (the state government) and employees seek the support of state legislatures for their positions on employee-employer issues–sending messages, supports and sanctions to the legislators. This dynamic will always exist in a free society—but it is not as efficient in negotiating issues as experienced employer and employee representatives in discussion together at the table.
  1.      ii.          Media: And they send messages through the media—giving interviews, writing letters, sending press releases. All these are okay, but, as with communication with legislators, do not amount to the detailed exchanges needed for mutual understanding and future planning.
  1.    iii.          Electoral Campaigns: Of course there are also campaign contributions and messages to candidates—again, of value, but even more removed from specifics and likely to be more rhetorical and less prone to working out mutual understandings.
  1.    iv.          Unilateral Actions: And there are job actions on the part of employees and unilateral decisions on the part of employers—easily giving rise to resentment, misunderstanding and hardening of positions—especially since, as unilateral, the other side is less likely to feel it had the proper input.

The point is that doing away with collective bargaining does nothing to control the power of unions—for good or ill. It simply takes away an excellent institution within which unions and their employers can communicate, leaving less efficient methods to take on more responsibility than they are capable of handling well.

Good Management: And there is a larger concern about communication. Communication between employers and employees is a crucial factor in good management. How can one manage an organization well without communicating with the leadership of one’s employees?

Governors (and bosses in the private sector) who decry collective bargaining are saying that they’d prefer to be bad managers—assuming they know their employees concerns, but with no way to sit down with the employees to seek deeper understandings and further exploration.

Why would they do this? One the one hand, it’s because they think they know enough about their employees’ situations without investigation—a questionable assumption in our world of large, complex, fast-changing, diverse organizations.

Scapegoating: But, on the other hand, it seems clear from news reports, that they are not thinking about employee needs or communication—or about good management at all. They oppose collective bargaining for reasons of political posturing. Faced with fiscal challenges, and citizens always concerned about taxes, they have chosen to make public employee union power the scapegoat, loudly attacking unions, and arguing that collective bargaining is the evil Trojan horse that has led to union triumphs over the government’s and the citizens’ fiscal wellbeing.

The fact that eliminating collective bargaining will not reduce union power, that union power is not the reason for the states’ and the citizens’ fiscal challenges, that the only guaranteed result of the elimination of collective bargaining will be worse management—these conclusions argue for a different approach which, unfortunately, does not fit well with politicians who are antiunion under any fiscal circumstances and who want to eliminate crucial governmental  services—whether badly or well managed.

Income Inequality: Yes, there is a final issue. The current attacks have been on the “too generous” salaries and benefits of public employees attained through collective bargaining. . Most citizens do not have such benefits; why should public employees?

The conclusion: measurably reduce public employee salaries and benefits, or at least prevent them from increasing.

But there is another solution. If public employee salaries and benefits are so far ahead of those  of the rest of the citizenry (a questionable conclusion), is the answer to cut back on the public employee salaries and benefits or to extend these better salaries and benefits to the rest of the citizens?

After all, one of the analyses of why income inequality has so much increased in the U.S.—leaving private employees behind—is that union power and collective bargaining have been taken away from most private sector employees. If private sector employees had unions to fight for them—and represent them in collective bargaining—they might catch up to public employees in salaries and benefits—reducing income inequality in our society overall.

Just  one more thing: Let’s say a law is passed precluding collective bargaining. Yet, subsequently, an issue comes up among the employees. And then, the union leader knocks on the governor’s door —or happens to see him eating in a restaurant—or walking in the park—or maybe even playing at the golf course.  You mean the union leader can’t mention it? They can’t discuss it? Isn’t that a violation of human relations—a violation of the basic concern of for one’s fellow human being?

_________________________________________________________

Blogger’s Note- As readers may know, Professor Lerman is a political scientist with 40 years of post-Princeton grad school teaching and a specialist in conflict resolution (which includes collective bargaining). He is also the co-author in progress of our book-to-be:

OBAMA, PROGRESSIVE RESURGENCE, AND U.S. POLITICS, 1990-2040

PUBLIC SCHOOL CLOSURES HURT POOR DISPROPORTIONALLY

NOTE: This blog does not specialize in current events, but once in a while an issue surfaces that reflects larger anti-progressive trends. One of these is the large number of closures of already underfunded public schools, especially in poor areas. America seems to be able to afford a vast consumer economy, even during recessions, a military that equals the defense outlays of the next 30 countries’ defense budgets, but cannot seem to find the money to make excellent public education available to all. What follows is some reporting around (mostly) inner city school closings. The people in power (Rahm Emmanuel, Arte Duncan, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, et.al.) tend to send their children, and/or have friends who send children to private schools. And for good reason. The public schools feature large classrooms, often shoddily equipped, with underpaid overworked teachers and a system focused on testing and scores by which to judge teachers and fund schools.

This will be part of an ongoing discussion because it is so central to the issue of fairness and class mobility in the United States. Opposing or clarifying views are welcome, but the problem, below the radar for many Americans, is presented here as a matter of class discrimination. Read on:

s-CHICAGO-SCHOOL-CLOSINGS-LIST-large

Chicago School Closings: District Plans To Shutter 54 Schools

Posted: 03/21/2013 7:27 pm EDT  |  Updated: 03/22/2013 1:06 pm EDT

Chicago School Closings List

Parents protest outside the home of Chicago’s Board of Education President David Vitale’s house Thursday, March 21, 2013, in Chicago. Teachers say the city of Chicago has begun informing teachers, principals and local officials about which public schools it intends to close under a contentious plan that opponents say will disproportionately affect minority students in the nation’s third largest school district. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

Citing budget concerns and falling enrollment, Chicago Public Schools officials announced Thursday they plan to close 54 schools next year and shut down 61 school buildings — the largest single wave of school closures in U.S. history.

For months, looming closures seemed inevitable. After a teachers union strike last fall concluded with an expensive contract, observers were left without a doubt that the only way the cash-strapped district could afford it was to shut down schools and fire the teachers who worked there.

Since the September strike, Chicago hired a new CEO for its schools, Barbara Byrd-Bennett, a veteran of closures in cities like Detroit. The district held hearings with parents about the fates of their children. Rumors flew about how many and which schools would be axed, with some predicting as many as 129 could close.

On Thursday, news of the final closure list began to trickle out. The day had come, a week before the district’s April 1 deadline. Byrd-Bennett announced on local television that CPS would close 54 elementary schools, name six for “turnarounds” and send 11 schools to share buildings with others.

As the news dribbled in through aldermen and school officials themselves earlier Thursday, many angry Chicagoans were searching for Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Barack Obama’s former chief of staff, who waged his mayoral campaign on promises of education reform. DNAInfo Chicago reported Emanuel was on vacation with his family.

Chicago Teacher’s Union President Karen Lewis blasted Emanuel’s absence.

“Our mayor, who is away on a ski trip, drops this information a week before spring break,” Lewis said during a Thursday afternoon press conference outside Mahalia Jackson Elementary School in the city’s Auburn-Gresham neighborhood. “What’s their spring break going to look like?”

Lewis went on to call the mayor’s actions “cowardly” and likened them to bullying. “He should be ashamed of himself,” she said, drawing a chorus of “amens” and whoops from students in the crowd.

In a phone interview, CTU Vice President Jesse Sharkey told The Huffington Post to expect a tumultuous spring from the teachers union. “We’re going to do any and all nonviolent forms of protest we have at our disposal including legislative and legal,” to protest the school closures, he said. “Also direct actions like sit-ins to try to stop this disastrous policy.”

While districts across the country have faced waves of closures, those in Chicago hit doubly close to home for the Obama administration; in addition to the Emanuel connection, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan formerly served as CEO of the district.

“When, where, why and how to close schools are local questions that are never easy. No educator ever wakes up in the morning wanting to close a school,” Duncan said in a Thursday statement provided to HuffPost. “On the local level, real considerations about budgets, resources, and declining enrollment have to be balanced against real impacts on the community. Closing a school is a difficult but sometimes necessary decision, and districts and local leaders should strive for a transparent process that listens to community input and offers better educational options for affected families.”

Chicago district officials have argued that dwindling population in some predominantly black neighborhoods has created an “underutilization crisis” where schools are operating way below their capacity. Keeping these buildings open, they said, is waste of resources. CPS says the closures could save $500,000 to $800,000 per school.

To soften the blow for students at closing schools, the district said it is adding 13 new special science programs, five International Baccalaureate programs, air conditioning and fine arts classes in 19 of the schools where these students will be sent.

CPS parents reacted with outrage at the news, even those whose children’s schools were saved from the chopping block.

Jennie Biggs, who has three children at Mark Sheridan Math & Science Academy in Bridgeport, called the district’s decision “unbelievable.”

“School is their second home,” said Biggs, 40. “It’s where they feel most comfortable. To lose that sense of belonging and that sense of community must be a traumatic event for a child.”

Biggs attended three of the volatile community engagement meetings held by the district earlier this year, where she said parents worried students assigned to new schools will be forced to cross into unfamiliar territory.

“Parent after parent after parent talked about safety concerns,” Biggs said. “For me, that’s my number one concern: How do we keep the kids safe?”

To simulate the effects a school change would have, one parent walked from Libby Elementary to Sherman Elementary in the Back of the Yards neighborhood, Biggs said, passing seven abandoned buildings along the way. The trek took 27 minutes.

“That’s what will be the daily experience for kids who are displaced,” said Biggs. She added the district will likely see a spike in truancy numbers as parents struggle to get their kids to a new school.

Related on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...

New post on Diane Ravitch’s blog

The Color of School Closures

by dianerav

Whose schools are closing? Is there a pattern?

Take a look at this graphic.

Tweet it. Share it.

And think about it. What is going on?

dianerav | June 12, 2013 at 11:20 am | Categories: Closing p

·Leslie Sabbs-Kizer, Nkai Melton, Akaira Melton, Khaymya Smith

Leslie Sabbs-Kizer, right, walks her children Nkai Melton, 8, Akaira Melton, 7, and Khaymya Smith, 3 to Bond Elementary school in Chicago, for the first day of classes Wednesday morning, Sept. 19, 2012, after Chicago teachers voted to suspend their first strike in 25 years. Union delegates voted overwhelmingly Tuesday night to suspend the walkout after discussing a proposed contract settlement with the nation’s third largest school district. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Students gather outside Benjamin E. Mays Academy , Wednesday morning, Sept. 19, 2012 in Chicago, after Chicago teachers voted to suspend their first strike in 25 years. Union delegates voted overwhelmingly Tuesday night to suspend the walkout after discussing a proposed contract settlement with the nation’s third largest school district. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Two students hug, right, as they gather outside Benjamin E. Mays Academy Wednesday morning, Sept. 19, 2012, after Chicago teachers voted to suspend their first strike in 25 years. Union delegates voted overwhelmingly Tuesday night to suspend the walkout after discussing a proposed contract settlement with the nation’s third largest school district. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Students walk through the gates outside Benjamin E. Mays Academy, Wednesday morning, Sept. 19, 2012, after Chicago teachers voted to suspend their first strike in 25 years. Union delegates voted overwhelmingly Tuesday night to suspend the walkout after discussing a proposed contract settlement with the nation’s third largest school district. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Students gather outside Benjamin E. Mays Academy Wednesday morning, Sept. 19, 2012, after Chicago teachers voted to suspend their first strike in 25 years. Union delegates voted overwhelmingly Tuesday night to suspend the walkout after discussing a proposed contract settlement with the nation’s third largest school district. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Rahm Emanuel, Jean-Claud Brizard, David Vitale

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, center, is flanked by Chicago Public Schools CEO Jean-Claud Brizard, left, and school board president David Vitale during a news conference after the teachers union House of Delegates voted to suspend their strike Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, in Chicago. The city’s teachers agreed to return to the classroom after more than a week on the picket lines, ending a spiteful stalemate with Emanuel that put teacher evaluations and job security at the center of a national debate about the future of public education. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Karen Lewis

Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union smiles as she talks with reporters after the union’s House of Delegates voted to suspend the strike Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Members of the Chicago Teachers Union’s House of Delegates celebrate after the delegates voted to suspend the strike against the school district Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, in Chicago. The city’s teachers agreed to return to the classroom after more than a week on the picket lines, ending a spiteful stalemate with Mayor Rahm Emanuel that put teacher evaluations and job security at the center of a national debate about the future of public education. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Tennille Evans

Tennille Evans, a member of the Chicago Teachers Union’s House of Delegates, celebrates after the delegates voted to suspend the strike against the school district Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, in Chicago. The city’s teachers agreed to return to the classroom after more than a week on the picket lines, ending a spiteful stalemate with Mayor Rahm Emanuel that put teacher evaluations and job security at the center of a national debate about the future of public education. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Mary Edmonds

Mary Edmonds, a member of the Chicago Teachers Union’s House of Delegates, celebrates after the delegates voted to suspend the strike against the school district Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, in Chicago. The city’s teachers agreed to return to the classroom after more than a week on the picket lines, ending a spiteful stalemate with Mayor Rahm Emanuel that put teacher evaluations and job security at the center of a national debate about the future of public education. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Teachers picket outside Morgan Park High School in Chicago, Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, as a strike by the Chicago Teachers Union continues into its second week. CTU members in the nation’s third-largest city will pore over the details of a contract settlement Tuesday as the clock ticks down to an afternoon meeting in which they are expected to vote on ending a seven-day strike that has kept 350,000 students out of class. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Patty Westcott

Teacher Patty Westcott pickets outside Clissold Elementary School in Chicago, Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, as a strike by the Chicago Teachers Union continues into its second week. CTU members in the nation’s third-largest city will pore over the details of a contract settlement Tuesday as the clock ticks down to an afternoon meeting in which they are expected to vote on ending a seven-day strike that has kept 350,000 students out of class. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·FILE – In this Sept. 14, 2012, file photo Madison teachers hold a unity rally for striking Chicago teachers at the Wisconsin state Capitol in Madison, Wis. Wisconsin’s attorney general planned to ask a judge Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012, to put on hold his decision issued last week repealing major parts of Gov. Scott Walker’s law effectively ending collective bargaining for most state workers. The request comes as school districts and local governments attempt to understand the ramifications of the decision and whether it opens the door to new negotiations previously barred with unions. (AP Photo/Wisconsin State Journal, M.P. King, File)

·Chicago Teacher’s Strike Enters Second Week

CHICAGO, IL – SEPTEMBER 17: Tyler Whitaker watches from a distance as teachers from the Jose De Diego Community Academy, where he is a third grade student, walk the picket line on September 17, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off of their jobs on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Smaller, more subdued groups of teachers picket outside Morgan Park High School in Chicago, Monday, Sept. 17, 2012, as a strike by Chicago Teachers Union members heads into its second week. Mayor Rahm Emanuel said he will seek a court order to force the city’s teachers back into the classroom. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Chicago Teacher’s Strike Enters Second Week

CHICAGO, IL – SEPTEMBER 17: Striking Chicago public school teachers attend a press conference by The Chicago Teachers Solidarity Campaign outside the office of Mayor Rahm Emanuel in City Hall on September 17, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Chicago Teacher’s Strike Enters Second Week

CHICAGO, IL – SEPTEMBER 17: Striking Chicago public school teachers attend a press conference by The Chicago Teachers Solidarity Campaign outside the office of Mayor Rahm Emanuel in City Hall on September 17, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·A handful of teachers picket outside Shoop Elementary School in Chicago, Monday, Sept. 17, 2012, as a strike by Chicago Teachers Union members heads into its second week. Mayor Rahm Emanuel said he will seek a court order to force the city’s teachers back into the classroom. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

·Chicago Teacher’s Strike Enters Second Week

CHICAGO, IL – SEPTEMBER 17: Striking Chicago public school teachers picket outside of George Westinghouse College Prep high school on September 17, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off of their jobs on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Karen Lewis, Jesse Sharkey

Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis, left, listens to CTU Vice President Jesse Sharkey speak at a press conference following a meeting of delegates Sunday, Sept. 16, 2012 in Chicago. The Chicago teachers union decided Sunday to continue its weeklong strike, extending an acrimonious standoff with Mayor Rahm Emanuel over teacher evaluations and job security provisions central to the debate over the future of public education across the United States. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·A young boy holds a placard in support of striking Chicago school teachers as they march after a rally Saturday, Sept. 15, 2012 in west Chicago. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·Striking Chicago school teachers march after a rally Saturday, Sept. 15, 2012 in Chicago. Thousands of striking Chicago public school teachers and their allies packed a city park Saturday in a boisterous show of force as union leaders and the district tried to work out the details of an agreement that could end a week-long walkout.(AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·A young girl plays a toy horn as striking Chicago teachers rally Saturday, Sept. 15, 2012, in Chicago. Union president Karen Lewis reminded that although there is a “framework” for an end to their strike, they still are on strike. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·Karen Lewis

Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union addresses the crowd during a rally Saturday, Sept. 15, 2012, in Chicago. Lewis reminded that although there is a “framework” for an end to their strike, they are still on strike. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Karen Lewis

Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union addresses union menbers during a rally Saturday, Sept. 15, 2012, in Chicago. Lewis reminded that although there is a “framework” for an end to their strike, they still are on strike. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·Karen Lewis

Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago teachers union , left, and vice president Jesse Sharkey stand before a meeting of the union’s House of Delegates Friday, Sept. 14, 2012, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·Karen Lewis

Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis arrives for a meeting of the union’s delegates Friday, Sept. 14, 2012, in Chicago. The city’s nearly weeklong teachers strike appeared headed toward a resolution Friday after negotiators emerged from marathon talks to say they had achieved a “framework” that could end the walkout in time for students to return to class Monday. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

·David Vitale

Chicago Board of Education President David Vitale speaks to reporters following negotiations with the Chicago Teachers Union on Friday, Sept. 14, 2012 in Chicago. After a week of public school teachers striking over issues that include pay raises, classroom conditions, job security and teacher evaluations, Vitale said the district and teachers union have agreed on a

·Public school teachers rally at Chicago’s Congress Plaza to protest against billionaire Hyatt Hotel mogul Penny Pritzker, who is also a member of the Chicago Board of Education on Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. Protesters said that $5.2 million in Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funds being used to build a new Hyatt hotel in Hyde Park would be better spent on meeting basic student needs. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·A large crowd of public school teachers rally at Chicago’s Congress Plaza to protest against billionaire Hyatt Hotel mogul Penny Pritzker, who is also a member of the Chicago Board of Education on Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. Protesters said that $5.2 million in Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funds being used to build a new Hyatt hotel in Hyde Park would be better spent on meeting basic student needs. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·Striking Chicago public school teachers and their supporters march down Michigan Avenue on September 13, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Striking Chicago public school teachers and their supporters rally following a march down Michigan Avenue on September 13, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Striking Chicago public school teachers and their supporters march down Michigan Avenue on September 13, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Teachers picket outside the Chicago Public Schools headquarters on September 13, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off of their jobs on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Striking Chicago public school teachers and their supporters march down Michigan Avenue on September 13, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Striking Chicago public school teachers and their supporters rally before a march down Michigan Avenue on September 13, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. More than 26,000 teachers and support staff walked off the job on September 10 after the Chicago Teachers Union failed to reach an agreement with the city on compensation, benefits and job security. With about 350,000 students, the Chicago school district is the third largest in the United States. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

·Thousands of public school teachers and their supporters rally outside the Hyatt Regency Hotel to protest against Penny Pritzker, whom they accuse of benefiting from being a board member of both the Chicago Board of Education and Hyatt Hotels on Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012 in Chicago. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·Children in strollers join thousands of public school teachers rallying outside the Hyatt Regency Hotel, protesting against Penny Pritzker, whom they accuse of benefiting from her position on the boards of both the Chicago Board of Education and Hyatt Hotels on Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012 in Chicago. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

·Two-year-old identical twins Colton and Lucas Jordan join thousands of public school teachers and their supporters as they march along Chicago’s Michigan Avenue, protesting against Penny Pritzker, whom they accuse of benefiting from her position on the boards of both the Chicago Board of Education and Hyatt Hotels on Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. (AP Photo/Sitthixay Ditthavong)

<span lang=”EN” style=”font-size:10pt;

<

v

school-closures-md

span

The Color of School Closures

Posted on: Tuesday April 23rd, 2013

Mass school closings have become a hallmark of today’s dominant education policy agenda. But rather than helping students, these closures disrupt whole communities. And as U.S. Department of Education data suggests, the most recent rounds of mass closings in Chicago, New York City and Philadelphia disproportionately hurt Black and low-income students. 

What can you do to end these discriminatory and unacceptable school closures?

·                  Share this infographic with your friends on Facebook and Twitter – start the conversation in your community!

·                  Send us your stories and data about closings in your district.

·                  Learn about alternatives that support students rather than close school doors on them.

There is no evidence to suggest that school closures work. Despite what policymakers say to justify these mass closures, reports have shown that the majority of student who are affected do not get placed in high performing schools. And though closures are often touted as a way for districts to save money in tough economic times, those savings often fail to materialize and can in reality cost taxpayers millions in hidden costs.

What is the alternative to closing schools? Evidence-based policies that provide students, schools and communities with the opportunities and resources they need to succeed, including:

·                  Wraparound academic, health and social services to help struggling students get back on track

·                  Recruiting, training and retaining high-quality teachers in every classroom

·                  Equitable school funding systems so that those who face the toughest hurdles receive the greatest resources

·                  Universal high-quality pre-K so that all students start school ready to learn

·                  Expanded learning time, including after-school and summer programming

·                  Turning schools into community hubs that provide expanded services to both students and community members

For more information, check out this report from Communities for Excellent Public Schools, “A Proposal for Sustainable School Transformation.”

Here are just a few of the many groups organizing against school closures in the cities highlighted in the infographic. If your organization is doing anti-closures work, let us know and we’ll add it!

CORPORATIONS/BUSINESS: A Powerful Engine for the Coming Progressive Partnership?

GEORGE SOROSBUFFETTCARNEGIE

Talking points:

1. There is a strong if limited tradition of corporate community giving in American history: philanthropy, community service, etc.

2. Companies give about $15 billion a year of the $240 billion in charity giving in a 15 trillion dollar economy; this is not an impressive figure relatively speaking, but $15 billion in good works is a good start, and business would rightly argue that job creation and externalities (improving roads, power grids etc.) are Absolute contributions that should never be underestimated

3. Our book advances the idea that business, big or small, in the coming years must not be seen as they enemy, as an adversary; anti-capitalist rhetoric may have validity, does have, in some circumstances, but we want to focus on “best practices” and tap the reserves (huge) of business resources for community improvement—quality of life… there are a significant minority of companies already following a variation of what might be called the “Carnegie-Starbucks model” with 2 very different approaches to social responsibility

4. Here is a short list of what might be called condensed arguments for business continuing do exactly what it is right now, and that that is plenty:

 Business bring jobs, paychecks, prosperity into US life
 Business’s obligation is to provide goods and services
 Business needs to make a profit to grow > more jobs
 Business’s obligation #1 is to its shareholders
 Business greatly helps people by generating dividends, etc.
 Business already gives substantial grants & civic projects
 Business-people are leaders in their communities
 The more progressive businesses and executives (Gates and Buffett today, for ex. and Carnegie and Rockefeller in the Gilded Age”)

5. What we are proposing to accomplish, without pointing the finger at Business for the moment follows this sequence
 Redistribution in the form of corporate and individual taxes is normally not well regarded today, it is not popular with the Republican party, it once was accepted as a fact of life (in what might be called the “Keynesian” period from the 1940s through 1970s)
 Corporate giving is being done, but taking into account the large projected deficits because of entitlement programs, so-called costs associated with Affordable Health Care legislation etc., decisions will have to be made about raising revenue while trimming expenses; the Republican party recently has signed on, Overall, to a No New Taxes policy, or very limited concessions for the highest income individuals

 There really are a limited number of solutions here: taxes can simply be raised to 1960’s levels (not likely), government spending can be made to go away by capping Social Security and Medicare, shutting down national parks, ending Saturday postal service, and such small economies (also problematic), the defense budget can be slashed X% (20,25, 30?)—variants of all of these have been proposed and, eventually, some of each may be needed; the previous mildly progressive Democrat to Obama, Clinton, managed to turn decades of deficits into surpluses; the present era (2013) is different: we now have an expensive prescription drug plan, baby boomers retiring and entering the Soc. Security and Medicare systems, and are still recovering with 7% unemployment after the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s

 There are signs that increased employment and production, which is now occurring, and some combination of the measures listed above will make a big dent in future deficits, but we propose one other avenue that will improve quality of life Without traditional taxation increases or along with modest increases

 These are expanded corporate philanthropy, quickly there are two ways to do this, for corporations to, say, quadruple their voluntary charitable giving programs/budgets: 1. just do more of what’s being done now by a multiple of 4, 2. working with a designated government council or board to coordinate community projects (parks, schools, roads, clinics, libraries, etc.) at the local, state or federal level (probably in that order of preference),

 Doing this would for starters, generate about $60 billion in added non-tax “revenue” per year, an indirect boost not exactly to deficit reduction but indirectly accomplishing the same thing; future columns in this blog will get more specific about how this would be done and how it can be a breakthrough bridge between business and communities and potentially between the political parties and the private/public sector…. no one says that this will be easy, we are simply saying that it is Doable and Makes Sense

5 MYTHS ABOUT THE 2012 ELECTIONS AND THE FUTURE

ROMNEYBarack Obama5 Myths About the 2012 Elections and America’s Political Future

  1. Obama and the Democrats Won Because Romney was a Weak Opponent

Romney was a relatively strong opponent whose credentials, solid business background and Republican governor of a liberal state not to be taken lightly. He was both telegenic and gaffe prone. The latter did not appear to be a problem in his: A. beating Obama soundly in the first debate, B. shadowing within 2-3 points of Obama in the polls and sometimes equaling or besting him, C. All of this in spite of being the quintessential one percenter, D. All of this and he still won 47+ % of the American electorate and the white male and female vote, in spite of caving to many very conservative positions

  1. Obama’s Victory was about his likeability, not his policies

Obama was indeed seen as more likeable and/or to have the average American’s interest more at heart, but he was also credited with Trying, if not always succeeding, to re-energize the American economy, maintain a newly respectable and thoughtful foreign policy, expand health coverage and protect programs that existed,….more (a bit for various groups: “illegals”, environmentalists, women—that minority that is the majority, veterans, not to be cynical but the latter a nice way to compensate for no war medals)

  1. The Right Wing of the Republican Party was discredited and is Moribund

Indeed the far right was a net drag on the party but events since the election show that while the party leadership is distancing itself from Tea Party excesses and hard-shell reactionary politics, the core of the right-right remains in tact, unapologetic, perhaps more localized in the south and conservative plains and RockyMt. states

  1. The Republicans will move more to the Center and halt Democratic gains

This may happen at the top of the ticket in subsequent elections (the meaning of the curve of 2008-2012 is clear enough, but the Republicans have a delicate balancing act in smoothing the rough edges of the far right and yet maintaining their most active cadres; in 2016 and beyond they may not have as polarizing (read black, smart, “elitist”) figure as Obama to rally the troops against

  1. An increasingly progressive electorate and reform at the very top are “Enough.’

No they are not. The Democratic and progressive forces must groom a new generation of governors, representatives and senators (the latter are retiring 2-1 over republicans, and the most liberal—Harkin and Rockefeller—at that, and state legislatures where gerrymandering has been deadly for the Dems)