Last week, a writer passionately bemoaned Clinton’s presence in Oxford to support Travis Childers. Why? The man had sex with an “impressionable” Monica Lewinsky and was impeached! While how "impressionable" Lewinsky was probably depends on how loosely you define that term, it’s true Clinton had sex with her. It’s also true that 20 million new jobs were created during his administration, that he not only balanced the federal budget but created a multi-billion dollar surplus, and that his administration paid down the national debt by something like 6 billion dollars. Which of those truths is more relevant to his offering political support to a current candidate?
As for impeachment—the articles of impeachment were brought by a Republican controlled House led by Newt Gingrich (who would actually be forced to resign before the vote because of sexual improprieties of his own). The House conducted no investigation of its own, but relied entirely on “The Starr Report,” which was so riddled with half-truth and misrepresentation that it stands today as an example of how not to conduct an investigation. So blatantly partisan and politicized were the articles of impeachment brought by the House that neither of them received even a simple majority in the Senate, even though it was also firmly controlled by Republicans.
More recently, we have a screeching screed from another right winger that urges the “decimation” of the Democratic party for four reasons: 1) “National Health Care that will ultimately be rationed.” 2) “Jobs that have not been created” due to fear of increased taxes and health care costs. 3) “Cap and Trade” program that will ultimately cause electricity bills to increase. 4) Unions. These are all well-worn wingnut positions, so let’s look at them.
“National Health Care that will ultimately be rationed.” Capital letters normally indicate an extant program, but the only national health care program I’m aware of is Medicare. That’s been around a while and hasn’t led to any rationing. The new health reform program passed under Obama requires purchase of insurance from private insurance companies. Should rationing occur, it would be because for-profit insurers required it.
In that regard, it’s probably worth noting that, prior to passage of Obama’s health care plan, insurance companies were engaging in their own form of rationing by rejecting coverage due to pre-existing conditions, cancelling coverage the minute an actual claim was filed, and removing children from their parents’ policy the minute they finished school. Given the Republican penchant for deregulation, it’s logical to think those provisions would be among the first to go if a Republican congress is put in place.
“Jobs that have not been created” due to fear of taxes and health care costs. Every non-partisan economic study indicates that businesses aren’t hiring because they are making enormous profits (due to productivity) at current levels. These studies point to the trillions of dollars in cash reserves businesses are sitting on as evidence.
“Cap and Trade” will cause electricity bills to increase. A cap and trade program has been in place since 1990—the Acid Rain Project. It has reduced sulfur dioxide emissions from utilities by over 50% and had no impact on prices. The cap and trade bill recently passed by the House is modeled exactly after the Acid Rain Project.
Wingnuts routinely reject the whole notion of global warming and become nearly apoplectic when human culpability for that is pointed out, but the science from everywhere except conservative think tanks is clear that global warming is happening and that burning fossil fuels is contributing to the rapidity with which it is happening. Cap and trade programs are not the best answer to the problem; a straight up tax on carbon dioxide emissions is the best answer. Unfortunately, there’s no political will in either party for the best solution. More unfortunately, the party of No has so far managed to block even the compromise Cap and Trade represents from passing the Senate.
“Unions.” Union membership is currently at an historic low and union influence on politics is even lower. The two examples of miscreant unions this writer offers are the United Auto Workers, which he worries will soon control both the auto companies and Washington, and the two teacher’s unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers. Let’s consider the threat posed by these leviathans.
In the government’s bailout of the auto companies, two things were required relative to the UAW. First, the companies were required to drastically shrink their work force, which of course meant shrinking union membership. Second, they were required to substantially re-work the ridiculously expensive health care plans the union had insisted on. Both of those things were done and they significantly decreased the clout of the UAW. (I’m not saying I think that’s a good thing, but it speaks to the concern raised in the letter)
“Race to the Top” is the administration’s centerpiece education program. It makes money available to states based on several criteria, but significant among them are that states must make creation of charter schools easier—and license more of them—and states must incorporate strong teacher evaluation standards into their programs and facilitate the process by which poor teachers can be removed.
There is no question that the teacher’s unions have been a major obstacle to improving our education system. No administration has done more to remove that obstacle than the present one.
The greater cause for fear is the Roberts court’s recent Citizens vs. United decision that allows an unregulated and unreported flow of corporate and Chamber of Commerce money into elections.
A little less emotion and a little more thought from the wingnuts would be nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment