SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Road Walker who wrote (264408)12/13/2005 1:54:35 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578244
 
"Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, a Christian group active in politics, said Monday that protesters will pray for "a change of heart" by Republicans, citing Old Testament prophet Isaiah, "Woe to you legislators of infamous laws ... who make widows their prey and rob the orphan.""

Liberal protesters target GOP budget

$500,000 ad buy combines with pray-in at Capitol

Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Washington -- The liberal alliance that hammered President Bush's Social Security plan has turned its sights on the Republican budget, running television commercials in the districts of seven Republican moderates and promising a pray-in at the Capitol on Wednesday.

The $500,000 ad buy, sponsored by the Emergency Campaign for America's Priorities and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union, accuses the Republicans of voting to "slash health care for struggling families, cut college loans for middle-class kids and take food off the tables of poor children" to "give billions in tax breaks to millionaires."


Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, a Christian group active in politics, said Monday that protesters will pray for "a change of heart" by Republicans, citing Old Testament prophet Isaiah, "Woe to you legislators of infamous laws ... who make widows their prey and rob the orphan."

The commercials complicate an already difficult task facing Republicans as they attempt to push through the first spending reductions in entitlement programs since 1997, while at the same time preserving Bush's first-term tax cuts on capital gains and dividends.

The budget has proved difficult for Republicans this year, and promises only to get worse in the future as federal entitlement spending rises rapidly, squeezing other programs and threatening all of Bush's first-term tax cuts.

The crux of the problem is that for the first time since taking control of both Congress and the White House, Republicans are facing serious pressure to restrain spending and lower the deficit.

But they are loath to cut middle-class entitlements such as Medicare or farm subsidies, or abandon any of Bush's earlier tax cuts, and so have turned to programs such as Medicaid, student loans and food stamps.


That strategy has opened them to broadsides by Democrats and their allied interest groups, and caused tremors among party moderates, fracturing party discipline.

Republicans have defended the budget cuts -- $50 billion in the House's version of the budget reconciliation bill and $35 billion in the Senate version -- as minor.

Medicaid is the nation's largest health care program, providing health care to the poor and disabled and paying half the nation's bill for nursing home care. States share its rapidly growing costs. House Republicans want to reduce the federal share over the next five years from $1.113 trillion to $1.10 trillion; that translates to reducing spending growth from 7.7 percent to 7.5 percent over the next 10 years.

The difficulty they are having passing these cuts points to much larger budget fights ahead.

The House and Senate have taken sharply different approaches. Leaders vow to reconcile their differences before Christmas, but a vote could slip to next year.

The House budget has drawn the most fire for its cuts of Medicaid, food stamps and student loans. The Senate version omits these and instead targets a Medicare fund intended to induce insurance companies to participate in the new prescription drug benefit for seniors. The White House has threatened a veto if that provision remains.

"Both versions are very unpopular because both share one fundamental flaw, which is these cuts are being driven in order to cover part of the cost of the large tax cuts they're pushing," said Thomas Kahn, Democratic staff director of the House Budget Committee. "Republicans can read the polls and they know that cutting programs like student loans and child support enforcement to pay for tax cuts for people at the top is just not popular."

One of the Emergency Campaign commercials targets Budget Committee chairman Jim Nussle, an Iowa Republican running for governor. Committee spokeswoman Kim Deti countered that the budget bill "is not making cuts in spending. Spending on all the programs is actually going to continue to increase. What we are simply doing through the bill is slowing growth in programs by a very slight amount."

The National Governors Association recommended many of the Medicaid changes in a report last summer prepared by a bipartisan task force led by Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, a Democrat who may run for his party's presidential nomination.

Many governors complain that Medicaid is overwhelming their budgets. The governors asked for limits on wealthy and middle-class seniors who commonly shelter their assets to qualify for Medicaid's nursing home payments.

The House bill would impose a $750,000 ceiling on home equity that seniors can shelter while still qualifying for nursing home benefits. Governors also want to be allowed to impose co-payments on beneficiaries and asked for more latitude in benefit structures.

Analysts say the overall budget cuts are not large, but the problem for Republicans is that they are linked with even larger tax cuts that together will produce larger rather than smaller deficits.

"In the larger context, these are not huge cuts," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a budget watchdog group. "It's just the whole idea that a very narrow slice of the budget is on the table, so Republicans have gotten themselves into a corner here where it does look like they're balancing the budget on the backs of low-income people."

At the same time, Republicans have also added new spending -- including renewing an expired milk subsidy and higher subsidies for home heating. One expensive Senate provision provides $3 billion to all U.S. households, regardless of income, to buy converter boxes for analog televisions as TVs are converted to digital later in the decade.

sfgate.com



To: Road Walker who wrote (264408)12/13/2005 2:57:17 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578244
 
Why it's hard to be civil in our discourse

If only the news from Iraq and Washington would stop providing new reasons for citizens' blood pressure to skyrocket.

Susan Lenfestey

As this administration bungles from one disaster to another, our president urges us not to look back at how we were bamboozled into this holy hell of a war, but to look ahead to the plan for victory -- as if there were one.

And we are urged to be more moderate in our criticism, more civil in our discourse. But that presumes that we have a moderate and civil government, and anyone with one eye open knows we don't.
Consider just some of the news of recent days:

In the Dec. 5 issue of the New Yorker, Seymour Hersh, the most tenacious war reporter of our generation, writes about the little-covered air war in Iraq. Unlike the Vietnam War, in which the military gave daily accounts of the air strikes, there is no such reporting in this war. In the 2004 siege of Fallujah, for instance, bombing raids were conducted day and night for three weeks. At that time the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing alone had dropped more than 500,000 tons of ordnance on Iraq since the start of the war. "In recent months," Hersh writes, "the tempo of American bombing seems to have increased."

More alarming, Hersh reports on the administration's plan for drawing down American troops by backing up the barely functional Iraqi Army with American air strikes. According to Hersh, military commanders oppose this scenario because it leaves the Iraqi ground forces able to call in sophisticated laser-guided bombs to targets that the pilots can't verify. With old feuds to be settled and the likelihood of a civil war, American bombs, they say, will hit increasingly indiscriminate targets.

The story broke that the U.S. military had been paying "journalists" -- in fact military operatives and an American public relations firm -- to write articles favorable to the U.S. mission in Iraq and place them in Iraqi newspapers as if they were independent news stories. Let's see, secret American gulags in countries known for their squishy laws on, um -- interrogation, the disgrace of Abu Ghraib and our administration's refusal to disavow torture, and now this mockery of a free press. No wonder President Bush can't seem to wipe the smirk off his face when he says he's bringing democracy to Iraq.

A memo leaked to the Washington Post revealed the heavy-handed politicizing of the Justice Department under Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales. Although Justice Department lawyers and staff unanimously concluded that the Tom DeLay-inspired 2003 Texas redistricting plan, which diluted black and Hispanic votes to assure a Republican majority in the Texas congressional delegation, violated the Voting Rights Act, they were overruled. High-ranking Justice Department officials ordered them not to discuss the case and quashed the release of the recently leaked 73-page memo. The same officials then approved the plan, and Texas picked up five Republican congressional seats in the 2004 election.

Members of the former 9/11 Commission issued a report card that gave the Bush administration and Congress a string of F's for their efforts to protect the nation from another terror attack. "Many obvious steps that the American people assume have been completed have not been," said Thomas H. Kean, the commission's chair and Republican former governor of New Jersey. "Our leadership is distracted." Politics and pork have trumped national security, leaving chemical plants unsecured and first-responders unable to communicate with each other but police dogs wearing Kevlar vests.

The primary responsibility of government is to protect its people. In 2004 Bush managed to convey enough of a tough-guy image to convince a slim majority of Americans that he was the best man for the job.

But he has failed at every turn and now seems incapable of grasping the enormity of the crisis he's brought down on our country. He should be declared a disaster, but that would bring in FEMA.


While it's true that the Democratic leadership should remain civil and do a better job of spelling out a constructive agenda, the rest of us, especially the media, cannot afford to be moderate, or polite.

Susan Lenfestey is a Minneapolis writer.

startribune.com