Strengthen Social Security

Historians of the future may one day write that the death of the New Deal began this year. If so, it goes without saying that corrupt forces like the Chamber of Commerce will be a big part of the story. So will billionaire ideologues like Pete Peterson, and greedy politicians looking for a handout. Unfortunately, so will a lot of reasonable people whose biggest problem is that they're temperamentally inclined toward being reasonable and moderate - even when circumstances don't warrant it.

The problem's become so severe that it will take more than one day to address it. It will require criticizing people that I respect, and who in some cases I've met and like personally. A great many moderately-minded individuals seem to have been lulled into accepting a Washington consensus in which the "new normal" means accepting that only remaining choice is between a radical assault on the middle class and a moderately radical assault on the middle class. In that world, a "judicious" assessment of Republican radicalism can easily turn into accommodationism. That can lead in turn to bad deals that create needless suffering.

More »»

A new video was released today by the folks at Strengthen Social Security to highlight the absurdity of today’s political debate about "entitlement programs," and specifically to address proposals that would raise the retirement age. Social Security and Medicare have widespread support from Democratic and Republicans voters alike, and defending them should be the at the center of centrist thought. Instead it's fashionable in Washington for otherwise reasonable Democrats like Sen. Dick Durbin to push for cuts to these programs.

And if you object to what's being done in your name, why, then, you're not very "civil."

More »»

It's almost like they had a plan. The right-wing has been trying to dismantle the New Deal since its inception, but after decades of failure it's found a new path to success. They're already persuaded quite a few Democrats to support the first steps toward dismantling Medicare and Social Security. They've also convinced a lot of journalists to ignore detailed economic analyses, and accept the ideological platforms of the far right as "moderate" and "reasonable."

How do you do it? How do you sell a nation on dismantling its most popular programs at a time when they're more needed than ever? How do you convince an entire class of people - the middle class - to voluntarily surrender their health and financial security to benefit those who are far wealthier than they are?

Well, we found it! We found the twenty-year-old PowerPoint presentation that outlines the whole thing - the radical agenda, and the 12-point marketing plan that made it possible. Here it is, available to the public for the first time anywhere: more »

More »»

On Face the Nation this Sunday, Sen. Mark Warner was asked by host Bob Schieffer why his ‘Gang of Six’ would take on Social Security reform in their forthcoming budget proposal. His response reflected a commonly-held myth about Social Security’s history that greatly exaggerates the changes in the worker-to-retiree ratio between 1950 and today.

More »»

Did an interview with RT Today on the meeting of the International Monetary Fund, and on the ways that IMF and World Bank policy reflect the same combination of austerity economics and a 'liberalized' financial sector that we're seeing here and in Europe. The video is here: more »

More »»

Remember all those mini-movies that summarized a broad topic in two minutes? Whether the subject was the Civil War, the magical things that happen when you multiply by ten, or the complete history of Western Civilization, these little films covered it all in one rapid-fire shot after another, giving you a whole lot of information -- and a splitting headache -- in a very short period of time.

The first couple minutes of this Michele Bachmann Today show interview are like that. She runs through the entire litany of conservatism's disproven economic cliches in 100 seconds or less, without even getting short of breath. If someone ever wants to make one of those two-minute movies and call it The Ideas That Crushed the American Dream, Rep. Bachmann's already written the script.

Fire it up and watch her go! We'll sound the bell every time she floats a discredited idea. Ready? more »

More »»

This weekend the New York Times ran what seemed to be a somewhat overly flattering piece about right-wing anti-entitlement hawk Pete Peterson, and the piece included this paragraph:

Progressives like Mr. Baker or Richard Eskow of the Campaign for America’s Future often paint Mr. Peterson as a disingenuous tycoon who made his fortune from the low carried-interest tax rate (it allows hedge-fund operators to shield earnings from the government). They argue that Social Security’s trust fund — while supplied with Treasury bonds, not dollar bills — will nonetheless stay solvent for decades, and accuse Mr. Peterson of shrewdly couching entitlement reform as a way to protect future generations when, in fact, it is today’s elderly who will suffer.

That would be Dean Baker, prominent economist, who describes Peterson with considerable accuracy:

"“He’s not focused on the debt so much as on cutting Social Security and Medicare,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research. “Even in the late ’90s, when we had a surplus, he was saying the same thing and the debt wasn’t in any obvious way a problem then.”

More »»

The President speech on the Federal deficit marked a brilliant return to what might be called his "holographic" style. Like a hologram, the President's speech was beautiful and evocative and shimmered with light. But like a hologram, what you see depends on where you stand.

Many progressives will hear a brilliant defense of government's role in the economy, and of the role that progressive taxation plays in a fair-minded economic system. Conservatives(those who aren't absolutely nuts) will hear a ringing endorsement of a plan that would downsize government and benefit the wealthy. And they'll love the President's "debt triggers," which could force the government to enact drastic cuts if targets aren't met.

This holographic quality, the ability to present himself as all things to all people, is the President's unique gift - unless, in the end, it turns out not to have been a gift at all.

What were the positives in the President's speech? It made a long-overdue case for government's vital role in society. It skewered the conservative notion that taxing the rich is unfair. And it took the right approach to Medicare by emphasizing the need to cut costs, not benefits.

More »»

Apparently the august and statesmanlike Mr. Rush Hudson Limbaugh III (his real name) was a little displeased by our piece in the Huffington Post this weekend, "Why Progressives Keep Losing and the Right Keeps Winning."  He read it out loud on his show this morning, and I'm about to say something about that which might shock and surprise you:

He was neither as courteous as one might hope nor as well-informed as once might expect. Disappointing, I know.

Rush spent nearly ten minutes of air time reading my piece and commenting on it. It wasn't all bad: After initially mispronouncing my name, he corrected himself and said it correctly. The man's a pro; gotta give him that. Almost nobody gets my name right.

You'll notice that he does change my words in one way: Whenever "Democratic Party" appears in the text he says "Democrat Party" instead. Oh, and he calls the Huffington Post the "Huffington Puffington Post." Très drôle, no?

Rush was furious at the suggestion that the Right won this weekend's negotiation. Do you feel like you won? he asked his listeners. Who cares? Judging by the hate mail I've received since the show aired, I doubt his listeners can feel their toes.

More »»

Congratulations! The "grand compromise" will cut nearly thirty nine billion dollars in needed government spending, which proves how "serious" everyone is about reducing the deficit. The grand compromisers could have cancelled the next ten years of tax subsidies for oil companies and cut the deficit by forty billion, but apparently that's not how serious people do things.

If the Republican Party were singing to its base today, the song would be the theme from Friends, "I'll Be There For You." And the Democrats would be singing "You Always Hurt the One You Love." We're being told we should celebrate a "compromise" in which Democrats gave up $38.5 billion in spending cuts, when the original Republican demand was for $32 billion. That means the Democrats only gave the Republicans 20% more (20.2135%, to be precise) than they originally demanded.

Okay, guys. You get an extra 20% -- and not a penny more!

More »»