Wayne White

Wayne White — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:20:08 -0400

Born last of three children into a working class family in 1950.

Graduated HS 1968. Flunked out of college first go-around (too much pinochle and beer).

Honorably discharged veteran; 3 years and 9 days in the USN.

Graduated university in 1977 (BS Geology/Geography) (thanks solely to the VA; GI Benefits).

First "professional" job (Exploration Geologist for a small, independent oil company) in Tulsa, OK ($12k/year; lots of money in those days; according to http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl $43,800 in today's money).

Worked and saved and lived well within our means and was eventually was laid-off from moderate to large independent oil company after 22 1/2 years employment with same (was one of 400; 70+% were 40 years old or older so obviously the lay-off was not age-related).

As we had "...done everything right," "...played by the rules," etc. we were two house payments from paying off our house at the time of being let-go. Took the severance package and held on for 2 1/2 years before taking "early retirement" from same company.

Presently still retired but as company-subsidized health insurance is now within earshot of 50% of net pension check I'm looking for part-time work to subsidize living.

Company-subsidized health insurance started out at around $425.00/month, the next year it shot up to $650.00/month and is now in excess of $1,000.00/month. Note: First "professional" job salary gross less than present health insurance. Insurance costs have increased 53/57% per year. Expect next year's insurance to by in excess of $1600.00/month. I also don't expect to see anything approaching Universal Health Care or cost reductions in the near future (10 years).

I expect to be driven into a state of poverty either by health care insurance or having to sell everything we own to pay for medical bills.

Why I don't think the Greens can do it for the Progressive Movement.

Michael Kwiatkowski — Sun, 04 May 2008 13:28:30 -0400

I've been trying, in my humble way, to help jump-start a renewed Progressive Party presence. But a question that is often asked of me is why not just join the Green Party. I could go into a long and detailed explanation, but the short of it is that I don't think they're very organized and some of their campaigning methods rub me the wrong way. (For the record, the reason I don't say much about the Libertarian and Socialist Parties is because I don't know enough about their organizational structure or their methods of campaigning to make an informed assessment.)

First, my distaste for the Green Party's methods in campaigning. As reported by CBS News, they accepted money and assistance in 2006 from then-senator Rick Santorum of the Republican Party in order to get on the ballot. The state's high court threw candidate Carl Romanelli off the ballot citing insufficient signatures, but the story exposed an even deeper rot within the Greens' political machine in Pennsylvania: the willingness to be compromised just to try to stick it to the Democrats, whom Greens consider little or no better than the GOP.

There is, of course, a valid argument to be made in claiming there is difference between the two major political parties. One need only look at the voting records of the two Prima Donna Democrats competing for their party's nomination to run for president, and the complicit cowardice by most Congressional members in either chamber, to see the truth in this point of view. But for the Greens to accept help from a GOPer so vile as to have had post-anal sex discharge named after him reveals both a lack of integrity and a sickening display of hypocrisy. Such actions add otherwise undeserved legitimacy to charges by Democrats that greens are somehow bent on "stealing" votes they feel belong to their party.

Then there is the organization of their campaigns for national office. Or, rather, the lack of organization. As I have pointed out in my recent three-part series on Progressives, Liberals, Movements and Political Parties, trying to run presidential candidates before having secured enough state-level offices (especially state secretary, judicial, and legislative positions) waste resources that are better spent building up presences in the various states so as to achieve the ability to gain traction at the national level. What good does it do to run candidates for president when the Green Party hasn't even made headway winning state legislative and executive offices first?

That's why I think it's better to rally the Progressive Movement through its own namesake political party. I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't work with Greens; since their platform so closely matches that of the overall Progressive Movement, they make natural political allies and might even be tempted to switch over. But I think as long as some elements in the party are willing to help Republicans, and as long as the party leadership insists on trying to build the party in a more top-down manner, their effectiveness as a political party is severely limited.