Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Serving US Poor a Cold Cup of Bitter Tea

"It seems the only federal monies the right wing in this country likes to see spent is for state-sponsored executions and subsidies for corporations and the wealthy."

You may have been as aghast as I was at some comments from right-wing tea party types in the audiences of the two recent Republican presidential debates. At one debate, audience members enthusiastically cheered the fact that Texas Governor and presidential hopeful Rick Perry, has executed 234 people during his tenure. Then, at a debate sponsored by Tea Party Express, some loudly cheered "yeah!" in response to a debate moderator's question about whether candidate Ron Paul would leave a young man without health care to die rather than to intervene with a federally sponsored health program. It seems the only federal monies the right wing in this country likes to see spent is for state-sponsored executions and subsidies for corporations and the wealthy.

Do you wonder if they actually know how desperate people are? Do the right wing, the extreme candidates, and the tea party policymakers who continue to advocate a dismantling of the social safety net in favor of tax breaks for oil companies and billionaires know the real state of economic distress in this country? Are they shielded from the reality of rising poverty in the United States by their own privilege, or are they rendered irrational and heartless by a distorted ideology that supports principles contrary to the fairness and equality to which our nation strives?

The Problem: Increasing Poverty and Inequality

The September 13 U.S. Census Bureau's release of 2010 data on poverty, income and health insurance, really oughta serve as a slap in the face with a cold wet tea bag. Revealing an alarming downward trend which mirrors the right's anti-people policy preferences, poverty in the United States is soaring and children are suffering the most. In the world's wealthiest nation, over a quarter of all of our children aged 0-5 years are poor and overall poverty continues to rise at an alarming rate. The poverty rate grew from 14.3 percent in 2009 to 15.1 percent in 2010, and the number of people in poverty grew by 2.6 million, up from 43.6 million to 46.2 million. The poverty rate is the highest since 1993, and the number of people in poverty is the greatest since records began 52 years ago.

Further, the percentage of children in poverty nationally increased from 20.7 percent in 2009 to 22 percent in 2010. The number of children in poverty rose by 950,000, from 15.5 million to 16.4 million. Children are four times more likely to be poor in the United States than our seniors. And the median income of their parents is down. Median household income in 2010 declined from 2009 by $1,154, or 2.3 percent. Those in poverty are getting poorer and the middle class is shrinking.

The conservative right tends to use our children as excuses for deficit hysteria and for dismantling Medicaid and Social Security. Yet the cold hard reality is that our children are in need of more food, more family income, and more shelter, and are getting instead only more poverty and hunger. Dismantling social safety net programs under the guise of helping our children through decreasing their future debt burden is a cynical argument at best.

In truth, it is only our social safety net programs that kept millions more American children and adults out of poverty. Government programs such as unemployment insurance, food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit on household income played a critical role in keeping the poverty rate from rising even more dramatically. In 2010, 3.9 million Americans, including 1.7 million children, were lifted out of poverty because of food stamps, while 3.2 million Americans were kept out of poverty by unemployment insurance benefits. Social Security provided a safety net from poverty to 20.3 million of us. Medicaid, the HalfInTen campaign tells us, provided health care to 48.6 million seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income children and families who may otherwise have had none. And, were Earned Income Tax Credit counted in the official poverty measure, it would show that the credit helped lift 5.4 million people out of poverty.

One final counter to right-wing nonsense about government spending impoverishing our children and our middle class. Although those lacking health insurance increased from 49 million in 2009 to 50 million in 2010, and employment-based health coverage continued to decline, children were protected from this downward trend because Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) covered them. And, the Obama health care reform act, so much maligned by the right wing, enabled 18-24 year-olds to actually increase their health coverage by 2.0 percentage points.

The Solutions: Green Public Jobs, Unions and Bringing War Dollars Home

Until the unemployed, especially the long-term unemployed, have jobs to return to, the trend of increasing poverty, hardship and inequality can only continue. We need a comprehensive federal jobs package and we need it, as the President says, "right now." President Obama'sAmerican Jobs Act, is a good start. It recognizes that we need public money invested in jobs that will not only employ people, but that will fix our crumbling infrastructure. It recognizes the obscene gap between the super-rich and the rest of us. It recognizes the value in saving the jobs of our valued teachers and first responders. It recognizes that this must be paid for from those who have benefited the most and sacrificed the least in this recession: the super-wealthy and the big corporations.

In order to make significant progress filling the 14-million job hole that we need to fill, we must go farther. The U.S. Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Out of Poverty Caucus also have some plans that will do just that. Key pieces of these plans are: the revival of American manufacturing, creation of a national infrastructure bank, jobs for youth, green industry development, support for labor organizing and higher taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations.

Finally, if we were to bring home the billions of dollars now being spent in devastating and costly wars overseas, we could pay for the significant investments that must be made at home. These are investments that must be made if we maintain the hope of becoming a nation of shared prosperity in a world of shared prosperity. Note that in Afghanistan, we tax payers are paying $1 million per year per U.S. soldier. Consider that for that same money, we could bring that soldier home, employ her or him in a well-paying green job for $50,000 per year and similarly employ 19 more unemployed Americans.

In addition to this year's price tag of $122 billion for war in Afghanistan, we may forget that we are still paying almost $50 billion just this year for the continuing war in Iraq, with almost 50,000 troops still there. Think of how that money could better be spent on jobs and income security for us at home. The National Priorities Project offers analysis of what we could instead be paying for at home to help raise our economy out of economic hardship. They point out that 42 states and the District of Columbia are facing serious budget shortfalls for Fiscal Year 2012 and that this year’s spending alone on the Afghanistan war would more than pay to fill the gaps in these state budgets, keeping and created desperately needed jobs and public benefits.

Yes We Can

President Obama's 2008 campaign slogan, Yes We Can, ought to be revived. There is a way out of this misery. Many millions are suffering unduly as the tea party and its ilk offer us only in cold cups of bitter tea while serving up fountains of champagne to the super-rich, Wall Street and big corporations. Don't drink the tea, instead support the above ideas and get us working again and fight for our children to be well, healthy and able to participate in a thriving future.

Monday, April 18, 2011

Powerful U.S. Senators Arrive in Guam; Guam Governor Calls on U.S. Senate to End Its Bipartisan Colonialism

Office of the Governor of Guam


Powerful U.S. Senators Arrive in Guam; Guam Governor Calls on U.S. Senate to End Its Bipartisan Colonialism


Immediate Release: April 18, 2011

(Hagatna, Guam) Guam Governor Eddie Baza Calvo, one of the 55 United States governors, found out this morning that fifteen percent of the U.S. Senate landed on Guam in secrecy today. The contingent includes the Senate Majority and Minority leaders and other powerful U.S. Senators. These U.S. Senators, both Democrat and Republican, have decided to thumb their noses at the island and its government. The Governor, who is a member of the National Governors Association and the Republican Governors Association, releases the following statement about how this snub can severely affect Guam colonial-federal relations as the U.S. government pushes a $15 billion realignment of Asian-Pacific forces on Guam:

“This morning, Guam Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo asked whether I would be greeting the 15 U.S. Senators scheduled to arrive at Guam’s Andersen Air Force Base today. We were both surprised and extremely upset that no one in the federal establishment informed Guam of their visit. We called the Navy to verify this stopover and we were told that the U.S. Senators will not entertain any meeting or discussions with Guam leaders or the Guamanian people. Instead of landing at the A.B. Won Pat International Airport, Guam, they have decided to shield their visit in secrecy and land within the confines of Andersen Air Force Base.

“In the 100 years we have been a colony of the United States, the U.S. government hardly did anything to resolve our colonial status. What kind of democracy allows colonialism to flourish? I am livid the U.S. Senate, a body created by the will of the people of 13 colonies who wanted freedom and democracy, would turn its back on the Guamanian people. It is obvious we are not part of their constituency, and they do not consider us a valuable part of the American family. This only serves to inflame our long-held belief that we are an American colony of second-class citizens who matter only when our geopolitical position is needed by the U.S. government.

“This is a sad state of affairs. This is the third time in the last year that Congress has made it clear that we are of no importance to the nation. This snub follows Congress trying to sell our own resources to us at Fena and Congress taking away our Delegate’s voting power in House committees. These U.S. Senators are only hurting American interests abroad. Look at the great relationship we’ve built with the U.S. military. Congress’s actions only undermine that work. Why? If Guam was so important to U.S. strategic interests, then why would the nation’s leaders continue snubbing Guamanians?

“If the Senate wants to thumb its nose at Guamanians, then perhaps it is time for Guamanians to call in every injustice ever committed upon our people by the U.S. government. And we can start with the Insular Cases of the same U.S. Supreme Court of the 1900s that said people of color were separate but equal. How many times have Guamanians answered the call to serve? How many have died for a democracy that doesn’t even fully apply to us? How many more times must Guamanians accept colonial treatment before Congress ever recognizes that our voices count, too? How much more oppression can our people take before they get fed up and tell the Congress to take their buildup somewhere else?

“We can have the greatest relationship with the U.S. military and the Department of the Interior, but if Congress continues ignoring Guam like the colony it is, we will never truly enjoy the America that the Marines of 1944 fought and died to bring to Guam. What happened to the pledge of a “One Guam” policy? It’s clear these U.S. Senators have no intention of uniting our best interests. To them, there is an American inside a military fenceline, and an American colony outside of it. They want nothing to do with that colony. Here is yet another compelling reason the Guam Legislature, Lt. Governor Tenorio and I are working together to call for a vote of self determination. We cannot continue on as a colony of the United States. We should either be a part of the U.S., with voting membership in the House and Senate and the right to vote for President, or we should govern ourselves. This is a message we will share with U.S. Senators Jim Webb and Carl Levin when they visit with us next week. At least these gentlemen have the consideration and decency to meet with their fellow Americans in Guam.

“I want Guamanians living in the U.S. States where these U.S. Senators are from to remember what these U.S. Senators did to Guam in the next national elections.”

Guam is an organized unincorporated territory of the United States, a colonial status that has not changed. Its residents are called Guamanians and were granted U.S. citizenship by an act of Congress called the Organic Act of 1948. Only certain provisions of the Constitution's Bill of Rights apply to the residents of Guam, called Guamanians. Guamanians have among the highest enlistment rates in the U.S. military. There are 183,000 Guamanians living in Guam. An unknown number reside throughout the U.S. mainland, Hawaii and Alaska. A 2000 census of those who call themselves Chamorro (the ethnicity indigenous to Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) or part-Chamorro says that 33,849 Chamorros alone live in California. This does not include the broader number of Guamanians of other ethnic backgrounds who live in California. According to the 2000 Census, nearly 100,000 Chamorros live in the 50 States and Puerto Rico.




Office of the Governor of Guam
Ricardo J. Bordallo Governor's Complex | Adelup, Guam 96910
Tel: (671) 472-8931/6 | Fax: (671) 477-4826 | http://governor.guam.gov

Sunday, October 17, 2010

The Imperial Defense of Pentagon Bloat

By David Sirotav from Commondreams.org

Beware the sophistry of budget talking points -- especially those seeking to deter any criticism of defense spending.

That's the lesson of these last few weeks, as establishment Republicans desperately try to thwart both progressives and tea party conservatives who are pressuring Congress to reduce Pentagon bloat.

The latest talking point du jour has been around in one form or another for years. It asks us to forget that a) America spends more on defense than every other major nation combined and b) the Pentagon, whose annual budget is now approaching World War II levels in inflation-adjusted terms, has lost track of trillions of taxpayer dollars. In light of those disturbing truths, we are nonetheless urged by Beltway Republicans to focus on the fact that defense spending is "4.9 percent of our gross domestic product, significantly below the average of 6.5 percent since World War II," as a recent Wall Street Journal editorial proclaimed.

That widely circulated article, aimed squarely at grassroots conservatives, was jointly written by three of the most influential Republican think tanks in Washington -- the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute and the Foreign Policy Initiative. And like clockwork, the "percentage of GDP" nugget went from their pen to the GOP's well-oiled media machine.

Within days, RedState.com was bewailing supposedly "historically low (defense) spending" and citing the GDP talking point as a "rallying call." The American Spectator magazine, meanwhile, held up the op-ed as an "important reminder to new Republican congressmen" to refrain from "shortchang(ing) both our troops and American national security." Not surprisingly, that's when the "percentage of GDP" stat began being loyally parroted by establishment Republican voices on talk radio.

At one level, the GDP line is designed to simply avert attention from the $700 billion annual defense bill being, well, $700 billion. That's not only a massive sum, but also comparatively exorbitant. Yes, the Pentagon budget is so outsized that according to former Reagan Pentagon official Larry Korb, "(E)ven if the United States were to cut its (defense) spending in half it would still be spending more than its current and potential adversaries."

But, then, discussing defense spending in GDP argot is more than just distracting. It's dangerously incoherent, or just plain dangerous, because the language implies that military expenditures must increase as the economy expands.

Think about it: From a strictly defensive, protect-the-nation perspective, that assumption makes no sense.

"Does a more prosperous economy increase the risk that we will be attacked by a foreign power or by a terrorist group?" writes Slate's Tim Noah. "Of course not."

He adds that "a growing GDP may increase the level of defense spending we can afford, but it has no bearing on the level of defense spending we actually need."

This is true, except in one disturbing case: if -- but only if -- we assume the economy should grow primarily as a consequence of military dominance.

Herein lies the truly "dangerous" part of the GDP mantra. If Republicans in Washington believe American economic growth should be based on the United States militarily subjugating and exploiting foreign countries, then those Republicans can logically (if abhorrently) insist that Pentagon spending must remain a constant percentage of GDP.

Most elites in the GOP establishment, of course, would never openly admit to believing that our economy should be based on hegemonic conquest. We know this because the GOP establishment expressed unanimous outrage at anyone even vaguely suggesting that America wages war for energy resources.

But maybe that's the unspoken admission in the GDP-themed push for more military expenditures. Perhaps for all of the GOP's outrage at war-for-oil allegations, the Republicans' defense spending rhetoric exposes their truly imperial vision -- one that even the slickest talking points can no longer hide.

Monday, November 17, 2008

Buildup Could Bring Many Filipinos

Buildup could bring many Filipinos
Joe Murphy
Guam PDN
November 17, 2008

Guam is heading for a sea of change. The key behind this, obviously, is the military buildup. That is coming, and if you don't like it I would suggest moving to Palau.

How will all this affect you? Greatly.

I just read a blog from the Asian Journal that puts one part of this typhoon-type change in perspective. It was written by Malou Liwang Aguilar of the AJ Press. It stated: "In the next few years, the number of Filipinos in Guam will possibly increase with the strategic move of U.S. military bases from Okinawa, Japan. At present, approximately one-fourth (or larger) of the island's population are either Filipinos or of Filipino descent.

"This move opens new opportunities for Filipinos in the island, as an estimated $13 billion will be spent for construction of facilities and housing for military personnel in the span of four years.

"This also means that 20,000 to 30,000 Overseas Filipino Workers can find jobs in Guam. Known for their work ethic and English proficiency, Filipino construction workers are preferred by Guam companies, according to the Philippine Association of Service Exporters Inc.

"But Guam is no stranger to Pinoys. In fact, 35 percent of Guam's population is of Filipino descent, according to Guam Gov. Felix Camacho, during his speech at the 'Living the Dream' event sponsored by the Republican National Convention held in St. Paul, Minn. Camacho, who is also part Filipino, emphasized the significant contribution of the API vote and urged his fellow APIs to get involved.

"Also, Filipino businesses thrive in the island. Chinese-Filipino tycoons like Lucio Tan, Henry Sy and George Ty are major investors. Tan owns one of the largest mall in the island, Micronesia Mall, (as well as) the Tropicana Hotel, American Bakery, Toppy Furniture and iConnect, a mobile communications company. His banks, Allied Bank and Philippine National Bank, also have branches, while Philippine Airlines regularly flies between Manila and Guam."

By the year 2014, approximately 8,000 U.S. Marines and 9,000 family members will relocate to Guam. It is said to be the biggest military buildup in the history of the United States. The expansion could include a new Marine base, an Army ballistic missile defense facility and expanded Air Force and Navy bases by 2014, according to an initial Defense Department time line.

However, news of the military buildup has raised fears among some Chamorros that their culture and population will be diluted. In a recent interview, Chamorro leader Debbie Quinata said that she's not sure that the tiny island can cope with the military influx.

With 40,000 people -- about a 25 percent increase -- expected to move to the island in less than a decade, that is certainly a big challenge to all issues that matter to Guam.

That was why during the Republican convention, Camacho reached out to U.S. presidential candidate Sen. John McCain to discuss the issues. "I've met with John McCain, to discuss issues that matter to Guam."

The governor's office is lobbying for financial assistance from the federal government over the next few years, money that is to be spent outside the bases' fence lines. This would mean roads, seaport, utility improvements and other projects.

In a visit to Guam last year, U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney stressed Guam's role in the U.S. bases' relocation.

"The U.S. can move quickly and effectively to protect our friends, to defend our interests, to bring relief in times of emergency, and to keep the sea lanes open for commerce, and close it to terrorists," he said. "This island may be small, but it has tremendous importance to the peace and security of the world."

Yet even with Guam's significant role to the U.S. military, Camacho pointed out to McCain that Washington, D.C., could give Guam better treatment.

"We are also Americans, and we need to change the way Guam is treated," Camacho said.

But no matter how you cut it, you are never going to make everybody happy.

Billions of dollars will be spent in Guam by the military, the American government and the Japanese government. That should make the businessmen joyful.

Millions of dollars, if not billions, will be spent to upgrade our roads and highways, and transportation in general.

We also can rest assured that the U.S. government isn't going to just drop the Marines off here. They will need better air transportation. They will need water and power and a garbage dump.

The people of Guam, if they can see into the future, should know that the Marines, their families and associated workers will pay more in taxes, and thus provide a bigger, better tax base, which should help our schools.

Communication should get better too, with better TV and movies. We will have more restaurants and night spots.

It is going to hurt somewhat that the traffic, already bad, will worsen.

More jobs will be created for local people, and more taxes will be paid into GovGuam, broadening that base.

The people of Guam have always been on the low end of the gross national product, but I think this will change, too. I see clearly that new and better houses will be built. The island people should have more money to spend on vacations and education.

Health care will become an essential issue, and we may get a new, up-to-date hospital built.

If we watch the military buildup, and don't complain too much, maybe we can count on a plebiscite that would grant this island more freedom than it has now, in the form of a commonwealth.

Joe Murphy is a former editor of the Pacific Daily News.

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Guam Primary Results

Bordallo, Aguon, Calvo finish strong in Primary
by Ronna Sweeney, KUAM News
Sunday, September 07, 2008

Low voter turnout may have been the key to having ballot tabulation for Saturday's Primary Election for Decision 2008 wrapped up shortly before 2am Sunday. In the race for Guam's congressional delegate, the incumbent Madeleine Bordallo took it by a landslide against Democrat challenger Jonathan Diaz. The tally - Bordallo got 8,766 votes, besting Diaz's 2,962.

In the all-important senatorial race, for the Democrats Frank Aguon, Jr. laid claim to the top spot, followed by B.J. Cruz and Ben Pangelinan. Sitting respectively at number four is Judi Won Pat who is closely trailed by Rory Respicio. Tina Rose Muna-Barnes took home the number 7 position, Adolpho Palacios came in at 8, trailed by Dr. David Shimizu at 9. And for the finishers in ranks 10-16 the list saw Dr. Judi Guthertz, Joseph Leon Guerrero, Matt Rector, Rosanna San Miguel, Robert Benavente, Phillipe Cruz and Luis Duenas.

In the Republican senatorial race, Eddie Calvo came in at number one, with Jim Espaldon at number 2 and Ray Tenorio at number 3. Frank Blas, Telo Taitague, Frank Ishizaki, and Mark Forbes follow thereafter. And rounding out the listing of 10 members of the GOP are Doug Moylan, Jesse Lujan and Dr. Dennis Borja.

View real-time Primary Election results by clicking hereStream KUAM's Election Night specialResults from the UOG exit poll

Sunday, April 20, 2008

War Claims Bill Stalled in Senate

War claims passage stalled
S.C. senator objects to fast-track procedure
By Steve Limtiaco • Pacific Sunday News • April 20, 2008

The U.S. Senate on Thursday attempted to pass the Guam war claims bill -- the last step before action by President Bush -- but the effort failed after a Republican senator from South Carolina objected.

If the bill introduced by Guam Delegate Madeleine Bordallo becomes law, it would require the federal government to spend as much as $126 million to compensate Guam residents for the atrocities they suffered at the hands of the Japanese military during the occupation of Guam during World War II. An additional $5 million would be spent on programs to memorialize the occupation.

Guam is seeking compensation from the United States instead of Japan because the U.S. forgave Japan's war debt decades ago.

The Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act, which already was approved by the House of Representatives, has been with the Senate Judiciary Committee for nearly a year.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., on Thursday tried to fast-track Senate passage of the bill -- making a motion for "unanimous consent," which would have bypassed the normal committee approval and floor-voting process.

The bill would have been approved provided there were no objections, but Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., stated an objection.

The reason for DeMint's objection wasn't stated in the Congressional Record, but his action defeated Boxer's motion.

Boxer minutes earlier had asked the Senate for unanimous consent on a bill to compensate relatives of U.S. citizens killed during terrorist bombings of U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998, but DeMint objected to that motion, as well.

Ongoing effort
Bordallo yesterday said efforts to pass the war claims bill in the Senate are ongoing.

"I continue to work closely with Chairman Leahy and Majority Leader Harry Reid on ways to secure timely Senate consideration and passage of H.R. 1595," Bordallo said.

"Together, we are working hard to pass this bill with bipartisan support and to ensure all senators have all the information they need and that they understand why this bill is important to the people of Guam and to our national security," she said in a written statement.

"I am grateful for the bipartisan support for H.R. 1595. Our friends in the Senate are very much engaged in helping us with this bill. Chairman Leahy has assured me that he continues to work very hard to pass H.R. 1595."

According to the Senate Web site, "unanimous consent requests with only immediate effects are routinely granted, but ones affecting the floor schedule, the conditions of considering a bill or other business, or the rights of other senators are normally not offered, or a floor leader will object to it, until all senators concerned have had an opportunity to inform the leaders that they find it acceptable."