Hurricane Relief... What Government is For!

Hurricane Relief... What Government is For!

As over 50 million people affected by Hurricane Sandy struggle together we're reminded what America is all about. This storm is projected to cost between $10 Billion and $20 Billion... these are huge numbers but the high estimate works out to only about $65 a citizen.

Joining together in tough times is what America is all about. We are stronger when we are united. It is not only what disaster relief is about... it's what government is about.

Government's moral mission is to protect and empower the people. This week the Federal, State and Local governments are worked together to limit the number of people in harms way and are now are working to speed recovery as the winds die down. The important work of protecting people while empowering their recovery is the key to good government.  

Time and again we've heard from Republican's that we should "starve the beast" to constrain government's ability to operate. Despite the rhetoric, both parties "tax and spend"! The 3 most important question's about taxation are 1)Who are you taxing? 2) How much? and 3) For what? Democrats strive to have a progressive tax where people who are doing better pay a little more so that we can have a strong government that is able to respond to crises. Republican's work to decrease taxation on the wealthy while continuing and calling for increasing spending on the military. Governor Romney has advocated privatizing disaster relief and called aid to the states "immoral", this is not a point of view you can see when you are under water.

Rhetorically, we all want a strong America. But often we forget that being the best costs something. When you pay your taxes you are patriotically contributing to a system that is able to cope with incredible devastation. You are supporting the work of a country who can talk about restoring order in just days and weeks. You are supporting efforts to harden our infrastructure and prevent future calamities.

Individual states, without the support of the Federal Government, cannot cope with these issues alone. It takes the combined efforts of all of us working together. Citizens of the 50 states appreciate that they are part of one of the strongest countries in the world. They rightly expect that they will be helped when disaster strikes. They are not being disappointed by the efforts of their government today.

This storm is historic. This storm was a combination of 3 weather systems that hit during the higher tides of a full moon. It was devastating  The extent of flooding in the New York Subway system is unprecedented in its 108 year history.

Climate change continues to predict 'superstorms' and sea level changes, this is not the last storm we'll see. When we vote next week we are deciding if we want a country with a hardened infrastructure that can prevent disasters, respond to crises, save lives and speed America's recovery. Or we're deciding we don't.



P.S. Many of us want to help even beyond the excellent work of our Federal Government, donate to the American Red Cross at www.RedCross.org.    

Are you better off than 4 years ago? Um, YES!

Romney and Ryan asked "Are you better off than 4 years ago?" in August 2012... during the narrow slice of time when August 2008 seemed pretty good. By the end of September2008 we were watching the wheels come off. There is nobody around who remembers that month who would not say "we are better off now than 4 years ago." Counting on us to have short short memories was more successful before YouTube.

If you need a refresher, take a look at George W. Bush on September 24th, 2008. As he announces the collapse of everything we know you can see what he knew we were headed towards. The next President would have a heck of a time getting us out of the problems Bush had created. For a man working on a legacy, he had found his in being the man who disproved the Neo-conservative agenda militarily, economically and socially.

September 24th, 2008


Weeks after these words the private sector was shedding jobs at an incredible rate. In Bush's last month over 800,000 private sector jobs were lost. Immediately under Obama it started to turn around, a little bit of "wait and see" and the few companies who kept their work forces and delayed layoffs did better. The "bikini graph" http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2010/04/05/4118097-bikini-graph-on-jobs-and-more?lite was one of those powerful data renderings that proved the turnaround. If the opposite graph was available before the 2010 election it would have been everywhere... I mean "STOP THE PRESSES" front page stuff... but it was almost nowhere.  

In these final weeks before the 2012 election we have a clear choice between Obama, who steered us out of this crisis in a matter of months, and Romney who would steer us right back into a new crisis. By doubling down on "trickle-down" and striving to be right of George W Bush, Romney has backed himself into a corner.

Are you better off than 4 years ago? Almost certainly! Will you be better off in 4 years with Obama? Or would you like to take your chances with Romney?

Revealing the Rhetoric... Gaining Perspective on The Radical Red Shift

Just calling someone a Communist doesn't make them one. There has been an effort to frame centrist policy as radically leftist, this Radical Red Shift has effectively kept us focused on clever words rather than on devious deeds. Repeated propaganda has a power that is best countered with real information. Looking at the range of political expressions, it becomes clear that the Democratic Party owns the Center as the GOP moves further to the radical right.

-- Compromise does not mean finding some middle ground between any radical idea and effective and efficient government policy. --

Congress is not a barter market, compromise does not mean finding some middle ground between any radical idea and effective and efficient government policy. When given 2 choices that are always many other options between or outside the given ones. By portraying all issues as if there were only two sides we have started to forget the range of the continuum.  Instead of remembering what the "extreme left" was, the right has rhetorically painted centrist policy as radically left. The idea that positions could even be lined up shoulder to shoulder along a line of choices is very simplified, all issues are much more complex as they involve many other dimensions. Let's look at how political policies affect "freedoms".

"Freedom" is an interesting word, George Lakoff identifies it as a "contested term". Political policy can be looked at as supporting or limiting a range freedoms. By using the term in a very general and non-specific way you can reshape the meaning to apply to almost anything (e.g. freedom to dump toxins into a river or to buy assault weapons without a background check). But meaning can be gained by looking at ranges; looking at freedoms as a continuum of economic freedoms and social freedoms can clarify what freedom really is.

Consider economic freedoms as existing on a spectrum from the left to the right. The far left is characterized by a government in complete control of, and even owning, the means of production. Soviet communism attempted this level of economic control, owning every farm, factory, and everything from production to distribution. It was unwieldy and it didn't work. On the far right, policies support corporations taking over typical government responsibilities. Most recently, the conservatives privatized military operations and interrogation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Currently your credit card company knows more about you than your government. In the middle, is sensible regulation of private industry while providing the security and public infrastructure of transportation, a secure banking system and contract enforcement through public courts. These regulations attempt to level the playing field to maximize Economic Freedoms for as many people as possible.

Democrats believe that government has a moral mission to protect and empower the people. Democratic policies and voting records range between the center left and center right. These policies work towards ensuring the economic freedoms by empowering employees and businesses while  protecting the commonwealth from environmental damage and enhancing public access. In many cases progressives might see opportunities for increased efficiency and better administration by owning some of the "means of production" but these options have often been removed from discussion... it is not the pragmatic reality of current policy... essentially there is no left in America and certainly no "Radical Left". Just being left of the "Radical Right" is not radical, it is solidly "Centrist".

--There is no left in America and certainly no "Radical Left". Being left of the "Radical Right" is not radical, it is solidly "Centrist".--

Republicans have moved to the "Radical Right" with recent innovations like "Money is Speech" and "Corporations are People". These 2 stances might have been unimaginable in a democracy but are just steps towards the further possible expression of the Right. The extreme right would be characterized by the -- no public government -- of Grover Norquist's "Starved Beast", where government is small enough to drown in a bathtub. This does not mean actually no governing entities... but rather that a "private government" run by corporations would control all aspects of the economy. Privateering of public infrastructure by selling off established and efficient public services (e.g. like a towns water supply) or contracting out for typical government duties are examples of transferring power and establishing private government. 


On the vertical scale we can plot Social Freedoms. At the top of the spectrum is Anarchy. Anarchy is the complete freedom to do as you please with no concern for the freedoms of others. In the movie "Mad Max" Anarchy had fallen into a violent and self destructive world... far from a utopia. The bottom of the continuum would represent total Authoritarian control, this may be like a Fascist State controlling what the citizens think, do and say. The Center of the Social Freedoms scale could be characterized as policy supporting citizens to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't impose on the freedoms of others.

On a range of social issues the two parties tend to differ on the role and interference of government, often perceiving these within the framework of their worldviews. In general Progressives tend to see support of government through the protection and empowerment as requisite to help level the playing field and allow anyone to succeed. George Lakoff has explained this worldview as seeing the government and citizens as a nurturing family; on the other hand, the Conservatives tend to see the ideal family as headed by a strict father.   These views may alter how people see social freedoms but in general many see the Republican Policies of restricting women's health choices including preventing contraception, restricting same sex marriage, increasing surveillance, resuming torture, detainment without charge, death penalty, the war on drugs and many other policies that interfere with citizens social freedoms appear more authoritarian. In general, Democrats fight for increasing public access to the beauty of nature, creating parks on prime real estate like beach fronts and mountain ranges, limiting crime by addressing its causes and striving to increase civil liberties while limiting infringements on other's rights. 

As the Economic Freedom scale and the Social Freedom scale are superimposed they overlap to form the Political Alignment Graph. The range of freedoms becomes much more complex, and much more realistic. Throughout history different systems have experimented in many of the regions of this graph. For instance, Soviet Communism would fall in the lower left with government controlling the economy and social life. I think if anyone in America was suggesting this it would be fair to call them radical. No one is! Let's look at the spectrum in light of today's American political reality.

In the lower right is the Republican Party with a strong belief in party discipline to increase authoritarian control of the population; shifting power to the wealthy and large corporations. In the center of the graph supporting responsible business and personal responsibility is the Democratic Party. 

In stated policy the Democratic Party represents the Center as the Republican Party continues to propagate and even innovate more "Radical Right" ideas. In the effort to counter the rhetoric which portrays the radical right Republican policy as 'centrist' and Democratic Policy as 'radically left' we have a tool - the Political Alignment Graph. In America there are few people (or in the world) who would support a Radical Left policy like Soviet Era Communism. There is no radical left in America.

Currently the most Progressive option, the most Centrist option, and I would argue, the most Libertarian option (if social freedom is of prime importance) is for you to Vote Democratic. Many have a perspective that the Republican Party best represents their views. But the idea that Independents might fit neatly into a center between these 2 parties is almost laughable; there are few who would prefer slightly less regulation and slightly more authoritarian control of government... but that is what the myth of the radical left has been selling.

This November we go to the polls and select who will be our President for the next 4 years and whether he will have a supportive congress. Whatever happens, America, and you, and I will be okay. I hope the Political Alignment Graph is useful as a tool to help clarify communication about recent political rhetoric and the Radical Red Shift. Or if not, it may give you a personal tool to help avoid getting frustrated or help you laugh when you're watching Fox News.