Tag Archives: Ohio politics

THE DUMB BLONDE VS. THE ELITE,By Louise Annarino,October 27,2012

THE DUMB BLONDE VS. THE ELITE, By Louise Annarino, October 27,2012

This morning I watched a political add running in Arizona against an “activist” judge whom the ad also described as “violating the constitution because he made law”. The self-described middle-class housewife in a McMansion kitchen went on to say “the elite think we can’t understand, but we do.” I wanted to  shout out,“NO, YOU DON’T !” Her smug look, smiling that she had proved she was not just a “dumb blonde”, made me sad for her. Somewhere along the way, she had come to accept but resent the sexism directed toward her by those she trusted to love and support her. They used their own sexism to make her vulnerable to their manipulations, and to use her to attack candidates who know the law, are well educated and professionally competent; but, make her feel stupid. The ad makers play on the anger which has built up over time, the resentment toward real oppressors which they re-direct toward their opponents. I felt sorry for the woman in the ad and all those she represents. I felt sorry for all of us.

The first quarter I taught Business Law at Ohio University I learned a disturbing fact while grading my students first mid-term exam. They could not write a sentence. The essays were impossible to grade since sentence fragments could not sufficiently show my students had grasped the concepts I had been discussing with them for over a month. Mine was an upper-level course open to juniors,seniors and graduate students. How could they have gotten so far without being able to write, I wondered.

After returning their tests to moans and gasps of disappointment I wrote a simple sentence on the board and asked someone to come up to the front and diagram it. Blank stares and no volunteers was the response. My pleas for someone, anyone to speak up about why this was such a problem provided the answer: no one knew what I meant by “diagram a sentence”. It took a  moment for that information to sink in. Surely, I had heard incorrectly. But, no, they did not know what nouns,verbs, adverbs did within a sentence. A few students identified the adjective, and understood its function. They explained they had not had to write because all of their exams were multiple choice tests.

I found an empty class on the evenings my law class was not scheduled and invited students to attend my English class. They would need it because my exams would require them to write, and passing the test meant it was in their interest to attend the extra classes. I did not do this out of altruism, but out of desperation. I wanted to make it easier to grade those tests with certainty that the grade reflected a student’s full grasp of the subject matter. I wanted to shorten the time I spent grading! We helped one another in our common cause.

The other disturbing discovery that first quarter was that while in high school my students had not taken an American History course (no longer required), nor a Principles of Democracy course (not offered, or not required). It is extremely difficult to teach law to those with neither of those courses under their belts. What examples can one use to explain court decisions? Why do courts make the decisions they do? What guides the court?

Since every night of the week was now filled with Business Law and English, and since my “day” job was Associate Director of OU Legal Affairs ( I taught on overload contract because I love teaching AND had to pay back my school loans), I could not add more classes. Thus, I expanded my curriculum to include American and World History and P.O.D. Also, since racial and sexual discrimination is another topic they would need to understand but had never been taught, I used one week of class to run them through workshops I had designed. This complex amalgam of coursework became my template for all of my future classes: School Law,Law and Medicine,Social Welfare Law,Vocational Education Law, and my on-going Business Law courses. Each piece helped my students understand law with such depth that I am convinced they would not be easily duped by the ad I saw this morning.

What worries me is that too many Americans are being duped. They have no idea how a bill becomes a law, the role of committees, the power of committee chairs, Roberts Rules of Order and Congressional rules of House and Senate, difference between states powers and federal powers, how courts function, the role of the judge, grand-jury  and jury. I could go on and on. Such ignorance of basic governance by executive,legislative and judicial branches applies to members of both parties. The base of each party expects more than can or should be delivered by a governance system which relies on compromise and consensus to accomplish anything. We can see where this has gotten us.

Term limits have only made incompetence in governance worse. In term-limited positions the newly-elected representatives don’t stay in position long enough to learn the ropes and develop nuanced strategies within the rules, develop trust and create alliances with colleagues across the aisle, and grasp the long-view of what is good for the country they serve. They are focused on short-term celebrity and fund-raising for the next campaign.

Shortening the Congressional work week and schedule, to free up time for such fundraising and celebrity-building appearances has contributed to the problem. During 2012 the House was in session only 122 days (http://thomas.loc.gov/home/ds/h1122.html);the Senate, 123 days (http://thomas.loc.gov/home/ds/s1122.html). This is not to say members are not on the people’s business 24/7 because they are. However, it does mean they are not focusing on building a collegial enterprise for the good of the country. The Teapublicans found it quite easy to block any effort at consensus and cooperation between conservatives and progressive, between Democrats and Republicans. And the newly-elected Teapublicans  arrived with little appreciation or understanding for the historical and social context of cooperation which Congress had learned over time was necessary for good government. They came with the intent of stopping cooperation, blocking the first African-American president’s determination to build a “more perfect union” where Blue and Red states worked together for a common good. They are playing the role of the marginalized  and demeaned “dumb blonde” taking on the marginalized and demeaned “elite”.  And the Republican Party fell right in-step with them. Some decided it was time to retire.

I need another classroom!

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

A DEBATE OR A SHELL GAME? WHOM DOES ROMNEY THINK HE IS KIDDING?,By Louise Annarino, October 1, 2012

A DEBATE OR SHELL GAME? WHOM DOES ROMNEY THINK HE’S KIDDING? By Louise Annarino, October 1, 2012

 

My first debate was in my Catholic high school in 1967. The single question to be answered: “Should tax dollars be used to support private education?” My position; “No! It was an unconstitutional breach of the separation of church and state, and would weaken both institutions. I was unpopular; but,as we can see,I was right. I doubt the journalists who question President Obama and Mr. Romney on Wednesday night,October 3d.( http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-debate-schedule/2012-presidential-debate-schedule/ )will have an opportunity to reach the depth of discussion we did in that high school debate. The format does not allow for in-depth responses with so many questions to be answered.

 

Also, Mr. Romney has already stated he will be fact-checking the president. This is a back-handed way of saying he will be calling the president a liar, for any response he makes. This is a brilliant offensive tool meant to put the president on the defensive for factual statements he really need not defend. His record is clear. It is Mr. Romney’s record which is disturbingly murky. He hides behind past accomplishments;for example, taking credit for an auto bail-out he opposed when he argued that if the automakers “get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.”

 

He still has not released his financial records so we can understand just what his true business dealings are. He follows Niccolo`Machiavelli’s premise- “There is nothing more important than appearing to be religious.”- by using charitable donations to his church as his excuse for withholding his tax returns and supporting financial documents, which would answer our legitimate concerns that his business dealings are self-serving and bad for American workers. While one applauds charitable giving,most Americans would prefer he not out-source their jobs, keep his sizeable wealth in American banks to use as loans for further small business development, and pay his fair share of taxes.

 

He continually changes his positions, not because changing circumstances call for more nuanced responses; but, because his audience changes. He has been known to argue for alternative policies on the same day to two different groups (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/26/mitt-romney-small-business-owners-_n_1917556.html )for example, while campaigning in Ohio. “The first message, delivered early in the day in Westerville, was that small business owners should ‘not be expecting a huge cut in taxes.’ The second message, delivered later in Shaker Heights, was that ‘small business is crushed by taxes,’ and that Romney plans to bring ‘tax rates down for small business’.” Who knows what he will say during a debate;his focus will be on “fact-checking” his opponent rather than telling us his true position. There used to be a term for this behavior: the pot calling the kettle black.

 

A debate where one party’s focus is on fact-checking to cover up his own lack of consistent and verifiable positions? Where one party takes on the role of debate monitor rather than engage in the debate itself? Where one party asserts dominance and control by bullying the other debater? This is nothing more than Romney’s effort to continue the shell-game he has been playing since he entered the political fray. Actually, this may be why we cannot see his tax returns. Perhaps his business and charitable occupations have always been simply a massive shell game. Perhaps Mr. Romney himself is a shell of a candidate, not a real contender for the presidency of the United States.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN'T HIDE: REPUBLICANS ON THE MOVE,By Louise Annarino, September 21, 2012

YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN’T HIDE:REPUBLICANS ON THE MOVE, By Louise Annarino,September 21, 2012

Can Democratic candidates win control of the the House of Representatives? Will they retain control of the Senate? Republicans controlled redistricting in most key states, including here in Ohio, following the 2010 census. As a result, it has been commonly accepted that RepublicanHouse candidates have their races sewn up. If this is so, why are they running so fast to jump off Romney’s coat tails?

And do they think voters have forgotten it is House and Senate Republicans who have blocked the efforts of Democrats and President Obama to achieve economic recovery, job retention and creation, break-up of banks too big to fail, oversight of Wall Street, broader energy program, slow-down of climate change, more expansive coverage and lower costs for health care, extension of social security and medicare solvency, women’s rights, LGBT rights, veterans’ care and benefits? Their obstructionism justified simply because they preferred a 1 term presidency over the good of the country and ALL of its citizens?

Norm Ornstein and Thomas Mann who are well-known for their independence and non-partisanship put it this way: “In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted.  Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.  The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics.  It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”

They may run as far from Mitt Romney, and their House colleague and putative leader Paul Ryan; but, they can’t hide form the facts:

  • Due to GOP insistence on holding budget bill hostage to defunding Planned Parenthood and health reform it brought the US Government to the brink of shutdown in 2011.
  • Due to GOP insistence on defeating President Obama’s stimulus,it refused to raise the debt limit until a few hours before default. S&P downgraded the U.S. credit rating for the first time in history explaining, “We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process.”
  • Due to GOP standoff as a budget extension expired 4,000 FAA employees were furloughed in a partial shut-down lasting 13 days,cost the government $200 million in weekly ticket tax revenue that airlines no longer had the authority to collect,and stopped work on dozens of airport projects around the country,
  • Due to GOP demanding Advanced Vehicle Manufacturing Program,which would cut 10,000 jobs it delayed emergency disaster relief.
  • Due to GOP refusal to accept Obama’s routine  proposal to extend the payroll tax cut for middle class families,leaving town as the payroll taxes were about to go up,refusing  to pass the Senate bill until Rep. John Boehner acceded to public criticism and maneuvered the votes needed to pass the bill at the last possible moment.
  • Due to GOP need defeat Obama in 2012 it continues to block the president’s American Jobs Act costing firefighters,police officers and teachers more than 1 million jobs.
  • Due to GOP need to ruin President Obama’s support by small business owners, it continues to block tax cuts for small businesses included in Pbama’s American Jobs Act.
  • Due to GOP desire to show Obama as incompetent, it continues to block essential infrastructure projects included in Obama’s American Jobs Act.
  • Due to GOP effort to pass ideological/morality-laden bills, it has delayed for months any action on the Senate’s version of the Transportation Bill, holding up Obama’s efforts to rebuild roads,bridges,rail lines,seaports,rail and truck depots essential to rebuilding the economy and increasing deportation of American-mad goods which improve our trade balance.
  • Due to GOP plan to remove student support for Obama it delayed reduction in student loan rates, and repeatedly blocked Obama efforts to remove private sector profit from student loan program. The changes Obama was able to accomplish should have been agreed to long ago.
  • Due to GOP plan to deny Obama the support of women voters and impose ideological strictures on women it delayed and blocked extension of contraceptive health care benefits for women, repeatedly refused to renew the Violence Against Women Act, opposed the Lily Ledbetter law, and denied Sandra Fluke’s first attempt to testify before a Congressional committee.
  • Due to GOP need to protect its wealthy donors in order to finance Obama’s defeat, it continues to hold middle-class tax cuts hostage unless tax cuts for the top 1% are maintained, and even increased.
  • Due to GOP disdain for science it has blocked Obama’s efforts to address the effects of climate change, insists on major cuts for pure scientific research,and plans to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency.

GOP House and Senate candidates can run from Romney-Ryan ticket, but they cannot run from its recent history, nor from the Republican Party Platform, which would continue to hold economic recovery hostage to impose GOP ideology and protect its wealthy donors. How important are these donors? By most accounts Romney spends more time with them than he does on the campaign trail. As ABC’s Jonathan Karl reports: “At one recent Texas fundraiser, a donor told Romney, ‘I am happy to write a check, but why are you here? Shouldn’t you be in Ohio?'”

We have a choice in this election: Vote for Democrats who will support President Obama’s plans for economic recovery, job creation, energy independence, environmental and health protection,end of war in Afghanistan, avoidance of future unjustified wars, meeting the needs of veterans, aiding our military families, following a just foreign policy, and exerting every effort on behalf of all of us; or, vote for Republicans who will continue to block everything which would move us all forward unless we allow them to strip away our civil rights, reward the 1% with more tax breaks, increase middle-class taxes, demean and dismiss the working poor, ignore the indigent, forget our military and veterans, cripple our cities, and use foreign policy to make money for corporate war-mongers. Republicans should keep on running,and not let the door hit them on the back on their way out.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

SHERROD BROWN n…

SHERROD BROWN needs our help. President Obama needs his voice and his support  during his second term. Please consider rushing a donation to Senator Brown TODAY.

54 days until the election.
Brown: 43.6%, Mandel: 41.4% — recent polling that has this race virtually tied.
$17 million in special interest attacks against me on Ohio TV.
$3 million left for us to raise before the end.
$50,000 a day to make that a reality.

There’s incredible energy coming out of our convention in Charlotte last week, and we should capitalize on this moment while we can. I know you’ve stood by us before, and I’m thankful for your past support.

But right now the special interests are coming at me harder than ever, and it’s essential we respond.

Will you consider giving another donation of $10 or more right now, and help us raise the $3 million we need before November?

More than one recent poll has shown our race tightening significantly. But I focus on different numbers, numbers that mean so much more than polling and negative attack spending.

Like the 850,000 jobs that we saved in Ohio through the auto industry.
Or the 1.9 million Ohioans who rely on Medicare.
Or the 382,000 Ohio students who saw their student loan rates remain low thanks to our action.
Or the 116,000 of you who have already contributed time and hard-earned money to this campaign.

Leave a comment

September 14, 2012 · 12:56 am

WORDS OF POWER AND CIVILITY: FREE SPEECH ON LIBYA,EGYPT, AND ISRAEL, By Louise Annarino,September 13,2012

Words of Power and Civility: Free Speech on Libya, Egypt and Israel, By Louise Annarino, September 13, 2012

As Associate Director of Legal Affairs at Ohio University in Athens,Ohio, I was asked each autumn to speak to the newly-arrived International students regarding American laws, and what they needed to know to avoid legal problems while studying in the United States. I started ,as is my usual practice,with the U.S. Constitution. I then described our judicial structure, the difference between civil and criminal law, and the role of local police, state highway patrol and the FBI.  There were 2 areas students were most interested in:  traffic laws and 1st Amendment free speech issues.

Freedom of speech was a phenomenally novel concept to many of our students,whose first reaction was to question whether I had misspoken, or they had misunderstood. When I explained we could even burn our flag as show of political protest, several students inevitably leapt to their feet. This seemed beyond the pale to them, as it is for many of us. We discussed how free speech did face limits through reasonable regulations meant to keep the peace;for example,one cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theatre. I also explained that it was often a component of active civil disobedience for which dissidents must expect consequences, often a stint in jail. I told them about The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail, Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, and Ghandi’s peaceful resistance campaign against British occupation of India. I cautioned them to understand that Americans guard free speech, even when the speech is uncomfortable, inane, even hateful. We even have a children’s rhyme “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never harm me” as a model for controlling our response to speech with which we disagree, or which is used to “attack” us. Police may intervene only to keep the peace;not to stop speech.

I have been thinking about these afternoons exploring what free speech meant to these students, what impact their new insights into American law and cultural mores would mean once they returned home. This programmed afternoon event led to many on-going friendships with students who would stop by my office to discuss American law and the Bill of Rights in the privacy of my office. We talked about African-Americans knocked off their feet by water hoses, attacked by dogs, clubbed by police as they marched for civil rights and an end to Jim Crow laws. We talked about American anti-war activists. We talked about American terrorists: KKK, Aryan Nation, CCC and other such fanatic fringe groups around the world, and their threat to civilized societies. We developed a common understanding about the dangers such groups posed not simply to life and limb but to free speech,freedom of assembly,freedom of religion, of the press etc.;and, to the very survival of government by the people. For violence breeds contempt for the speech of those who use it to instigate such violence.

I think about these young men today. I wonder what they expect of us;and,what we can expect of them. The theatre we discussed is no longer a crowded building; but, an internet of social media and viral videos. When a hate-monger on one side of the world shouts out hate-speech to arouse and instigate a response, violence on the other side of the world too often erupts. We must be sensitive to the fact that America has been blessed with immigrant influxes,especially along our coasts, which opens American society to cultural differences and reduces tribalism. Countries emerging from tribal structures to begin building democratic republics need our calming influence on such forces;not an aggressive disdain for their struggles. “Chest beating” does nothing to build the good will needed to strengthen the hand of those  fighting off the fanatic fringe. A policy of diplomacy and dignity, tolerance and respect for diversity, guidance and support for democratic reform shows President Obama’s power as a statesman. This is not a sign of weakness; but, of strength. Because he is a strong man who knows how to use the power of his office, and his personal power, he does not need to beat his chest.

“Violence as a response to speech has no place,” in society says Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

After condemning the attacks and the death of our Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others, “Justice will be done,” says President Obama.

“It’s disgraceful that the Obama administrations’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks,” said the Romney campaign.

Rence Priebus, Chairman of the Republican Party tweeted, “Obama sympathizes with attackers in Egypt. Sad and pathetic.”

Today, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney and FOX news continued to lie about President Obama’s response in an effort to undermine his national security accomplishments, and undermine his leadership at home and abroad. Is this the action of patriots? When Americans are being attacked and killed, when we have American troops and diplomats in the field, when we should be decrying ignorant and malicious rhetoric we have a candidates for president and vice-president throwing fuel on the fires burning abroad. They blame not only President Obama but those in diplomatic service whose lives are being licked by the flames.

While diplomatic efforts by Obama and Clinton to assure the world the United States is not waging war on Islam, but on terrorism, Romney goes even further to undermine our diplomacy in the middle east, asserting that Obama is no friend of Israel. He even lied that Obama refused to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In fact, the two spoke on the phone since they will be addressing the U.N. on different dates: Netanyahu is scheduled to be in NY on the 27th,Obama on the 25th.There are disagreements between them as to strategy; but, not as to the goal of Israel’s security. Netanyahu and Romney  are double-teaming our president and his foreign policy. This is no time to play such political games. There is room for disagreement . Within Israel there is disagreement. A Netanyahu deputy disagrees on setting Iran “red line”, much as Clinton and Obama have.

Israeli Deputy Prime Minister for intelligence and atomic affairs Dan Meridor, and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, agree with President Obama’s approach. When Mr. Romney is president he can set America’s foreign policy, but not before that event occurs. Since when does a private citizen,even one running for president, join with the leader of another nation to undermine American foreign policy?  Definitely not in the midst of rising unrest near our embassies. President Karzai canceled a trip abroad today fearing the unrest will spread within Afghanistan and against our troops. Should not Romney,Ryan,and Priebus be equally concerned about our troops?

Fact-checkers were busy today assessing Libya/Obama statements of Romney/Ryan/Priebus as untrue. Meanwhile the Neo-cons advising Romney seem eager to push them to continue to lie and create such unrest abroad it could justify their desire to increase military defense spending. Ryan and Romney insist military spending must be increased 20% to keep America safe. They are talking about increasing contracts to corporate arms producers and defense contractors with financial interest in companies such as Mr. Cheney’s Halliburton Corp. They are not talking about veteran’s benefits, which the Ryan/Romney budget cuts. They are not talking about the safety of our troops.

The sad truth is that free speech allows liars to tell untruths about political figures and celebrities because of an exception to defamation charges for public figures. One cannot sue a congressperson by a defamation claim for comments made on the floor of the House or Senate, either. Public and political figures have to defend themselves against lies all the time. We have a notion that “the truth will out”. This might have been true when newspapers,television stations and radio openly and transparently competed with one another;now, one person (or his corporation,think Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes) can own multiple media outlets, even all,within any geographical area. CITIZENS UNITED did away with any transparency requirements which would at least alert us to the names of purveyors of lies. Truth will out is a fantasy. Our town is now the entire world. And media moguls with financial,nee political,agendas rule the town.

Those who have no sacred history of free speech wonder why the U.S. does not simply arrest those hate-mongers and liars who keep throwing fuel on the fires of fanatics. They expect and ask us to arrest, and punish, such persons. While I would love to see them punished, it is not easily done when they can defend their speech as free speech. But, they must face consequences.They must be held accountable…and they will be…if we can discover who they are. Any company supporting such messages of hate, bigotry, and deception should be boycotted, its employees unionized, and its directors removed by shareholder actions. Politicians who join in the game must be denied out votes. We can use speech, our free speech, to see justice done and consequences suffered. We cannot give up our sacred freedoms but we can use them, teach them and spread them throughout this country and the world community.

Words have power, and we must use them wisely, compassionately and forcefully as have our President and Secretary of State. Thank you Mr. President and Secretary Clinton. Thank you citizens of the world, who seek freedom, including free speech for your people. As you build your new democracies,guard it well.

UPDATE/ JUST REPORTED ON RACHEL MADDOWS/9:13 PM:

Attack on Libyan embassy was not a protest but organized attack.4 cars pulled up flying black flags,witnesses say it was response to killing of Libyan AlQuaeda leader by drone attack. As we learn mire we will understand more, and perhaps strengthen our ties with a free Libya and its people.,many of whom were also injured in this attack. It is still imperative that we allow our president and secretary of state to address foreign policy and security issues abroad,and strengthen our ties to emerging democracies and persons of good will. We must hold accountable all those who would weaken and undermine our efforts to seek peace with the nations of the world,despite the difficulties we face.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

WHO DO YOU TRUST?, By Louise Annarino,September 9,2012


WHO DO YOU TRUST?,BY Louise Annarino,September 9,2012

Johnny Carson,whom some of you will recall with a wide smile as the best-ever late-night talk-show host, started his television career as host of late-afternoon show called WHO DO YOU TRUST? It came to my attention when my 5th grade teacher chided him for using “WHO” rather than the correct “WHOM” in the title.  Obviously, the nuns were watching this show when they returned to the convent after classes. That was enough for me. I had to check this guy out. So, I switched over from American Bandstand one day and I was hooked! He and his side-kick Ed McMahon,kept me in stitches as they ran the game show. Later, Johnny took over for the 11:30 p.m. time-slot on NBC. Johnny kept me laughing for many years;just the memory of his skits and famous poses still make me laugh. “always keep ‘em laughin’ ” is the mantra of all forms of entertainment.

The political conventions,where politics becomes entertainment, are now over. Article after article has parsed these events ad nauseatum. Talking heads have even parsed the comments of their fellow commentators. There is only one question left for me: “Who do you trust?”. That is the person for whom you will vote. How do you know whom to trust? The one who makes you laugh or smile.

Laughter is disarming. We only laugh when we are able to relax and let down our defenses. We only let down our defenses when we trust s person. We literally get “weak with laughter”; and, some like me actually can laugh so hard they “fall down laughing”. Doctors in the Netherlands can explain why. I am more interested in WHEN we allow ourselves to laugh, only when we feel safe enough to get weak or fall down. There was a lot of this behavior at the Democratic convention; not so much at the Republican convention. Democrats are not funnier than Republicans. Nor do they have a better sense of humor. Both events had their fair share of people in funny hats and outrageous costumes. Only one had a guy talking to an empty chair and that was at the Republican convention. I have scoured the internet for photos which show the Republican delegates enjoying their convention and the mood I see is somber,concerned,annoyed,and solemnly patient; with a few smiles interspersed,a balloon launch,and cowboy hat toss. In searching photos of the Democratic delegates I see laughter to the point of tears and weakness, relaxation,pleasure, joy and hope. I also see such trust in the candidate that the delegates were relaxed enough to let down their defenses and enjoy their convention.

This reminds me of a trip a brother and I took to Hawaii sitting in the non-smoking section of the plane. Our section of the plane was quiet except for the recurrent flip of a magazine page. From the smoking section shrieks of laughter poured forth. They sounded like they were having a lot more fun than we were having.I could not laugh while my white knuckles gripped the armrest, knowing sharks were circling below readying for lunch when our plane crashed into the Pacific Ocean. Smoking and drinking allowed for a relaxation I could not imitate while flying. Fear had its grip on me. Nothing was funny. I trusted the laws of aerodynamics, but not possible human error.

There will alway be human error. We are not gods. We do not expect our leaders to be gods, nor are they God’s representative on earth, despite what some politicians imply. There is no moment when God chooses our next candidate no matter what Teapublicans  insist. We choose our candidates. Republicans chose Romney-Ryan. Democrats chose Obama-Biden.  Who makes you smile? Who makes you weak in the knees with laughter? Who trusts you? Who do you trust?

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

IT MUST NOT BE RAPE IF A WOMAN GETS PREGNANT,By Louise Annarino,August 20,2012

It Must Not Be Rape If A Woman Gets Pregnant,By Louise Annarino,August 2o,2012

As I write this I am listening to Tchaikowsky’s Sleeping Beauty Suite via Spotify, thanks to a helpful young nephew who downloaded it to my computer.Little girls love the story of Sleeping Beauty. Even those of us who are feminists to the core dream the most beautiful dream of all, finding our prince.  A few of us are lucky enough to have found him. Then there is rape, the stuff of nightmares.

Students moved into residence halls at The Ohio State University this week-end. Some of them will be raped; 1out of 4 is a commonly cited statistic. Another is that 90% knew their rapist; and yet another that 60% of male college students “indicated some likelihood of raping or using force in certain circumstances”(see more at http://www.crisisconnectioninc.org/sexualassault/college_campuses_and_rape.htm).

As a 19 year old student and Resident Advisor or RA at OSU I spent many nights in the University Hospital emergency room comforting such young women; and, sometimes comforting those who were hemorrhaging from a back-alley abortion. Abortions were then illegal. Sleeping Beauties, these young women, who sought to make a dream come true, woke up in a nightmare. Every 21 hours a woman is raped on a college campus.

It is not only college women, those uppity females who believe they are as smart and as competent as men, and able to compete with them who face sexual assault. Rape crosses all economic and sexual barriers. In a department of Justice Study 1 in 6 women and 1 in 33 men experienced rape or attempted rape. Yet, a 1992 report from the National Victim Center ( see more at http://www.911rape.org/facts-quotes/statistics )called rape the most underreported violent crime in America; with one in six victims reporting the rape. The 2000 FBI Uniform Crime Report states that a rape occurs in the United States once every 5 minutes.

The young are more likely to be sexually assaulted than adults. In the 1992 study the National Victim Center reported the following breakdown by age of victims:

29.3% were less than 11 years old
32.3% were between 11 and 17
22.2% were between 18 and 24
7.1% were between 25 and 29
6.1% were older than 29
3.0% age was not available

Getting lost in statistics? Each one is a human being just like you,your wife,daughter, mother,sister,niece. Rapists live among us as family, friends, neighbors. Rape is a violent crime not because of the nature of penetration, the level of force used, nor the behavior of a woman prior to the rape. It is because sex is used as a weapon to injure,maim,even kill a woman; body, heart and soul. Rape is meant to denigrate and defile a woman. To show her how worthless she really is. It is not a sexual act but a violent act using sex as the weapon.

While working on a graduate level project at a maximum security men’s prison in Ohio I discovered that most rapes are planned; inmates often described to me how they selected their victims. The reason most women report knowing their rapist is because he sets up potential victims by making innocent and deceptively friendly contact with her hours,days,weeks in advance; often, by simply asking for the time or directions and making conversation. Those women who respond favorably and kindly are selected. Those who ignore or showed distaste for the man’s advances are bypassed as likely to be a “problem”. I was told (women in the helping professions) teachers,nurses and social workers are particularly sought out. Since then, I am most unfriendly to any man I do not know and give a glaring look if asked for directions etc. Not very ladylike; I have no illusions about, nor dreams of being a princess.

I understood rape,finally, despite the hours I had spent with women who had experienced it, when I was nearly gang-raped while walking across the OSU campus in daylight, walking with two female roommates. I had taken several self-defense courses and like many women mistakenly believed I could take-down or escape a rapist, never imagining the possibility of pair or gang-rapes. 85% of rape survivors report they tried unsuccessfully to reason with the man who raped her. 55% of campus gang-rapes are committed by fraternities,40% by sports teams,and 5% by others.(http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php) In my case it was the intervention by the OSU football squad which saved me. GO BUCKS!

Which brings me to the Teapublican fraternity of men in the House and Senate who show their disdain for women by submitting bills to control them, deprive them of needed health care, and pay them less than men doing the same job. Recently, Representatives Todd Akin (R-MO) and Paul Ryan (R-WI) co-sponsored H.R. 3“No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” which initially included language which changed the definition of rape to forcible rape. Later,public pressure forced the bill’s supporters to remove that unacceptable and narrow definition. Perhaps Mr. Akin meant to say forcible instead of legitimate while defending his extreme anti-choice view because he believes some rapes are legitimate, and/or not all rapes are forcible. Either way the idea of rape held by Mr. Akin, Mr. Ryan and other Teapublicans is misguided. They discuss rape as if it were a sexual act, as if some sex is legitimate and some not; as if some sex is forced and some not. Rape does not illustrate a woman’s willingness or unwillingness to exert her sexuality. It can never be legitimate. It is inherently a use of force meant to denigrate and harm a woman. Rape is a weapon against women.It is a criminal act; and they don’t get it.

His very words over during a recent interview illustrate the Teapublican Akin’s failure to understand the problems women face: “First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” Why is he talking with doctors about rape? Why is he not talking with criminal experts? Why is he talking about pregnancy resulting from rape? Why is he not talking about the injuries sustained by women resulting from rape? Why? Because he is not interested in rape. He dos not respect a woman’s right to be free of criminal attack when sex is the weapon.He is interested in stopping ALL abortions, even those resulting from rape. Abortion is his raison d’etre. SInce a woman who gets pregnant could not have been raped, there is no need to add an exemption for rape victims in legislation denying funding for abortion. This was no slip of the tongue;this is Teapublican policy espoused by candidates running on the Republican Party tickets across the country.

How would Akin and Ryan decide which rapes are legitimate or forcible, and which are not? If Akin’s scientific analysis is correct, any rape resulting in pregnancy would NOT be a legitimate rape since a legitimate rape “would shut that whole thing down”. If “that whole thing” did not shut down, then the rape must not be legitimate rape. The woman should not be protected nor her abortion/health care needs funded.

I resent having my female reproductive health system described as “that whole thing”. Akin and Ryan talk about God and religion so much one would expect a little more sanctity and appreciation for God’s design of women’s bodies. One would expect them to respectfully learn the truth about sexuality and reproduction. One would expect them to respect women and protect them from criminal violence;not parse such violence against women for political gain.

The Akin-Ryan denigration of women from the floor of congress and their campaign trails is painful and frightening to all women, but especially to those of us who have had to learn to overcome the hatred and disdain of the men who attacked us. Now,  presidential candidate Romney selects Rep. Paul Ryan to run as Vice-President. Mr. Akin, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Romney wound us anew. Of course they frighten us. They are the stuff of nightmares which have never gone away.

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under COMMENTARY, POLITICS

OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE HUSTED TANGLED IN HIS OWN WEB,By Louise Annarino, August 18,2012

OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN HUSTED TANGLED IN HIS OWN WEB, By Louise Annarino, August 18,2012

Oh what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive. – Sir Walter Scott (Marmion, 1808) 

Republican Secretary of State John Husted has a difficult task. His party expects him to help deliver the State of Ohio’s 18 electoral votes to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney while remaining fair and impartial managing the Ohio election process.

President Obama narrowly won Ohio in 2008 by 4 percentage points, or 207,000 votes. Certainly it could not be to hard to close that gap. The Republicans dominate and control the Ohio Legislature: 10 Democratic senators vs. 23 Republican senators; 40 Democratic representatives vs. 59 Republican representatives (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page). Ohio Republicans used their legislative strength to reduce the Democratic voting pattern advantage, which seems to be growing stronger with changing demographics. Many of their moves aroused the ire of the electorate, fired up the Democratic base which had become complacent, and required Governor Kasich to appear to act with a less partisan agenda. The overturn of SB 5 intended to eliminate collective bargaining, weaken Ohio public employee unions, lessen union dollars and workers normally applied to elect Democratic candidates, and remove a balance of power in the workplace to ease the way for privatization of state government functions was the first sign a straightforward, open approach would not work in Ohio.

The agenda has not changed, but a web of deceit and manipulation has been hung over Ohio politics to disguise it. The Republican legislature next passed HB 194 and two weeks later HB 2249 (protecting in-person early vote for veterans in context of affirming no in-person early vote for all others under HB194) which rolled back the early access to the polls accomplished under former Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner (D), which successfully corrected the problem of persons unable to vote in 2004 due to hours-long lines in strong Democratic polling venues. I was a poll worker during that election. The first sign that then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell was attempting to suppress Democratic votes was the use of electronic machines without a paper trail, the increased number of machines to Republican leaning wards/precincts and decreased number of machines in Democratic ones. The wait was so long in some of the poorer areas of Columbus, that people had to leave the line to go to  work after waiting 4-5 hours to vote. At Kenyon College, students and others waited 7-8 hours.

HB 194 was headed for repeal when opponents collected the necessary 300,000+ signatures to place it on the 2012 ballot. Fearing another SB5 fiasco, a firing up of the base to turn out even more heavily in November, the Republican legislature repealed HB 194, but not HB 224. Democrats argue that repeal of HB 194 restored early voting to where it was BEFORE the Hb 194, i.e. Brunner reform period. Republicans argue HB 224 still stands. The only part of HB 194 included in HB 224 was banning voting during the 3 days before election day: Saturday, Sunday and Monday.

On July 17, Obama for America, Ohio Democratic Party and the DNC filed a lawsuit against the Ohio Secretary of State John Husted to restore early voting rights for all Ohioans.”Ohio election law, as currently enacted by the State of Ohio and administered by Defendant Ohio Secretary of State, arbitrarily eliminates early voting during the three days prior to Election Day for most Ohio voters, a right previously available to all Ohio voters,” the lawsuit states.(Election Law Blog (pdf).) By law, IF the court agrees with Republicans the only loss of early voting established in 2008 would be those 3 days, the week-end and Monday before the election. Boards could vote for week-end voting for other week-ends. And, if Obama campaign wins the suit, boards could allow voting on that final week-end as well.

Republicans insist the real purpose of the Obama campaign lawsuit is to disenfranchise military voters. HB 224 merely clarified that HB 194 restrictions on early voting did not overturn other sections of Ohio and Federal laws allowing overseas and active military longer voting periods, including early voting. This lawsuit cannot have such an effect and this action is not requested in the relief sought by the Obama campaign. This is argument is a red herring, another strand on the web of Republican deceit.

Llocal election boards to set dates and times for early voting. Each board has two Democratic and two Republican members. Tie votes are decided by the Secretary of State. SoS Husted issued a memo that if the board vote resulted in a tie, he would set the date/time at regular business hours:8-5,M-F. At first glance this approach seems fair and impartial. Until one considers its impact.

White collar and affluent workers  who tend to vote Republican, are often able to get time off work to run out and vote,allowed to arrive late or leave their desks early. Blue-collar and service-workers, those with part-time jobs, those with more than one job because their pay is so lousy, single parents with kids to pick up at school or a babysitter after getting off work, those who rely on public transportation, older voters who require transportation by others to the polls and others who tend to vote Democratic find it much more difficult to vote. An 8-5/M-F schedule disproportionately disenfranchises half the voters of Ohio, 51% if we use data from the last presidential election. Husted’s policy sounds as if he is treating everyone equal,and he may be sincerely trying to do so. However, his stance actually creates a disparate outcome for many Ohio voters, in violation of equal protection rights.

The fact he foretold his fall-back decision would be business hours may sound like a Moses move, but in effect it was a message to Republicans on the election board that they had nothing to risk. In heavily leaning Republican areas they could vote with Democrats to remain open longer and vote on week-ends, since the Republican victory was already assured by the demographics. In heavily leaning Democratic areas, voting “no” to longer early voting hours and week-ends would create a Republican advantage by suppressing Democratic voters to an 8-5 schedule of little use to them. Republicans on election boards in Democratic areas knew Husted’s plan was more restrictive than anything they might have been pressured to agree to.

SoS Husted and Ohio Republicans argue that every Ohio voter (i.e. someone who voted in the 2008 election and is still at the same address,with same name) will be mailed an absentee ballot request form they can fill out and mail in to request an absentee ballot. This is supposed to make up for the fact they can’t get to early in-person vote. However, this assumes that the apps will actually be mailed, correctly and on-time. It also assumes that voters who have never voted on an absentee ballot will believe it to be secure. Many persons, especially those from less affluent backgrounds have experienced enough corruption and mishandling of their rights in other venues only feel secure voting in person,watching their ballot go into the box, or seeing the tape print out their vote. They should be able to have the same right to vote in-person as active-duty military living in Ohio.Veterans should also have the same in-person voting right as active duty military.

The reason we have poll-workers on-site is to make sure things go right. They answer questions, offer a second or third ballot if one is miss-marked, explain how the operation works to avoid such errors. Being human beings, it sometimes happens that something goes wrong. A voter taps the wrong name on the machine, fills in the wrong spot on an absentee ballot, forgets to tap the VOTE button at the end. Poll workers watch for such mistakes because EACH and EVERY vote is a sacred trust.

Voting by mail has its downside. I was once mailed two absentee ballots.I called the Board of Elections and discovered two different files showed different information. An old address was in one;the new address was in a second but both ballots were sent to the new address. I was told the ballot would have to be provisional due to my mix-up;and, that I could no longer vote at the polls since a ballot had been issued. Stuff happens. I never vote by mail now. I don’t trust the ballot request, nor  the ballot return will be properly handled.  I tried mailing my ballot that year with a return receipt requested but no one would sign for it. I sent it with a proof of delivery. I always wonder if my vote counted that year. There are valid reasons Ohioans want to vote in-person.I have yet to hear a valid reason they should not be able to do so at a time and place intended to get out the vote,not suppress it. Tangled webs are hard to escape,but I have confidence SoS Husted could easily do so if he truly is working to help Ohioans vote in a non-partisan manner.

No doubt by the time you read this things will have changed again. The two Democratic election board members from Montgomery County (Dayton area), Thomas Ritchie Sr. and Dennis Lieberman,have been suspended by SoS Husted and face a hearing to fire them on Monday morning, for voting to restore week-end voting despite Husted’s order. “Their Board had voted earlier to have evening and weekend hours in a bipartisan vote.  The SOS sent out a directive Wednesday afternoon ordering uniform hours across the state of 8am to 5pm Monday through Friday until the last two weeks when the hours will be 8am to 7pm Monday through Friday.  He ordered NO weekend hours.  There was a tie vote on this second motion.  Instead of breaking the tie vote.  Husted threatened to fire the Dems if they did not withdraw their motion.  There is a hearing on Monday about defying his directive with the intention of firing both Dems.  After announcing the hearing, Husted cast his vote with the Republicans.  That sent a message to all the Republicans around the state–vote against extended weekend hours.”(Mary Woods)

The Franklin County (Columbus area) Board of Elections next meets at 3 pm Monday,August 20 at 280 East Broad Street. Enter on the ground level through door on east side of building and sign in at guard’s desk to the left and he will direct you to the meeting location. Several groups are planning a rally to remind SoS Husted he works for all Ohioans, not just Republicans; and, that the effort to suppress ANYONE’S vote is unacceptable to Ohioans. Marchers will meet at the SoS office ,180 E. Broad St. at 2pm and march to the 3pm meeting at the Board of Elections,280 E.Broad St.

In the meantime, check your registration at http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/Voters.aspx. or call (614) 466-2655/ (877) SOS-OHIO (767-6446). You can update your address, make a name-change,learn what ID you will need to vote and find answers to your questions. You can also pick up a voter registration form at your local library. Whatever you decide to do, do it TODAY. time is getting short. Early in-person voting starts October 2d. http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/Upload/elections/directives/2012/Dir2012-35.pdf

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

ROMNEY'S ON A ROLL-TWO LIES IN TWO DAYS,By Louise Annarino, August 9,2012

ROMNEY’S ON A ROLL-TWO LIES IN TWO DAYS,By Louise Annarino,August 9,2012

 

LIE#1

TANF(Temporary Assistance to Needy Families),signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996 is the basis for welfare-to-work requirements. States must follow regulations meant to place welfare recipients in jobs. It includes a provision allowing waivers of state plans. The Obama Administration is the first in 16 years to listen to concerns from state officials, Republican and Democratic, that the work requirements are so rigid they actually create bureaucratic blocks to job placement. A memo from HHS (Health and Human Services)  one week ago stated it was open to experiments allowed by waiver to help states “find more effective mechanisms for helping families succeed in state employment.” The memo to the states reinforced that waivers would not be granted which could reduce access to employment,the same time limits would remain in place, and the waiver would be revoked if the experiment failed. “If states are not meeting their performance targets,their authority to test new ideas will be terminated,” said George Sheldon who oversees the program at HHS. (see more at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=156741426 ).

 

In Romney-speak this translates to “I hope you understand that President Obama in just the last few days has tried to reverse that accomplishment by taking the work requirement out of welfare. That is wrong. If I’m president I will put work back in welfare.” See video at (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/08/mitt-romney-we-must-restore-work-welfare ). This video is now part of his political ads, is repeated as a factual account of what occurred on FOX news and elsewhere. This distortion of an effort to recognize the unique needs of individual states to put more welfare recipients to work should have been well-received, not falsely attacked, by those who so often argue for “states’ rights”.

Posted August 8, 2012 on Romney’s official website:

-Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison today made the following statement on President Obama’s dismantling of bipartisan welfare reforms:“President Obama’s push to eliminate welfare to work requirements goes against everything Republicans and Democrats—including President Bill Clinton—fought so hard for more than a dozen years ago.

  • Former Speaker Newt Gingrich today made the following statement on President Obama’s dismantling of bipartisan welfare reforms:“As an architect of the historic and bipartisan 1996 welfare reform bill, I am disturbed and angered that the Obama administration is undoing the act’s central concept of a welfare-to-work requirement. The hugely successful reform saved billions for taxpayers

This lie is particularly disheartening when tied to his comments to NAACP, and subsequent speeches wherein he uses racial code talk “people who want to get free stuff”, “big bucks who won’t work”. His lies reinforce negative racial stereotypes, and foster racial and class division. These lies do more harm than costing one’s opponent an election.

LIE#2

After some Ohio voters faced hours-long lines at polling places during the 2004 presidential election, the state adopted reforms designed to prevent similar problems in the future. Those reforms included allowing voters to cast ballots at county boards of elections for an extended period before elections.

Earlier this year the Republican-controlled Ohio Legislature passed an Election Reform Law (HB 194)under the guise of stopping non-existent voter fraud. “The…closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.” (see more at http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/ ).

 

In reaction to the more than 300,000 signatures on a petition by Ohioans to place a referendum to repeal the law on the Nov. 6, 2012 ballot, Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted convinced the legislature to repeal the law. Two weeks after HB 194 passed, another law (HB 224) affirmed a rolled back early voting three days before an election, except for active military and overseas voters whose prior rights had been overlooked when HB 194 was passed.

 

This seemed redundant for other voters already denied under law (HB 194). HB224 was passed as an emergency measure and super majority to protect the early voting rights of active military and overseas voters who were not considered when passing HB 194. It was meant to correct an oversight but in effect It continued the suppression of voting the 3 days before an election except for active military and overseas voters.

Although HB 194 was repealed HB 224 remains, including the restrictions on week-end voting repealed in HB 194. Clearly what appears to be a technicality is suppressing votes.In the last presidential election 93,000 Ohioans voted on that week-end.

 

 

The Obama campaign filed a lawsuit to restore the right of all Ohioans to vote,as they did in 2008, during the three days before the Tuesday election. It does not seek to disenfranchise military and overseas voters.”Plaintiffs seek to restore for all voters access to early voting through the Monday before Election Day,” the Obama campaign’s brief said. “Neither the substance of its Equal Protection claim, nor the relief requested, challenges the legislature’s authority to make appropriate accommodation, including early voting during the period in question, for military voters, their spouses or dependents. The question before the Court is whether, in the circumstances of this case, the State of Ohio may arbitrarily and without justification withdraw from all other Ohio eligible voters the same right they previously had to vote the weekend and Monday before election day.”

 

The lawsuit argues that all Ohio voters should be permitted to cast ballots that weekend, as members of the U.S. military are permitted to do. The complaint alleged that Ohio’s legislature failed to justify the disparate treatment between military and nonmilitary voters, and contended the “unequal burden on the fundamental right to vote violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.”

 

In Romney-speak this translate to “President Obama’s lawsuit claiming it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period is an outrage,” the Republican candidate’s Facebook message proclaimed. Next came a statement from the campaign: “We Must Defend the Rights of Military Voters.” Right-wing bloggers took it from there, and the outraged headlines came pouring forth. ( see more at http://prospect.org/article/red-white-and-untrue-romneys-big-lie-about-military-voting ).

 

The Romney campaign asserts that military personnel are losing the extension of time to vote they deserve, and have historically had, while serving overseas. But the voters in question are not voting absentee; they are voting in-person on absentee ballots. Absentee ballots filed from overseas are not created by the law being challenged.

The government already assures extra efforts for military voters—thanks in part to President Obama. He signed the Military Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act, which made a number of extra voting guarantees to servicemen and women overseas. For example, military bases now must have voter-registration services, and those serving overseas are allowed to send and receive their applications for voter registration and absentee ballots by email or fax as well as through the mail. Diane Mazur, a law professor at the University of Florida and a former Air Force officer, told Buzzfeed that the groups’ argument is “extremely misleading.” Mazur says there’s no history of of special privilege for military voters casting a ballot in person. “The idea that service member are fuller citizens than the rest of America is a disaster for military professionalism,” she says.

The problem with lies is that they must be sustained. Surrogates like Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison,campaign advisers, newscasters become pawns used to sow distortion and division. Voters are made needlessly fearful. Fifteen military organizations pumped up by team Romney intervened in the Ohio law suit believing they face a loss of voting privileges. Jon Stoltz, who heads the group VoteVets, and supports the Obama campaign’s lawsuit said in a telephone call to reporters “What appalled me so much about the narrative in Ohio is that the Romney campaign is supporting legislation that actually denies 900,000 veterans in the state of Ohio the right to vote early…In short, Mitt Romney supports efforts to make voting more difficult for the very people who have put their lives on the line,” Soltz notes.

The facts show that Romney’s claim about restricting military voting is a blatant distortion. The purpose of the lawsuit is to ensure that every Ohioan—including military voters—has the right to make their voices heard at the polls.

 

Everyone lies,so tey say.But, the complete misrepresentation of fact. The total reversal of an opponent’s credited position on an issue, the blatant change of historical fact, the warping of legal pleadings to serve a partisan political agenda are so overwhelmingly unique in their proportionality to past campaign lies they beggar description. This is something new. This is Romney-speak.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

REMEMBER ROMNEYHOOD,By Louise Annarino,August 7,2012

REMEMBER ROMNEYHOOD, By Louise Annarino,August 7,2012

 

Ronald Reagan took office as 40th. president of the United States in January 1981. By the close of his term in 1989 he had slashed domestic spending, reduced aid to cities by 60%, slashed public service jobs and job training, reduced funds for pubic transit benefiting cities while retaining highway funds benefiting suburbs,halved the budget for public housing and Section 8 and sought to eliminate housing assistance to the poor causing a steep increase in homelessness,widened the gap between rich and poor,(wages for average worker declined and home ownership rate fell),deregulated the Savings and Loan industry (leading to corruption,mismanagement and collapse of S&L’s requiring $100 billion government bailout) and attempted to dismantle legal services for the poor. (see more at http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/135/reagan.html )Reagan told us as Romney,Kasich,Mandel and Ryan now tell us that big tax cuts would pay for themselves by generating higher tax revenues through greater economic growth. President George W. Bush tried Reagan’s strategy and failed, just as Reagan did. Why would we expect Romney to achieve a different result using the same strategy?

 

I was a supervising attorney of the Senior Citizen Unit for The Legal Aid Society of Columbus during this time. I handled a caseload of 200 open cases, 350 altogether; and supervised another attorney with an equally large caseload, two paralegals, and a secretary. Our goal was to assist clients over 55 whose income fell well below the poverty line set in the 1950’s. Our cases involved consumer fraud, public benefits,medicare and medicaid,food stamps,hospital and medical bills, wills and powers of attorney/guardianships, housing, banking, land-lord tenant issues, mental health and a multitude of other legal issues. One cut made by President Reagan resulted in the deaths of three of my clients, and extreme suffering for hundreds of others.

 

President Reagan talked code to bigots,racists and economically advantaged white Americans in an attempt to stigmatize the poor, gut anti-poverty programs,and justify his tax cuts. “During his stump speeches while dutifully promising to roll back welfare, Reagan often told the story of a so-called “welfare queen” in Chicago who drove a Cadillac and had ripped off $150,000 from the government using 80 aliases, 30 addresses, a dozen social security cards and four fictional dead husbands. Journalists searched for this “welfare cheat” in the hopes of interviewing her and discovered that she didn’t exist.”(see more at http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2004-06-20/the-real-economic-legacy-of-ronald-reagan ). Reagan would have loved the interenet and used it along with political ads just as Mitt Romney does today – promising to roll back or privatize government benefits, requiring drug tests of welfare recipients, describing members of NAACP  as people who want free stuff from the government, falsely accusing President Obama of simply mailing out welfare checks to people unwilling to work. Working with Republican and Democratic governors HHS recently issued a memorandum allowing states to apply for waivers for TANF work requirement so long as the more flexible state project “demonstrates attainment of superior employment outcomes in lieu of participation rate requirements.” This is typical Obama pragmatism. If the state can demonstrate a different plan moves more people from welfare to work, HHS will be flexible and grant a waiver. Romney’s assertion is a complete distortion meant to appeal to voters who believe in welfare queens, or as Romney might state “big bucks” unwilling to work, a clear racial-code slur.(see more at http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/07/13165243-dubious-claim-behind-romney-welfare-attack?lite).

 

I dread where Romney’s distortions to justify tax cuts might lead us; and, how many Americans will suffer and even die as a result of old,failed policies. President Reagan ordered the Social Security Administration to remove all current disability recipients from active rolls, and require each one to reapply for benefits. He was certain that too many were fraudulently claiming to be disabled. He saw a welfare queen behind every bush. The actual fraud rate for welfare benefits at the time was 1/4 of 1%. Yet, American voters were told the rate was so high, every recipient was a suspect. So suspect that every SSD and SSI recipient was terminated. Those terminated lost a monthly income and medicare or medicaid coverage, and food stamps. They had no where to live, nothing to eat, could not see a doctor or go to the hospital, ran out of life-saving medications. Disability recipients are the most fragile among us.

 

My staff immediately filed new applications, and appeals of termination, for each client in our open and closed files. We posted flyers at community centers, senior centers and elsewhere offering our services. Many fell through the cracks. We also filed appeals for termination of low-income housing, evictions, food stamps and medicare or medicaid. We negotiated with landlords, doctors, pharmacies and hospitals begging patience until our cases could be heard. Most of our clients tried to hang on so long as they could. Others were too proud and disappeared into the streets. Others became so depressed they committed suicide. Three of my clients died simply because they lacked medication,food,medical care, and housing. I recall one phone call from a case manager at The Franklin County Welfare Department happily informing that finally (after 5 months) he was restoring my client’s food stamps. He thought I would be grateful and happy but I was crying. He asked why, “ Mr. X died yesterday from complications from diabetes and malnutrition. You are too late.”  Every single appeal I filed was granted. Reagan was dead wrong;too wrong, and too many dead as a result.

 

At the same time, Reagan announced he was eliminating Legal Services Corp. which funded legal aid societies like mine nationwide. He was frustrated that government was paying lawyers to appeal denial of  government benefits. My annual salary at the time was $12,600. Average salaries for lawyers in the private sector was $65,000. Congress reauthorized Legal Services but Reagan vetoed the funding bill. Staff agreed to work without pay, give up management positions and not replace those who gave up and left the agency until funding could be restored. I found a live-in position at a rooming house with no pay but free rent, installed soda machines in basement to pay for my bus transportation to work, and took an evening and week-end job as a toy store clerk to pay school loans and buy food while handling an ever-increasing caseload and grieving for my clients who were being so unjustly maligned and hatefully treated so that taxes could be cut and military spending increased by President Reagan. Now, Mitt Romney, Ohio Governor John Kasich, and Senate candidate Josh Mandel wants a repeat performance. They pit voters against President Obama and Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown,using the same disingenuous statistics and history.

 

Remember the Alamo! Remember Pearl Harbor! Remember 9/11! I ask you to remember Reaganomics, Trickle Down Economics, Bush Tax Cuts, and now Romneyhood. We cannot allow politicians to prey on false fears when we have something real to fear. We must never forget that code messages stoking race-baiting, homophobia, and misogyny with lies and distortions will lead to death and disaster. I wish I could have saved those clients.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS