Tag Archives: politics

February 22, 2013 · 1:51 pm

Will Tribalism Trump Citizenship?

Will Tribalism Trump Citizenship? By Louise Annarino,2-22-2013

 

My Mother’s side of the family is planning our first ever family reunion. That this is happening during a time when I am wrestling with the differences between being part of a tribe or being a citizen of a nation indicates the synchronicity which operates throughout the multiverse. What does it mean to be part of a tribe? What does it mean to be a citizen?

 

My first struggle for identity was between two tribes: my Father’s and my Mother’s. Was I Sicilian like Dad; or,Napolitan like Mom? “Half and half” Mom explained. In our house we referrred to two other larger tribes: our paisans (which included Siciliani,Calabrese, and Napolitani etc.) or “the Americans”.

 

The American tribe seemed stranger to me than the paisan tribe, and trying to fit into that tribe was quite confusing. For example, when visiting Americani one had to wait one’s turn to speak,slowing down conversation, but creating time for reflection. Portion sizes were miniscule at meals. I once had dinner at the home of a school chum and each person was allotted 1/2 a pork chop. I was starving when I got home and dug out the cold lasagna,because of course we always had left-overs in our over-stuffed fridge. But, my friend’s family had money to attend the symphony,go to the art museum and attend ballet. Mom could sing an aria as well as Maria Callas, or a pop ballad as well as Frank,and we danced around the kitchen together every day. She had won a jitterbug contest at radio City Music Hall at age 16 and music and dance filled our home. Each tribe had a lot to offer and I understood adhering to tribal dictates would have been a mistake.

 

I did not like the sound of English.Italian was much more musical and passionate in its delivery,using hand movements to extend and deepen meaning.English seemed drab. When I asked my Mother to teach me Italian and speak it more often so I could understand the adult conversations of my older extended family better she offered my first instruction in the difference between tribalism and citizenship when she stated, “You are an American now. You will speak English and learn to be an American. I will not teach you Italian.It will not help you become an American;it will only hold you back.”

 

When I responded that maybe I did not want to be an American she strongly set me straight. “It is America which protects us and gives us a chance to have a decent life, and to live in peace and prosperity.” As a woman particularly, she warned me that I should be greatful to be an American. “It is not so easy to be an Italian woman,” she explained. We are lucky to be Americans and living in the best country on earth. Italy was the “old country”;America is our country now. At Thanksgiving, Mom cooked turkey with all the trimmings, plus antipasto, lasagna and garlic bread. At Christmas and Easter we ate ham plus ravioli. Tribally, we were both Sicilian and Napolitan,both Italian and American. As citizens we were all-American.

 

When I listen to fundamentalist,tea-party,NRA furor I hear tribalism trumping citizenship. When I read about the Taliban, AlQuaeda in the Magreb and other such groups I see tribalism trumping citizenship.Tribalism is a threat to peace, and must be kept in check. The Soviet Union was an horrific and failed effort to reduce tribalism. The United States of America is the wondrous and best example of a successful effort to reduce tribalism. How do we do so? Through our Bill of Rights which covers every single citizen,even though we are still trying to make that a reality in fact.

 

We end tribalism through citizenship. The nation becomes larger and more meaningful to a citizen whose rights and freedoms are protected and preserved, than his allegiance to a tribe, especially one which tramples upon human rights and fails to protect the human rights of every member of the tribe. This is why the Soviet-Union failed, why Al Quaeda will fail, why any tribe seeking to assert its authority over a nation instead of under a nation is doomed to fail.

 

Which brings me to immigration reform. We must never approve an immigration policy which focuses on controlling tribes and creating an underclass through work visas, or one which allows women to be denied full freedom. The centerpiece of any sound immigration policy must be a path to citizenship. Do we really want to allow various tribes to live within our borders without citizenship? Do we understand that this would endanger our democracy?

 

This is a real danger. Tribalism is a threat to those outside the tribe,and often to those within the tribe. The only reason America has been able to peaceably self-govern and overcome the tidal wave of tribes,with all their differences, is through offering full citizenship to those willing to pledge allegiance to our constitution and to our Bill of Rights, which often flies in the face of the tribe’s belief system. For example,The Violence Against Women Act is being opposed by Republicans in part because it affords protection against violence for immigrant women. Do we understand the tribalism which perpetrates such violence, under a veil or not? Do we understand the tribalism among some Republicans which would deny a human right to a woman outside the American tribe? Tribalism is a threat both from tribal Americans and from tribal immigrants.

 

Citizenship carries rights and privileges, but it also demands allegiance to an enlightened set of principles laid out in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We can’t have one without the other.Those who would zealously guard such principles, must also demand such allegiance.However, if they do not offer the rights of citizenship, they cannot demand allegiance to America. For over 200 years we have not invited tribes to settle here;we have invited citizens to settle here. That has kept us safe.That has kept us free.

 

We cannot understand the importance of immigration policy unless we understand the difference between tribalism and citizenship.

2 Comments

Filed under COMMENTARY, POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 30, 2013 · 4:39 pm

States’ Rights and Immigration Reform,By Louise Annarino,1-30-2013

States’ Rights and Immigration,by Louise Annarino,1-30-2013

Political pundits have ceased describing bi-partisan discussion of Immigration reform as an attitude of cooperation, thank goodness. They have moved beyond that wishful thinking to a more realistic view that Republicans understand they must change their legislative approach to remain more competitivewith Democrats for the Latino vote. This is true, but does not go far enough, to understand why the Republican party is not your father’s Republican party.

Democratic House minority leader Nancy Pelosi(D-CA) recently opined that House Republicans are anti-big government. This is why they will always vote no on any legislation requiring federal government rules,regulation or oversight. However, it is not that Republicans are anti-big government;nor even always anti-federal government. They are anti-federal(big) government only when it does not serve their purposes. They only oppose big government they do not like. And their purpose, following the civil rights gains of the ‘60‘s and 70‘s and demographic changes coloring America since the ‘80’s, is to preserve white-Anglo male dominance and power. Once again, as so often in our history,ethnocentrism and racism tied to money is the underlying force behind our politics.

Republicans have no problem with a federal government which rewards the top 1% and corporations with tax breaks,tax loopholes,and government contracts. Republicans have no problem with federal emergency relief which protects their voting base.This base of Republican support is predominantly white. On the other hand, they oppose such considertion for urban residents,unions-especially government employeee unions, the middle class,and the working poor. The one thing these groups have in common is their diversity. In opposing early voting in the 2012 election,Franklin County,Ohio Republican Party Chairman Doug Preisse,was quoted in The Columbus Dispatch newspaper as saying, “I guess I really actually feel we shouldn’t contort the voting process to accommodate the urban — read African-American — voter turnout machine.” it clear that race is an underlying factor in maintaining Republican power and control. Even Senate Republicans’ renewed interest in immigration reform illustrates this.

Indeed, the Senate Gang of Eight proposes A Bipartisan Framework for Immigration Reform which includes a provision that the governor’s of border states,their attorneys general, and community leaders would staff a commission to monitor and enforce new immigration measures. This is an example of using the power and purse of a strong federal government while claiming control through states’ rights strategy to deflect any outcomes which they disapprove.

Who are the governors of our border states? Rick Perry(R-Texas),Jan Brewer(R-Arizona),Susana Martinez(R-NewMexico),and Jerry Brown(D-California). While their input is certainly of value;they are not currently empowered to direct nor control immigration prolicy and procedures. Who would be the community leaders appointed to the commission? The Southern Poverty Law Center has identified some community leaders incvolved in border security as members of “hate groups”. How would such  leaders  be denied membership? Former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson wrote in an op-ed for CNN on Jan.30,2013, the “Supreme Court ruled emphatically that immigration is the responsibility of the federal government, not the states.”http://www.billrichardson.com/news/bill-richardson-oped-cnn-stars-align-last-immigration-plan.

As we watch immigration reform enacted into law,we must assure that neither hate groups,nor hateful politicians,nor persons pushing a racist and ethnocentric agenda usurp what must be a fair and just resolution. We must not forget that Republican opposition will not be due to anti-big government sentiment, but something far more difficult to eradicate. We can support those Republicans who are willing to confront the real issues facing their party. But, we must never consent to the demands of the hate-mongers who hide behind states’ rights.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , ,

January 23, 2013 · 11:21 pm

Visions,Dreams and History:Barack Obama’s Second Inauguration,Louise Annarino,1-23-2013

Visions, Dreams and History: Barack Obama’s Second Inauguration,Louise Annarino,1-23-2013

We each use different words to describe singular events.Like the optical illusion in which some see an old woman with a large nose,and others see a young woman,we see more than a single meaning in President Barack Obama’s second inauguration.This one matters most to me.

b63462fc63eb11e2a97322000a1fb158_6

When I read DREAMS OF MY FATHER, just written by someone unknown to me named Barack Obama,my first thought was that this man could be our first African-American president, and a great American leader. From that moment I have watched him grow into both roles.

He is someone future generations of Americans will appreciate far beyond what we do today. As I listened to his second inaugural address I heard our history transformed into one closer to the truth. His words cut closer to the bone than anyone had expected. It was thrilling to watch him weave a tapestry of the development of our greatest ideals of “life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” from our Declaration of Independence,through a civil war, and into a civil rights movement which continues to create a more perfect union. He joins a clear line from George Washington and John Adams to Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Martin Luther King,Jr. There is a greatness and a challenge in President Barack Obama’s words which transform the American story, and opens our eyes to its great truths.

Liberals and conservatives alike are dissatisfied when they cannot construe Barack Obama’s efforts in a manner which serves their world view. Visionaries, like prophets of old, are often unwelcome in their own lands. To appreciate who they are we must stand outside the mundane boxes of our own making, and peer at them from afar. Only then, from the distance of time, do we fully appreciate the transformative process such leaders of men put in place.Those unwilling to make such a journey of the mind and heart will find my view an overblown adulation of a flawed man. I see the flaws but greatness makes them fade from view,allowing us to focus on what is truly important; i.e. we are a nation of the people,by the people, and for the people. Generations to come always deify those we vilified while visionaries challenged the status quo..

The British government put a price on the head of traitor to the king George Washington, and other founding patriots. He could have been hung. Attorney and patriot John Adams, who believed every person is entitled to a legal defense, was vilified and threatened for defending eight of the kings soldiers, six successfully, who shot to defend themselves against a mob in an event called the Boston Massacre. Abraham Lincoln was one of the most hated men in the nation by many in slave and non-slave states alike,who disapproved of his political maneuvering around the issue of slavery. Teddy Roosevelt was vilified for the obscene “dinner that shocked a nation” in which ex-slave Booker T. Washington ate with the president and his family at the White House. http://historynotebook.blogspot.com/2008/11/booker-t-washingtons-white-house-dinner.html He was no less hated by westerners for developing a national park system and protecting huge swaths of land against private development. Despite pulling the nation free of an economic depression,and successfully prosecuting a war, destroying the threat to human lives by fascism and anti-Semitism,and forging a peace which made friends of our former enemies Franklin D. Roosevelt was vilified and attacked.  Peaceful civil disobedience proponent and civil rights leader Martin Luther King,Jr. was hounded by the F.B.I. as a socialist/communist provocateur. He found his life threatened at every turn by white fear and loathing. Creation of a holiday in his honor brought renewed political opposition to his legacy.

Today, we forget the vilification of those we now call heroes,patriots,icons of American democracy;those who fought inch by perilous inch through a sea of hate and disdain, to create a more perfect union of the United States of America. Obama’s second inaugural speech will be remembered long after the snide comments of political pundits, and the short-sighted praise of his friends. It established a true rendering of the issues and events marking the era in which he served as the nation’s president. Our gret-grandchildren will know him,and us, by this speech.  For myself and for generations to come, I now thank him.

You can view the entire text and video of  President Obama’s speech at this link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/obama_inauguration/7840646.stm

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , ,

January 20, 2013 · 7:05 pm

Second Inauguration of United States President Barack Obama,Louise Annarino,1-20-2013

Second Inauguration of United States  President Barack Obama, Louise Annarino,1-20-2013

I routinely ran out of gas in 1972,the year I finished graduate school and became a prison social worker 35 miles from my home. Back then,cars did  not have warning lights when fuel was low, nor meters expressly keyed to gas tanks to tell one how far she had driven since the last fill-up;at least,not on any car I could afford.

Driving was always an ordeal to make it to my destination before the tank was empty. I rode on fumes the last few days before pay-day. One Christmas, friends gave be a bank made out of a gas can with a $20 bill inside.They told me to keep it in the trunk, and not to use the cash, until the next time I ran of gas.This was to be my new alternative to calling them for help as I sat on the berm.It worked the first time.After that, I had no money to put in the can. I was back to square one.

I learned a lot sitting by the highway watching cars speed by. Enough to understand the larger world’s frustrations, fears and even animosity toward the global power of the United States. Even those who are our friends often look on in amazement and incredulity at our narrow,short-term focus. Even fellow Americans find it difficult to understand.

I wondered about the driver of a car with a full tank as he drove by my disabled car -hood up and flashers flashing- without a glance my way. Does he not see me? Does he have no time to stop? Is where he is going so important he cannot stop to help? Does he expect other help will arrive? Does he fear me? Even more disconcerting were those drivers who glanced my way and smiled as they sped by. Did they think their smiles showed empathy? Did they think it was a joke to run out of gas? I hoped for a thumbs up, help is on the way gesture. Instead, I too often got the finger, the one that conveys disdain,dislike and blame.

I was to blame. It was my decision to not refill the tank when it got below 1/4 tank. But, that decision was made by the fact I had no cash. The little I made as a state social worker paid for rent,utilities,car payment,car insurance,and school loans. I packed my lunch,never ate out,nor ever saw a movie. I did all I could with what little I had. Some countries are like that. Not every country has a GDP equal to that of the United States;nor every citizen a job paying enough to always drive with a full tank. People and countries do the best they can with what they have to work with. Yet, we speed  by them when they are forced to sit on the berm.we ignore them,smile at them,give them  advice,even give them $20 once in a while. And some of us give them the finger. None of these efforts solve the underlying problems.

So, as I sat there on the berm I could feel my resentment build over time. No amount of prayer,smiling,or waving my arms stopped a car. Only the good-heartedness, fearlessness, and generosity of a particular driver did that. For which I was inordinately grateful. As I matured, improved my personal economy, and could afford a car with warning lights I stopped running out of gas. Countries are like that,too. Too many have little chance of doing what I was able to do here in the United States.

WW II created many new countries,dividing tribes and cultural groups with artificial lines. The imperialism of the West,so ingrained and institutionalized abroad, continues today. Multi-national corporations  harvest and sell the young countries’ natural resources, influence the non-development of new enterprises which would compete for their profits,and drive toward these countries toward their futures with blinders on. They do not see those standing by the side of the road. Or, if they do, too few stop to help. And helping one-by-one without solving the underlying problems does not create a lasting solution.

Thus,resentments build, even within the hearts of those who appreciate the corporations which bring  jobs, have made friends across national boundaries, seek a common goal,and are people of peace. When the few who do not seek peace,who share no common goal come among them with a can of desperately needed gas, they cannot easily turn them down. Who knows when the world’s drivers will take notice of them waiting on the berm? Who knows when the world will begin to work on solutions which last? This was the hope which President Obama brought to the world. This is why  those waiting on the berm rejoice at his election and re-election. President Obama knows the world’s byways,sees far and wide as he drives the ship of state, plans for a lasting solutions,with a long view over time. Those of us on the berm understand and appreciate him for this.

I think of Libya,Chad and Algeria. These are not surprises to anyone who has traveled the world’s byways with eyes wide-open,scanning the berms on each side for other travelers in need. Unfortunately, those who think stopping to help those on the berm delays their own progress oppose our president. Those who prefer to drive among winners and not the losers standing on the berm,oppose our president. And, there are too many of us who fear those waiting on the berm; too afraid to chance stopping to help a fellow traveler. They actually fear our president, or try to make us afraid. If we want a lasting peace with the world, and an end to terrorism and war, we need to be better drivers and better friends to  our fellow travelers on this globe. That is President Obama.That is the President the world knows and loves.That is my president! I hope you enjoy the second inauguration of President Barack Obama. I know I shall.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

January 13, 2013 · 4:45 pm

The Quietest World War in History,Louise Annarino,1-13-2013

The Quietest World War in History,Louise Annarino,1-13-2013

 

Drones have enabled the west to fight a world war without its citizens being aware. These unmanned silent ships of surveillance cruise the world directed from afar. U.S. and RAF pilots control these flights from Nevada, except for the initial take-off and landing which are controlled by companion crews where the drones are physically maintained.1

The United States,unlike Britain also uses armed drones to attack targets the drone has isolated; the RAF uses conventional weapons once the drone has isolated a target. U.S. surveillance drones are also used by French forces to guide air attacks. The U.N. relies upon drone surveillance to understand threats to nations around the globe,and make appropriate decisions calling for intervention. Nowhere is this more evident than in the growing threat from Islamist rebels aligned with Al Quaeda in northern Africa known as A.Q.I.M. (Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb), where troops from 15 nation regional block the Economic Community of West African States known as ECOWAS are being trained by the European Union.2

This world war is as different from the Cold War as the Cold War was from WWII,which differed from WWI. But, it is as widespread and threatens the survival of nations, and kills both combatants and civilians. There are at least two notable differences: First,the lack of awareness by citizens of the west that they are engaged in a world war; a war which will not end with the withdrawl of conventional troops from Afghanistan and Iraq. and second, the lack of attention we citizens of the west pay to media accounts.

There is growing concern over the backlash of the use of drones. However, the alternative to the use of drones would be far worse. There would undoubtedly be more civilian deaths,more combat deaths and injuries for soldiers on both sides,more property destruction,higher numbers of refugees,more danger to our troops etc.1 We must question,however,whether this reduced impact of war by the use of drones merely extends its duration by lessening our attention and outrage.

President Obama and Secretary of Defense nominee Chuck Hagel share a world view that war is hell and we only go to war when asolutely necessary. Each seems to  understand far better than we that we are engaged in a different kind of war, a war where acts of terror are the weapon of choice by those bent upon the destruction of western economic,social, and religious dominance. Such a war cannot be fought with conventional methods. President Obama and Chuck Hagel are ready to restructure the Pentagon and the military industrial complex. The military and industrial complex is fighting back. Companies which manufacture conventional weapons fear lost revenues should they be forced to compete with high-tech robotics industries, or re-tool conventional arms to high-tech arms manufacturing plants. It is all about the bottom line for them. It cannot be so for the nation,nor for the security of its citizens.

Our national security depends upon a new methodology,one understood and currently deployed to maximum effect possible by President Obama. It behooves us to pay attention and to understand the need for change he suggests. A smaller overseas military footprint; development of new technology to reduce civilian deaths,increase certainty as to terrorist targets,use of surveillance for broader objectives etc. is our future.3 Beating swords into plowshares must still be our goal;but,how we get to that place is changing. However,we cannot condemn what we do not understand. The silence is deafening and Hagel’s Senate confirmation hearing will be more about protecting the financial interest of private contrators and arms manufacturers than our country. The dones may be silent. We need not be. We must not be.

1.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9552547/The-air-force-men-who-fly-drones-in-Afghanistan-by-remote-control.html

2.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/world/africa/french-airstrikes-push-back-islamist-rebels-in-mali.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130113

3.http://www.popsci.com/category/tags/drones

Leave a comment

Filed under COMMENTARY, POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 12, 2013 · 5:43 pm

MISBEHAVE A LITTLE,by Louise Annarino,1-11-2013

Misbehave a Little,Louise Ananrino 1-11-2013

The people who were trying to make the day worse

were not taking the day off. 

Why should I?

Bob Marley

It is tiring to be a change agent. Whether one is a writer, activist, educator,or politician the day-to-day grind takes its toll. But, failing to write,be involved,teach or legislate for positive change is not an option in a democratic republic. Those who raise questions, challenge the status quo,post on facebook pages,knock on doors,make phone calls,write letters to the editor,speak up in meetings,add unpalatable topics to agendas and otherwise interfere with business as usual are not trouble-makers but patriots.The Chuck Hagels of the world are too far and in between.

 

Backlash like backwash is never pretty. It carries the flotsam and jetsam of petty jealousy and fear. Leaders too often react as if activists’ suggestions for change are criticisms of their leadership rather than a course correction of the effort in which they are each engaged. Leaders fear being shamed, replaced or made obsolete, especially when grassroots activists engage in the process of evaluating their common effort. We have no time for such emotional attachment to correctness while opposing forces marshall against our gains and plot our losses.Those engaged in the effort to make the day better do not have the luxury of sitting on their laurels, as Sister Robertine,OP used to warn her students. Women get this more easily than men. Perhaps because they are seldom ceded power.They paste it on bumper stickers with the phrase “well-behaved women seldom make history.”

 

Ego too often gets in the way of real change. Thus, we must continue to urge change and not take the day off. We must set aside focus on individuals, and focus on the enterprise itself. Those with overdeveloped egos have trouble doing this. Like weightlifters who overwork muscle groups they sometimes get too big for their britches. This is something we are all prone to do.Thus,we all must fight against it. Bloggers,educators,party leaders and politicians must welcome comments no matter how uncomfortable, because comments stimulate new ideas and offer insights otherwise unavailable to them. And, this is why diversity is so helpful to reaching well-developed strategies and positions. This is why Chuck Hagel is needed at the Pentagon.

 

So,take time to comment whenever you can. Your input matters. You are what makes democracy work. Misbehave a little. As we would say in the 60’s, “Tell it like it is!”

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , ,

January 10, 2013 · 5:12 pm

NO TED STRICKLAND NOR AFRICAN AMERICANS,By Louise Annarino,1-10-2012

NO TED STRICKLAND NOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS,By Louise Annarino,January 10,2012

 

Sutton, Ryan, Fitgerald. What do they have in common? Each is considered a potential candidate for governor of Ohio. Each is white. The Democratic Party often chides the Republican Party for its lack of diversity. Maybe Democrats should look at the glass ceiling within their own party. Why are no African-American candidates mentioned as potential candidates, now that Governor Strickland has announced his disinterest in the position?

 

It cannot be said that Democrats have no potential African-American candidates capable of serving as governor. There are  several ready to take that position today:

-Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory who has served in both the Ohio House and Ohio Senate, where he served as the Assistant Minority Leader.

-4th term by a landslide, Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman, the first African-American mayor of Ohio’s capitol.

-State of Ohio Senator Nina Turner (SD25), who has gained national attention for her strong defense of voting rights and women’s rights.

 

While it is true that racism impedes the election of African-Americans in Ohio, the problem is much more complex. http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2012/11/electing_black_statewide_offic.html No African-American Democratic candidate has been elected to statewide office; but, three African-American Republicans have done so.

 

Democrats must ask, what are we doing wrong? Instead we seem to accept this dilemma as a reason to shy away from promoting African-American candidates for statewide office. U.S. Rep. Joyce Beatty is an anomaly, running in a newly-created safe district, perhaps the safest in the state of Ohio. Could she have defeated Senator Portman, which would have required sate-wide support? The Democratic Party must address its own racism, and find a strategy which allows African-Americans to succeed in state-wide political races.

 

The first step is to NAME African-Americans as potential candidates for EVERY position;to APPOINT them to highly visible committee and leadership positions and lead ISSUE promulgation efforts, and elect them as PARTY LEADERS. What we need is affirmative action, not passive acceptance. Democrats cannot continue to take African-Americans for granted as voters, as party members, nor as candidates. Still, this is not enough.

 

The same shortcomings which affect white candidates affect African-American candidates, but with greater impact. Campaigns are won street by street, ward by ward. Most citizens have never met a Democratic ward leader, would not even think to contact that person for assistance. Most citizens make no regular contribution to their County Democratic  Party because they see no day-to-day return for their investment. Outreach is non-existent,marketing haphazard at best. Sharing information within closed party circles has its place but is only a small part of a communications effort. When was the last time the party organized  a community service project? Advertised it as a party effort? First serve, then ask for donations to party coffers.

First Lady Michele Obama recently asked for participation in a Day of Service to honor Martin Luther King,Jr. Could not the Franklin County Democratic Party do something similar? Every month? What are we doing to create an image of a party who cares for each and every citizen across the state? We cannot ask for support from a community which we make no effort to support.

 

How does the Democratic Party advertise what we do accomplish? Yes, it takes money. Are there not enough Democrats with wealth to support specific projects? Using social media is not a panacea. Simply having a web page or Facebook page is insufficient. Newsletters must reach beyond the party faithful. Radio,television,community paper promoting Democrats? Non-existent in central Ohio.

 

Advertising requires a subtle message which emphasizes what the party is doing for Ohioans. The big message should be helping, with a footnote identifying the party as the helper. An example would be signs posted on infrastructure projects explaining what the project is accomplishing for citizens, and thanks to the party candidate bringing the project to the state. Then, Republican Governor Kasich could not claim credit for projects he initially opposed.

 

The party can win over voters whose racism may lessen support for African-American candidates if the party itself has ingrained a sense that Democrats are the community’s strongest supporters. Such passion for the party would benefit all Democratic candidates. In the meantime, African-American candidates must be groomed, promoted, supported and positioned for the next campaign. Past failure is no excuse for doing nothing;it is a reason to learn from our mistakes.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 5, 2013 · 3:50 am

TRUTH-TELLING IS NON-PARTISAN,by Louise Annarino,1-4-2013

TRUTH-TELLING IS NON-PARTISAN,By Louise Annarino,1-4-2013

 

It was very difficult for the young recent OSU graduates to find jobs. One young man papered the walls of his dorm room with rejection slips. Others gave up the hunt for professional positions and became sales clerks, bar tenders and wait persons. Many returned to graduate school, piling up more debt, as aid to higher education failed to keep pace with increasing costs.

 

The recession was in full force. A war was ending, soldiers competed for jobs. Too many veterans suffered from PTSD, drug or alcohol addiction, joblessness and homeless. Delayed services by the V.A. and the declining economy complicated their return.

 

Companies were closing research and development departments, outsourcing jobs and off-shoring manufacturing plants. Some argued the loss of small businesses  and replacing local shops with shopping malls was good;t hat economies of scale would keep the price of goods down.Union busting was the new normal. The president himself  approved “scabs” to cross picket-lines,for the good of the airline industry.

 

Small family farms were unable to compete with mega farms;entire farm communities disappeared despite Farm-Aid concerts.Some argued that economies of scale would keep food prices down.

 

Lower income levels created tension between the age groups. School levies were no longer so easily passed. Small schools were combined to create economies of scale, losing the familial feel which had existed in neighborhood schools where every teacher knew every child in the school.Taxpayers resented the extra student perks such as school bands,art and theatre and music programs,and field trips. And, they resented the teacher perks such as summers off.

 

De-regulation was the cause celebre’ of business. Environmentalist climbed into the forest canopy and cut fish nets to protect the forests and oceans, and were snidely called “tree-huggers” and radicals. Ecology was not viewed as real science. Civil unrest by young persons protesting racism,sexism,homophobia and class warfare was contained by military-style response.

 

A few years later a charismatic and popular president was elected and gave people hope that things might change. But by then, many argued that the poor and working poor were really free-loaders looking for government handouts. The president agreed that “government was the problem not the solution” and should be made leaner and meaner,and thus fairer to wealthy job creators whose increased wealth trickled down to the masses.

 

Meanwhile,politicians reframed the focus of the nation from a community working together for the common good  to everyone can make it big. People were encouraged to invest in the stock market,open 401Ks and build a portfolio of wealth. Anyone who failed to make it rich in America just did not work hard enough or smart enough;and was underserving of support by those who did the right thing. We came to view people as big thinkers and doers or small thinkers and doers. Economies of scale were considered good for the social order.

 

The young graduates,with huge education loans and low-paying jobs were told the right thing was to use 1/3 of one’s income to pay living expenses,put 1/3 into savings/investments, and give 1/3 to charity. Doing this would assure a secure retirement and make social security unnecessary. Doing this would assure the poor would be cared for through private charity and make welfare,food stamps and medicaid unnecessary. Young people were told that social security and medicare were unsustainable and too costly, and would not be available when they retired. Elderly were described as free-loaders who felt entitled to government care, depriving young people of a chance for a strong economy in which they could thrive. They were told it was better to create a private retirement investment portfolio on Wall Street with a much higher return than any FICA tax could provide for them.

 

Doesn’t this sound like today’s headline stories? This was happening 35 years ago. This is my generation’s story.We were warned we would have no social security when we were ready to retire. We are now retiring, with social security. The fear-mongering was not true 35 years ago. And, it is not true now. And, thanks to President Obama, we do not see the massive savings and loans/bank failures experienced 35 years ago. Thanks to President Obama we see an increase in manufacturing;an entire auto industry saved and made more profitable, not lost like the steel and aluminum industries were lost 35 years ago. And, thanks to President Obama we do not have high inflation rates as we did 35 years ago.

 

I worry about putting social security on the table while discussing deficit reduction. Social Security has no relevance to the creation or elimination of the deficit. That will be easily explained. But, I expect the old attacks on Social Security will once again be trotted out to misinform and mislead younger voters. It will be framed as a job destroyer, siphoning off money which could be used to create jobs. It will be framed as a scourge on the growth of private retirement portfolios. It will make enemies of young underemployed recent graduates of this generation and those of my generation. My generation will recognize it as a pack of lies,because we have seen the lie exposed over time. But will the young believe us, or those who would lie to get their hands on a big chunk of change.  Investment managers will be tempted to take big risks to make big personal gains, which could leave future retirees holding an empty retirement bag. We now-old young people have watched this happen over and over again. We recognize the game.

 

We are being encouraged to raise this issue with our president,senators and representatives. And, we should do so.  We must also discuss this issue with younger people .This is an issue which should cross age barriers, not create new barriers. This is a chance to make our party stronger and more united. We cannot pass up this chance to strengthen our bonds. The republicans certainly will do all they can to weaken them. After all, they are even willing to default on our debts and throw the world’s economy into chaos, just to destroy social security,medicare and medicaid. This is serious business,and has been for decades.

 

This should not be a partisan issue, but it is. My republican friends will assure me they would never destroy these programs. They will argue that Democrats are no different than Republicans; that even the president says we agree on almost everything, including the need to fix entitlement programs. This is well and good.But we cannot ignore the differences set in stone in each party’s platform. Democrats promise to protect entitlement programs. Republicans promise to eliminate or reduce them. These positions are not the same;they are world’s apart. We must hold Democrats and Republicans equally accountable. Truth-telling is the only way to be non-partisan.

2 Comments

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

January 4, 2013 · 3:27 am

BOEHNER HOLDS THE GAVEL; PELOSI HOLDS THE POWER,By Louise Annarino,January 3,2013

BOEHNER HOLDS THE GAVEL;PELOSI HOLDS THE POWER,By Louise Annarino, January 3,2013

There are two kinds of power: positional power and personal power. Nancy Pelosi appeared to lose her positional power when she passed the gavel to Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner, who retained his position today.  Pelosi never relinquished her personal power however. And, I would argue she still retains positional power, even without the gavel. It was Pelosi who delivered the votes to pass the American Taxpayer Relief Act. Boehner could not pass it without her. He lacks the personal power to marshall the votes of his Republican members. Pelosi’s personal power among Democratic members is much stronger. Pelosi consistently delivers those votes as she sees fit.

Boehner needs Pelosi. He cannot lead  the entire House without her. He can only follow the minority of fanatics within his party. Pelosi need never follow Boehner; but, she can lead him! Don’t you love it, ladies?

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

January 4, 2013 · 3:05 am

SIZE DOES NOT MATTER,By Louise Annarino,January 3,2013

SIZE DOES NOT  MATTER,By Louise Annarino,January 3,2012

 

Well, it is January 3rd. and the bills have all been mailed out. As usual, I overdid Christmas. I tried to raise my debt ceiling, but Target and Visa said, “What nerve you have. You bought gifts on the credit we extended to you; and, we expect you to honor your debts. If you don’t pay what you owe, we will ruin your credit.”  Actually, I did not really act so irresponsibly; nor did I have that conversation with my creditors. I am simply illustrating what  it means to raise the debt ceiling. It confuses us because on first hearing the phrase, we think it means seeking a higher limit on our credit line so we can make new purchases. But that is not really the way government finance works.

 

Congress passes a law to create program which costs X amount of dollars,and then authorizes a spending bill to implement the program. It must be certain that sufficient funds exist to pay for the program, because this new programs create new debt. The congressional budget office or CBO scores the bill. President Obama has made it a practice to only seek legislative action scored to stay within the current budget. Previously, we have gotten into trouble because congress, among other bills, authorized a war without raising the funds to pay for it.It was the first time in our history we did not raise a war tax. Instead, congress cut taxes to record lows, when it needed more taxes  not less to pay the billions the war would cost.

 

To cover this up, the war expenses were not included within the federal budget, so the war costs would not appear to create,and later increase, a budget deficit. The cost was hidden in the Pentagon budget,which is why the Pentagon repeatedly returned to congress asking for military spending increases to cover the costs. Who could turn down such a request for “our brave soldiers in the field”? When President Obama took office, he corrected this accounting trick. Some in congress now use this seeming jump in budget deficit as a ruse to attack entitlement programs, calling Obama a socialist/welfare president,destroying our grandchildren’s futures. No, war does that.

 

When a newly passed bill’s debt comes due, if insufficient funds are in the treasury to pay the debt, Treasury issues bonds to raise funds to pay the debt, asking congress to  raise the debt ceiling. Since congress approved the debt, congress should pay the debt to maintain the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Congress should raise the debt ceiling. This sensible approach had not been seriously questioned until Obama became president.Throwing the country into default has always simply  been unacceptable.

 

President Obama sought to increase taxes, AND raise the debt ceiling, AND cut program costs.This is the so-called “Grand Bargain” which Rep. Boehner at first agreed to 18 months ago,  but backed away from when he could not find the enough votes in his party to assure its passage. Instead, congress passed a sequestration bill which brought us to what some called a fiscal cliff. For weeks, Obama sought Boehner’s support and leadership efforts in congress to make a new grand bargain. Again, Boehner could not, or would not do so. Instead Boehner agreed to a reduced increase in taxes, and is holding out on raising the debt ceiling as a bargaining tool to force Obama’s hand and reduce government spending; not by making smart and balanced cuts, but by eliminating or starving government programs previously authorized by congress,and relied upon by our citizens: social security, medicare,medicaid. Now, Boehner tells us he will no longer deal directly with Obama, abdicating his House leadership role as representative of, and intermediary for his party.

 

We know suggested cuts to these programs are meant to cripple them and make them unpopular by making them useless, making it easier to eliminate them altogether. Raising the income cap on earnings for social security would increase FICA revenue and strengthen the program. Raising the retirement age would make it useless to many of our hardest working citizens, many who will die before receiving any benefits, or receive fewer years of coverage. Changing the cost of living formula would hurt older citizens in ways unimaginable to those who need not choose between buying a chicken or filling a prescription.

 

We all know our country is in a tough spot. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling would only make our situation worse, and it would leave a long-term, and totally unnecessary blot on the full faith and credit of the United States. Our economy is rebounding,slowly but surely. We cannot afford a congress which is willing to forsake recovery and economic growth under a mistaken belief that the size of the government matters more than the wisdom,purpose and good faith of the government.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , ,