Healthcare Summit: The Party of No keeps saying 'no'

I am such a political nerd. I watched the healthcare summit yesterday and loved every minute of it. I generally listen to talk radio while working; instead, yesterday, I used my auxiliary computer screen to live stream the healthcare summit on C-Span. If you weren't able to watch it, here is the C-Span link where you can watch the recorded broadcast. Yesterday evening National Public Radio also aired an hour-long analysis of the summit, but it really paled in comparison to the real thing.

President Obama set the tone at the beginning by reminding the attendees that the purpose of the summit was to find bipartisan consensus on healthcare-- not to talk about process, not to campaign, not to dredge up differences, and not to spout hackneyed talking points. Throughout the day, he had to remind attendees why they were meeting.

Everyone had stories about constituents who gone bankrupt or lost loved ones because of poor insurance coverage or no coverage. Several-- including the President-- had stories about pre-existing conditions, and there was consensus that if they were not covered by the government's Cadillac health plan that they would have a hard time buying insurance on the open market today. I was impressed with their thorough knowledge of the problems. (Of course, they have been talking about healthcare reform for a year!)

The other consensus--besides recognition of the problems with the current non-system-- was the identification of the common enemy-- health insurance companies. The health insurance companies were vilified by Democrats and Republicans alike for raising rates, for dropping sick people, and for strict-- and sometimes absurd-- rules about pre-existing conditions. Although pre-existing conditions were discussed at length, the Republican's plan would expand coverage to only 3 million Americans-- compared to 30 million under the President's plan-- and would not get rid of pre-existing conditions, according to NPR.

Over and over again-- ad nauseam-- the Party of No said the Congress should start over, which in an election year means: "Let's just forget about this for a while." Despite repeated Republican calls for a "clean sheet of paper," President Obama and the Democrats pushed for comprehensive reform and expanding coverage throughout the day.

The other Republican suggestion was to address a piece of the problem-- rather than tackle comprehensive reform. Which piece was not clear. (This way, they could go back to their constituents and say they did something.) The Republicans also were clearly more worried about tort reform, the cost of healthcare to the government, and deficit spending than expanding coverage for uninsured Americans. (Ironically, the cost of Medicare skyrocketed under the Bush Administration with the prescription drug bill that does not allow the US government to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies-- so Republicans created this problem. Also, the Republicans under President Bush didn't worry about deficit spending. )

The Republicans-- including Arizona's Jon Kyl-- railed against "mandated coverage" because it would be too expensive and because people want choice. Basically, what they are calling "mandated coverage" the President calls a "minimum benefits package." He used the example of the fictitious Acme Car Insurance that he purchased as a college student, but when he was rear-ended, it didn't cover the repairs to his car. He said we have to eliminate insurance coverage that doesn't really cover anything and eliminate lifetime caps on coverage. Now people have the "choice" to buy really cheap insurance that in the end may or may not be adequate. Kyl said that these mandates would raise rates for some Arizonans; the President's point was that it may raise rates for people who have the really cheap policies that leave them underinsured.

One high point of the day was when Arizona Senator John McCain began grandstanding, and President Obama reminded him they were no longer on the campaign trail. Of course, McCain is on the campaign trail, since he is up for re-election, and conservatives, independents, and progressives in Arizona are not happy with his performance.

One of the day's best statements originally came from Senator Harry Reid but was repeated a few times by others. Reid reminded Republicans that they were entitled to their own opinions but not their own set of facts.

If you want to learn more about the different healthcare reform ideas and see your government at work, turn off the pundits and watch the C-Span live videos of this summit.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Tea Partiers: Show us the money

Thanks to the original Boston Tea Party in 1773--when revolutionary patriots dumped English tea into the Boston Harbor rather than pay the tax-- the US became a country of coffee drinkers. "Taxation without representation," was the battle cry to rally the colonialists against the English monarchy. Civil unrest continued for two years after the Tea Party until the Revolutionary War began in 1775.

What will come of the current Tea Party movement, which started as a corporate media-inspired publicity stunt on Tax Day 2009?

Whether they realize the historical significance of the original anti-tax Tea Party movement, a smattering of disgruntled voters across the country identify with the idea that they are being taxed, but the government does not represent them. On some level I agree that what is best for the American people is often lost once lobbyists get involved in legislation. I believe that our state and federal governments are controlled by multi-national corporations--not the people-- and that this trend toward corporatism could get worse, thanks to the Supreme Court's recent ruling.

We all know that campaigns are run with money. How is the Tea Party funded? According to National Public Radio, the national Tea Party is setting up a fund raising structure. The party is forming the Ensuring Liberty Corp., a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) and the Ensuring Liberty Political Action Committee.

Ironically, Tea Party organizer Mark Sokda told the attendees at the recent Tea Party convention that the fundraising would be totally transparent, but according to NPR, 501(c)(4) organizations like the Ensuring Liberty Corp. "can raise as much money as it can get-- no limits-- from wealthy donors and from corporations. And there's no disclosure."

This does not sound transparent; it sounds ominous. Multi-national corporations have a history of funding conservative organizations with warm-and-fuzzy names like Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks. Will the Tea Party become a mechanism for corporations to further control government? After all, the Tea Party's original event was heavily promoted by the country's most conservative corporate media outlet.

On the local level, the Tucson Tea Party's very sophisticated website rails against the Democratic-controlled City Council on the main page, but the "about" page focuses on anger over the corporate bailouts and gives no information about their funding.

Ironically, the big corporations that received these bailouts may be secretly funding the "grassroots" Tea Party movement in the future.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Disgusted? It's Time to Organize

No, I'm not joining the Tea Baggers... er...Tea Partiers. On the contrary, I believe that it's time for the left to get organized.

After weeks of discouraging news from Phoenix about the Arizona legislature's plans to dismantle public education, close the parks, increase taxes for the middle class, deny healthcare for thousands of poor Arizonans-- AND offer even more tax breaks for the rich, I must say I'm pretty disgusted with our state government. Arizona Legislators are pandering to the corporatists, the gun lobby, and anti-immigrant extremists while ignoring the citizens of this state -- especially our children and the poor. At the same time, Arizona's US Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain-- brought to you by big banks, big insurance, big pharma, and big guns-- are marching in lock step with the Party of No and stonewalling all progressive legislation offered by the Obama Administration.

What's a lefty to do? With lingering recession, high unemployment, deep budget cuts, and failed government (particularly at the state level), these are dark times for our country. The grass roots populists who elected America's first black president are no match for the corporatists' multi-million-dollar war chests. But as The Doors sang, "They got the guns. We got the numbers."

Three recent Tucson events have given me hope-- the Martin Luther King Jr. Day events sponsored by the local Black Chamber of Commerce and Pima County African American Democratic Caucus, the Corozon de Justicia Awards Dinner sponsored by Derechos Humanos, and the Charlie King concert sponsored by No More Deaths.

These events gave me hope because it brought me face-to-face with hundreds of local activists of all colors who are working quietly and organizing on multiple progressive issues.

Particularly inspiring was the Corozon de Justicia keynote speaker Roberto Lovato, a writer and Latino activist, who addressed a highly diverse activist audience on Friday night. In 2009, Lovato launched the successful Basta Dobbs campaign which led to the resignation of right wing commentator Lou Dobbs from CNN. This campaign is a shining example of how the masses can take on corporate America-- and win. On Sunday, KXCI's Amanda Shauger aired a very insightful interview with Lovato, whose latest projects can be found at Presente.org.

Lovato said that national boundaries are irrelevant to corporations and that there should be no national boundaries in the human rights struggle against corporatism and fascism. Ironically, Iranians protesting against their repressive government are using The Doors' anthem from the 1960s anti-war protests as a rallying cry against fascism and sexism in their country. Is it time for us to dust off the vinyl and take to the streets? The Tea Partiers are not the only ones who are disgusted.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Democrats rally the faithful for 2010 elections

Fallout from years of Republican-controlled state government gave Democrats plenty of fuel to fire up the faithful this weekend at the Democratic State Committee Meeting in Phoenix.

Speaker after speaker hammered Republican governor Jan Brewer and Legislative ideologues with the facts. Arizona's economy is one of the worst in the nation. They have locked Legislative Democrats out of the budget process, refuse to listen to Democratic budget ideas, and failed to come up with concrete, fair solutions to the state's financial crisis. Arizona is fighting for the bottom in about every measurable statistic--except unemployment and home foreclosures.

"Leadership is not a spectator sport," declared Gubernatorial Candidate Terry Goddard. "Real leadership would be to include Democrats in the budget process." Goddard vowed to bring everyone together to solve the state's problems--unlike Brewer who has worked only with fellow Republicans.

Goddard went on to say that Arizona "is on a sprint to the bottom, and it's time to stop the free fall."

Arizona is at the precipice. State Republicans have ignored their fiscal responsibilities, given repeated tax cuts to the rich, mortgaged our future, and shortchanged our children and grandchildren. Reminding Democrats that education funding is one of our core values, Superintendent of Public Instruction Candidate Jason Williams led the audience in a chant from Dr. Seuss: "A person's a person no matter how small."

The Arizona Democratic Party is fielding strong candidates at all levels in 2010-- from Attorney General Goddard for governor to dozens of legislative hopefuls. Jobs, education, the economy, solar energy, and immigration reform were recurrent themes through several speeches.

Personally, I was very impressed with all of the candidates, their ideas, their integrity, and their energy. For detailed information about the candidates and their ideas for our future, check out the link lists that I have posted.

The 2010 elections are crucial to our state and the country. I encourage everyone to volunteer, donate, and VOTE! It's time to take back our state.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click this link to see the slide show from this event.

Campaign financing: First Amendment used to change laws in US and in Arizona

In two days, six judges have altered decades of campaign finance reform to favor the rich and well-connected.
Two court rulings this week--one by the US Supreme Court and another by a US District Court Judge--have left progressives reeling. Ironically, both decisions are based upon the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

On Thursday, January 21, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision ruled that limiting campaign contributions from corporations limits their freedom of speech. This decision is based upon the legal precedent of corporate personhood, which gives corporations the same rights as "natural persons" (AKA real people). To learn more about corporate personhood, check out this movie-- The Corporation.

President Obama said this ruling gives "a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics" and has instructed the Congress to work on revised campaign finance reform legislation.

On Wednesday, January 20, 9th District Court Judge Roslyn Silver ruled that state matching funds given to Clean Elections candidates limits the freedom of speech of their opponents who are not running as Clean Elections candidates. The rationale is that the candidates who are running traditionally would somehow limit their fundraising because it would essentially give their Clean Elections opponents more matching funds. Silver did not strike down all of the Clean Elections legislation--just the matching funds section that brings "clean" candidates coffers up to the funding levels of their opponents. Silver has given the proponents of Clean Elections 10 days to appeal her ruling.

Arizona's Clean Elections law was created by the voters in 1998. According to the Clean Elections Commission, close to 90 individuals--including several in Pima County--have qualified as Clean Elections candidates for the 2010 elections cycle. Some are suggesting that implementation of this decision be delayed until after the 2010 elections.

Where do we go from here?

This article was originally published in my Progressive Examiner column.

Tucson march honors Martin Luther King Jr.

Despite chilly weather and the threat of rain, hundreds of Tucsonans of all ages and races gathered on the University of Arizona mall on Monday for the 25th Annual Martin Luther King Jr. Day March.

Clarence Boykins, President of the Tucson-Southern Arizona Black Chamber of Commerce and march organizer, greeted the crowd on the mall.

After a blessing, speakers reminded the marchers that although African Americans have made great progress since the civil rights movement of the 1960s, there is more work to do. In his address, Pima County Board of Supervisors Chairman Richard Elias alluded to Arizona's budget crisis and the state's Republican-controlled legislature. He called upon all Tucsonans to work together to raise up the less fortunate--regardless of race.

Marchers walked, chanted, and sang their way from the UA to the DeMeester Performance Center at Randolph Park, where they heard more speeches and enjoyed music performances and fine food. MLK events continue today.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click this link to see the slide show.

Move your money, pay cash and buy local

Frustrated Americans are bankrolling bank bailouts and funding bonus checks for CEOs with poor performance appraisals, but what can we do about it? How can we voice our anger and frustration? The federal government thinks these banks are "too big to fail."

Arianna Huffington and her cohorts have given us a way to demonstrate our frustrations. If these non-performing banks are "too big to fail," make them smaller by moving our money out. The Move Your Money campaign began in December 2009 and has taken off through social media and the Internet. At least two Examiners have encouraged their audiences in Newark and LA to move their money.

For Tucson, I'd encourage people to not only move their money to sound local banks or credit unions but also to buy local and pay cash. These three simple strategies can help us invest in our community and our local businesses.

More money stays in your community if you bank locally and buy locally. The Local First movement has been progressing across the country, with chapters in many state and cities. Yes, Tucson has Starbucks, Target, Safeway, and national chain retail stores, but we also has Epic Cafe, Yikes Toys, several farmers' markets, and Bohemia. Shopping and dining locally makes economic sense. The Local First Tucson website lists locally owned businesses in every service category. Forty-five cents of every dollar you spend stays in Arizona, when you buy from Arizona businesses.

Pay cash is my third piece of advice. Why pay cash? Because it costs you and the retailer money when you pay with a debit or credit card. Retailers pay 2-5% of the purchase price to the card company when you use a VISA, MasterCard, American Express or other debit or credit card. Two percent of a $10 purchase is only 20 cents. Multiply 2% by millions of transactions each day across the world, and you realize that card companies are making truckloads of money-- even before they start charging you interest, annual fees, late fees, or ATM fees for the convenience of using cards. Check out the New York Times video that opened my eyes the insane amounts of money that are being made by cards companies-- particularly VISA, the industry leader. Cards are much more convenient than checks or cash, but we are paying dearly for that convenience.

How do we survive in tough economic times and still foster growth locally? Pull money out of those free-loading banks that are "too big to fail", cancel the credit cards with those mega-banks, and open up an account with a local community bank or credit union. Buy local, pay cash, and live within your means.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Same-sex marriage is 'business-friendly'

Same-sex marriage-- I'm sure that this is not what Bruce Ash, John Munger, Jan Brewer, Steve Kozachik, Jack Kemper, and John C. Scott have in mind when they talk about making Tucson and Arizona more "business friendly," but as Judy Tenuta would say, "It could happen."

Work with me on this one....
1- Arizona has a multi-million-dollar budget mess on it's hands and no real solutions.

2- Our Republican governor and legislature refuse to take steps to bring more money into the state coffers because the obvious way to increase revenues would be to roll back the tax cuts that they have given businesses and rich people, and that would not be "business friendly."

2- Historically, Arizona has been a major tourist destination. We have plenty of hotels, resorts, and scenic vistas, which are perfect honeymoon retreats.

3- Arizona has the Grand Canyon, great weather in the winter, and the Gem and Mineral Show as tourist magnets, but fostering a new niche market for the tourist industry would make good marketing sense.

4- Arizona politicians-- both Democrat and Republican-- want to appear "business friendly."

So, why not develop same-sex marriage as a niche tourist market? According to this post on Alan Colmes' website, Edmund Egan, chief economist for the City of San Francisco, estimated that same-sex marriages could have earned that city $35 million a year + additional funds in tax revenues (except that California made it illegal with Prop 8).

Same-sex marriage also is illegal in Arizona, but-- hey-- if the legislature really wants to be "business friendly," they can make it happen. Si se puede, fellas. After all, bringing in several million dollars without raising taxes or fees would be "business friendly."

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Jan Brewer: Cut the ideology and start governing

On Monday, January 11, 2010, the Arizona Legislature goes back into session. My wish for the new year is that Arizona's Republican lawmakers will put aside right wing ideology and work with Democratic lawmakers to develop shared solutions to the state's tremendous economic and social problems.

In other words, it's time to govern.

2009 was a disastrous year in Arizona politics. A year ago, when Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano moved to the post of Homeland Security Director in the Obama administration, Secretary of State Jan Brewer became governor. Napoitano brought lawmakers from both sides of the aisle together to create legislation. Brewer and her fellow Republicans in the legislature have shut Democratic lawmakers out of the process and essentially disenfranchised Baja Arizona residents represented by them.

Disregarding the Democrats' ideas and legislation has been a long-standing Republican tactic in the Arizona Legislature, but at a time when Arizona faces a monumental, multi-billion-dollar budget crisis, it is unconscionable for the Governor and other state-level Republicans to ignore Democratic legislators and their constituents.

Republican budget cuts affect us--our schools, our universities, our children, our jobs-- but we Democrats in Southern Arizona are basically unrepresented in the legislature.

In addition to the 2009 regular session, legislators have tackled budget issues on and off for months in multiple special sessions, but even with millions of dollars in cuts they have only nipped around the edges of the deficit.

How did Arizona get into such a financial fix? Of course, the US economic downturn has played a large role in the states' financial problems, but Republicans on both the state and federal levels who gave multiple tax cuts to the richest Americans must own some of the blame for the deficits. In Arizona, multiple tax cuts have resulted in a government that relies heavily on sales tax. With sales of homes and other goods down and unemployment at a record high, the state's revenues continue to shrink.
Undoubtedly, the blood-letting with continue during 2010. Republicans refuse to entertain revenue-generating solutions. In fact, this week, House Republicans announced plans to raise taxes on middle class Arizonans while offering more tax cuts to businesses.

How can they in good conscience off revenue cuts in the midst of a budget crisis? Their claim is that these business tax cuts will incentivize businesses to relocate to Arizona. They have a short-sighted view of what businesses want. Yes, it has become fashionable for states and cities to bend over backwards and offer multiple incentives to entice national sports teams and large businesses to relocate, but businesses look for other amenities-- like quality schools and universities, an educated workforce to draw from, a well-maintain infrastructure, and enlightened government.

As an old hippie, I wonder why are we Baja Arizonans not outraged over our disenfranchisement, the ineptitude of our state government, and the lack of leadership displayed by our governor?

We should be protesting at Jan Brewer's speech in Phoenix next week. Or at the very least, we should be bugging them on the phone and on e-mail. Check out the link box on this page for contact information and updates about proposed bill. Viva Baja Arizona!

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

New Year's Resolution: Do More with Less

A few years ago, I was walking through Macy's in San Francisco and checking out the latest fashions. This was about 5 years ago when the '60s and '70s looks first started coming back in style. The upscale downtown store was filled with fringed suede purses, lace-up leather boots, beaded necklaces, and crocheted vests from the hippie era and weirdly psychodelic mini-dresses, big sunglasses, and platform shoes from the early disco era. (Who knew that platform shoes would come back?)

The blue jean mini-skirts struck me in particular because they were authentically ragged, although quite pricey. The handmade look was reminiscent of the original blue jean skirts that we old hippies made in the early 1970s.

I sewed my first blue jean skirt from pair of cutoff shorts when I was a freshman in college. Since the dorm sewing machines were possessed by mechanical demons, we sewed these skirts by hand, which gave them a particularly crude look.

My mother was appalled by the rugged workmanship of my creation. In the fall of 1969, she sent me to college wearing wool sweaters with matching wool skirts, purses, and tasteful heels. When I came home in the spring, I was wearing a home-made love bead necklace that I strung; an orange hand-crocheted vest; my hand-sewn, blue jean mini-skirt; and Water Buffalo sandals. Except for the sandals, I had created my outfit with a handful of raw materials, a bit of ingenuity, and some skills I learned in junior high home economics class.

Fast forward 40 years to 2010, where is that personal ingenuity today? In the current economic climate, I believe we should look back to the '60s and '70s for direction. Gardening, composting, eating healthy meals, making your own clothes, living simply and naturally, and living in harmony with nature and other people were all in style.

How can you emulate this lifestyle today? Here are a few tips on living more simply:

- Evaluate your household. Does your house or apartment suit your family's size? Is if convenient to your work or do you have a long commute. You may consider downsizing or moving closer to your work to save money and energy costs.

- Do you know how to knit, sew, or crochet? These are useful skills. Consider taking a community class or asking a friend to give you a few lessons. If you know these crafts, teach your children. (They'll thank you someday.)

- Check out your closet. Are their clothes that could be updated or restyled into other fashions? Recycled fashion is in style-- particularly in Tucson. Maybe you could make pillow covers or other decorative household items from these clothes.

- Harvest rainwater and grow a garden.

- Plant trees to shade your property.

- Start a compost.

- Buy and eat locally.

- Reuse and recycle.

- Engage your family-- particularly your children-- in these activities.

I challenge you to more with less this year. You may find that this enriches your life.

This article originally appeared in my Baby Boomer Examiner column. To see a slide show of recycled art, check out this link.