In Tax Cut Plan, Debate Over the Definition of Rich - NYTimes.com

In Tax Cut Plan, Debate Over the Definition of Rich - NYTimes.com: "The dispute over what income level qualifies as rich is caused, in part, by the tendency of people to gauge their own wealth by comparing themselves to those closest to them. A study released this month by two Princeton University professors found that in most of the country, people feel comfortably middle class if they earn $70,000. But in New York City, the figure was $165,000. The median income in New York City is $55,980, according to the Census Bureau."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

NYT/CBS Poll - Ohio Governor Race Tightening - NYTimes.com

NYT/CBS Poll - Ohio Governor Race Tightening - NYTimes.com: "TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) — A new poll shows Ohio Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland and GOP challenger John Kasich (KAY'-sik) are about even in one of the most closely watched governor's races in the country."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

From Ken Shewmon

DeMint Controls The Senate

The Progress Report recently documented how the United States Senate has earned its reputation as the world's greatest deliberative body -- not because of what is being debated, but for how long the "debate," particularly because of the GOP minority -- carries on.

Senate Republicans have brought the upper chamber to a virtual standstill, abusing filibuster and hold rules and using delay tactics to block anything remotely progressive from passing through. This week, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) took that obstruction to a whole new level, warning his colleagues on Monday night that "he would place a hold on all legislation that has not been 'hot-lined' by the chamber or has not been cleared by his office before the close of business Tuesday."

Roll Call noted that DeMint's office has objected to hot-lining -- or fast-tracking -- legislation for years, but his "threat to essentially shut down legislation in the chamber is remarkable." Republicans and Democrats said that DeMint "had essentially made a unilateral decision to end legislative activity in the Senate."

...: "Hot-lining" is a process in which the two Senate leaders poll their caucuses to see if any senator objects to passing a bill. If no one raises an objection, than the bill is fast-tracked for passage. As the Wonk Room's Ian Millhiser noted, "[u]nless all 100 senators agree to begin and end debate on a bill without objection, the dissenting senators can force up to 60 hours of uninterrupted debate before a final vote can take place" -- 30 hours after debate begins and 30 hours after debate ends.

The Huffington Post reported that one of DeMint's colleagues on the other side of the aisle said that his obstruction has been ongoing since President Obama came to office. "It is my understanding Jim DeMint has had a standing hold on everything throughout this two year process," Sen. Jeff Merkely (D-OR) said yesterday. "When I have had amendments on a couple of occasions, I have been told: 'Absolutely, we in the Republican leadership are fine but you are going to have to clear it with Jim DeMint because he has a standing hold on everything.' So I'm not sure this is a real change from what he has been doing."

Millhiser notes that 30 hours "may not seem like a lot, but when you consider the sheer number of confirmations, bills, and appropriations that the Senate must consider just to keep the country running, the ability to waste 30 hours before any one of these tasks can be accomplished empowers the dissenters to prevent more than a fraction of the Senate's business from ever being completed." Indeed, more than 300 bills that have passed the House, many of them uncontroversial and passed unanimously, have not received a Senate vote. Moreover, as Attorney General Eric Holder noted in a Washington Post op-ed yesterday, "23 judicial nominees -- honest and qualified men and women eager to serve the cause of justice -- are enduring long delays while awaiting up-or-down votes, even though 16 of them received unanimous bipartisan approval in the Judiciary Committee." And the vacancies are holding up the justice system as many federal courts do "not have enough judges to promptly or effectively handle the court's caseload." "If we stay on the pace that the Senate has set in the past two years -- the slowest pace of confirmations in history," Holder wrote, "fully half the federal judiciary will be vacant by 2020."

DeMint has been on a crusade to purify the GOP, actively supporting right-wing tea party candidates for Senate. DeMint's endorsements have often times gone against the candidates his GOP leadership supports. "I'd rather have 40 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters," DeMint said recently, referring to his desire to purge the GOP of moderates. "I hate to offend my colleagues, but the fact is that there is a battle going on for the heart and soul of the Republican Party," he said. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who just lost to DeMint favorite Joe Miller in the state's GOP primary, said of the South Carolina Republican, "I think he has made people uncomfortable. I think that he has kind of rattled the cages, whether it advances to a full-on civil war, I don't know. What I'm looking at right now is what's going on in my state." "I personally think it's very counterproductive," said Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO) of DeMint's antics. DeMint has even criticized Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), saying that "the problem in the Republican Party is that the leadership has gone to the left." And if elected, DeMint's new bloc of supporters may pose a leadership challenge against McConnell. DeMint said it is not his "plan" to challenge the current Minority Leader but he reportedly said "he's open to some kind of elected leadership once 10 to 15 new conservatives -- many of them supported by DeMint -- join the ranks as he expects." And while DeMint provokes the GOP and its leadership, McConnell appears to be idly standing by. "I wonder what Minority Leader McConnell thinks about Minority Leader DeMint's unilateral declaration," said a spokesman for Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) of DeMint's "hot-line" announcement, who added, "One thing I know for sure is if their Conference continues to follow the lead of the junior Senator from South Carolina, then the only title that proceeds his name or Sen. McConnell's name will be Minority Leader."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Zakaria: Don't Forget That the Bailouts Worked - Newsweek

Zakaria: Don't Forget That the Bailouts Worked - Newsweek: "The remarkable aspect of TARP, in retrospect, was the bipartisanship that made it possible. Hank Paulson and Barney Frank became comrades in arms. George W. Bush cooperated with Nancy Pelosi. Conservative Republicans endorsed a vast government appropriation. Liberal Democrats supported a bank bailout. The fact that people of wildly differing political persuasions all came to the conclusion that this was the right policy should be some proof that it was not ideologically motivated. For a moment in September 2008, Washington worked."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Letter to the Editor: An Irrational Electorate

Common sense has been rationed in political climate

September 29, 2010

Why are we (supporters of President Obama's administration and the political leaders who support him) feeling frustrated, and a bit demoralized as we approach the upcoming November mid term election?

Because we are facing too many irrational voters.

* Too many voters refuse to accept the findings of most economists: the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (see recovery.gov) prevented our nation from entering into a repeat of a 1930s great depression.

* Too many voters have demonized The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (turning the term "stimulus" toxic), yet applaud the projects made possible by the Reinvestment/Recovery funds such as the improvements to The Glendale Village Square and the improvements to East Sharon Avenue.

* Too many voters blur The Troubled Asset Relief Program into the "stimulus" funding program.

*Too many voters have forgotten TARP was established by President George W. Bush.

*Too many voters have lost sight of the fact that the majority of economists agree the TARP loans prevented the total collapse of the world's financial system (see financialstability.gov).

*Too many voters have demonized TARP and turned the term "bank bailout" toxic.
*Too many voters fail to see, accept or understand that the vast majority of the TARP funds have already been paid back to the government by the banks.

* Too many voters seem to have forgotten President Obama arrived in office facing an unprecedented array of challenges. In the month President Obama took office, the nation was losing 750,000 jobs a month (see blogs.abcnews.com). [ed note: click on "Non-Verbal Answer to the Stimulus Doubters" on the right side of the blog -->] We are no longer losing jobs; there is today positive private sector job growth. All employment reports show continued signs of gradual labor market healing.

*Too many voters fail to accept the fact that prior to the passage of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, our nation's medical and health insurance system was unsustainable, denied access to millions and provided protection for no one.

*Too many voters fail to see that The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the great Civil Rights Legislation of the 21st Century.

*Too many voters fail to see that the benefits of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 will be seen over time as equally valuable to our nation as are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (see whitehouse.gov -search "benefits of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010").

* Too many voters confuse the need for short-term government deficit spending in a global recession with the need for long term deficit reduction which has nothing to do with the Reinvestment and Recovery funding, but everything to do with addressing solutions to strengthening Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as well as addressing tax reform and a balanced budgeting process.

* Too many irrational voters have forgotten why this nation elected President Barack Obama. Those who are grumbling need to be reminded what this great nation liked about him in the first place.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is also a neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (GOFACT.) He lives in Glendale.

PROVIDED

Richard Schwab Community Press guest columnist

Op-Ed Columnist - The Tea Kettle Movement - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - The Tea Kettle Movement - NYTimes.com: "To me, that is a plan that starts by asking: what is America’s core competency and strategic advantage, and how do we nurture it? Answer: It is our ability to attract, develop and unleash creative talent. That means men and women who invent, build and sell more goods and services that make people’s lives more productive, healthy, comfortable, secure and entertained than any other country."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Closed Circuit Debates

Connie Pillich rules!

Nobody showed for the WaycrossTV debate last night except Connie Pillich.  And the first 1/2 hour had no sound.  Pretty poor.  What's the theory of a closed-circuit debate anyhow?  Why not on one of the regular channels? 

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - The Tea Kettle Movement - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - The Tea Kettle Movement - NYTimes.com: "And how can you take seriously a movement that sat largely silent while the Bush administration launched two wars and a new entitlement, Medicare prescription drugs — while cutting taxes — but is now, suddenly, mad as hell about the deficit and won’t take it anymore from President Obama? Say what? Where were you folks for eight years?"

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Letter to the Editor by a Lawyer I Respect Greatly -- That Makes a Case for a $500,000 Breakpoint on the Tax-Break Extension

Tom Price was a legend in Cincinnati tennis. The annual Metropolitan Tennis Tournament is named after him and it was he who got Arthur Ashe on the Junior Davis Cup Team, Ashe’s big tennis breakthrough. About Tom, Ashe’s coach, Hall of Famer Dr. Robert Walter Johnson, once told his protégé “He says what he means and he means what he says.”

Would that the same could be said of the opponents of the extension of the Bush tax cuts for upper-income Americans. A case in point is Syndicated columnist Paul Krugman (“Republican brinksmanship and the tax-cut racket,” Sept. 18). Krugman may say what he means but he doesn’t mean what he says.

No less than seven times in his column Krugman labels upper-income Americans as “the rich,” “the richest” or “the wealthy.” A Nobel prize winner in economics, Krugman knows full well what those terms mean and they don’t mean upper-income taxpayers. My dictionary defines “rich” as having wealth or great possessions; abundantly supplied with resources, means or funds; wealthy. That’s a balance sheet test, not an income test. Many rich people may have nice incomes but many people with nice incomes do not have wealth.

A great many people with higher incomes are small business owners. Let’s take, for example, your neighborhood florist. She’s a single mom with adjusted gross income of $210,000 per year. She has little or no net worth, beyond a collection of vases and an inventory of flowers with a five-day life span. And, she’s putting two children through private colleges at $40,000 per year each. She must be amazed to learn from Krugman that she is rich. Or from our president that she is a millionaire or billionaire.

According to the Wall Street Journal, 48 percent of the net income of small businesses run as sole proprietorships, partnerships or S corporations went to households with incomes of over $200,000 in 2007. The past few years have been tough on a lot of them. Many have paid taxes on profits left in the business to sustain it. I have seen some dig into their savings or investments and pump funds back into their businesses. I have seen others cut employee work hours to avoid layoffs.

The Heritage Foundation regards small businesses like that of our neighborhood florist as the primary job creators in the economy. It opines that increased taxes on upper-income taxpayers resulting from the failure to extend the Bush tax cuts would hit small businesses hard, have serious adverse consequences for economic activity and sharply lower the rate of economic growth.

So, when you see the Krugmans and the Obamas plumping for increased taxes on the rich, know that they really are calling for increased taxes on small businesses that may well be far from rich and that can ill afford a heavier tax burden. It’s high time for pundits and politicians to say what they really mean. It’s high time for truth in political rhetoric.

Edmund Adams

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Supreme Court of Ohio Races! Vote For Eric Brown and Mary Jane Trapp!

Please help to educate your friends, family and clients about the Ohio Supreme Court race.


Ask them to visit Votetoendinjustice.com and talk to them about the Supreme Court decisions featured there. Ask them to view this video:
www.youtube.com/user/votetoendinjustice

In the featured case, 6 of the 7 Republican justices decided that banks get to keep customers’ money if the banks destroy the records of the deposits. In this case, the customer, an elderly woman, had the ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT; the bank did not deny the Certificate was genuine, and admitted it had failed to maintain records of the deposit. The bank got to keep her money anyway. By law, banks are permitted to destroy records of accounts after 6 years of “inactivity.” The Supreme Court applied this to automatically renewing Certificates of Deposit. According to the Court, after 6 years a bank can destroy its records of the CD and keep the money!

The lone dissenting justice, Paul Pfeifer, summed up the decision this way: "Not everybody sits and counts his or her money every day. Mrs. Spiller has the certificate of deposit. The bank has nothing. The bank wins?"

Please disseminate this video so that all Ohioans understand what is at stake in this election.

www.youtube.com/user/votetoendinjustice

Pass it along to your friends, clients and co-workers, and visit www.votetoendinjustice.com for more information about cases that have adopted pro-business, pro-insurance company, pro-employer and pro-corporate stances at the expense of the rights of hardworking Ohioans.

We have the power to stop injustice by supporting Mary Jane Trapp and Eric Brown this November. Both have been rated higher than their opponents by a Cleveland Judicial Candidate Rating Coalition. In addition, Mary Jane Trapp has been rated as the superior choice by the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, which represents the largest regional legal community in Ohio.

PLEASE JOIN OUR CAMPAIGN BY:

SENDING AN EMAIL to your friends, family members and clients about votetoendinjustice.com

SIGNING UP on our Facebook page

Not at the Glendale Street Fair

But my daughter won a prize last week for this photo, taken in Barcelona when they visited there earlier this year, and her camera was at the ready. Note the videoman in the back, who was capturing the expressions on the crowd, Becca thinks.  Some sort of Candid Camera clip -- Spanish style.

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Closed Circuit Debates

Group of us watched Steve Driehaus debate and more than match Steve Chabot last night, on Waycross TV.  Connie Pillich debates tonight at 7 pm.  Come down to watch at 10036 Springfield Pike.

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

From Jack Buescher

Gents: If I could sum up our most potent argument I would put it on a bumper sticker and include it in every phone call:


Save Social Security, Vote Democrat


I hope to be available for phoning soon.


Good job on Sat..

Jack

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Petraeus Says Taliban Have Reached Out to Karzai - NYTimes.com

Petraeus Says Taliban Have Reached Out to Karzai - NYTimes.com: "American support for the process is in part a recognition that “Oh, by the way, you are not going to kill or capture your way out of an industrial-strength insurgency,” General Petraeus said, underscoring the scale of Taliban activity."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Structure of Excuses - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Structure of Excuses - NYTimes.com: "So what you need to know is that there is no evidence whatsoever to back these claims. We aren’t suffering from a shortage of needed skills; we’re suffering from a lack of policy resolve. As I said, structural unemployment isn’t a real problem, it’s an excuse — a reason not to act on America’s problems at a time when action is desperately needed."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Non-Verbal Answer to the Stimulus Doubters

Click on graph and then "Control+" five times.

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Job Loss Looms as Part of Stimulus Act Expires - NYTimes.com

Job Loss Looms as Part of Stimulus Act Expires - NYTimes.com: "Tens of thousands of people will lose their jobs within weeks unless Congress extends one of the more effective job-creating programs in the $787 billion stimulus act: a $1 billion New Deal-style program that directly paid the salaries of unemployed people so they could get jobs in government, at nonprofit organizations and at many small businesses."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

GOFACT at Glendale Street Fair

At our GOFACT Glendale Street Fair booth,

we have registered voters, filled out applications for absent voter's ballots, picked up new volunteers, handed out campaign information, and had some great exchanges and conversations. It has been a very worthwhile endeavor.

KUDOS to Michael Del Favero, Bruce Abel, Barb and Leo Rosenthal, Tom Youkilis, Paula Taylor, Ben Floyd, and Mary Fran Piepmeier for stepping up to make our GOFACT booth a success.

REMEMBER Wed. Sept. 29 (and every Wed. until Nov. 2) phone bank 6:00 - 8:00 - Woodlawn office.

REMEMBER Sat Oct 2 (and every Sat. in Oct.) Canvass 10:30 - Woodlawn office.

Go GOFACT,

Richard

Richard O. Schwab
830 Congress Ave.
Glendale, Ohio 45246
H.513-771-4397
M.513-470-4599



Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - We Haven’t Hit Bottom Yet - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - We Haven’t Hit Bottom Yet - NYTimes.com: "The political upheaval going on in the United States right now is being driven by the economic upheaval. It’s sometimes hard to see this clearly amid the craziness and ugliness stirred up by the professional exploiters. But the essential issue is still the economy — the rising tide of poor people and the decline of the middle class. The true extent of the pain has not been widely chronicled."

Remember to stop at the GOFACT booth at the Glendale Street Fair today, and buy the book "Freedom" or register for a drawing to win it.

Guts of New Yorker Essay on The Stimulus

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7% in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted GDP by more than 2%. A recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from respectively, Moody's and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above 11% and that GDP would've been almost half $1 trillion lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policies softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again. It did so without any of the negative effects that deficit spending can entail: interest rates remained at remarkably low levels, and government borrowing didn't crowd out private investment.

Polls show that a sizable majority of voters think that the stimulus either did nothing to help or actively hurt the economy, and most people say that they are opposed to the new stimulus plan.

Many voters conflate the stimulus bill with the highly unpopular bailouts of the banking sector and the auto industry;

Rep. Mike Pence, of Indiana, referred to the "bailout stimulus."

The very things that made the stimulus more effective economically may have made it less popular politically. For instance, because research has shown that lump-sum tax refunds get hoarded rather than spent, the government decided not to give individuals their tax cuts all at once, instead refunding a little on each paycheck. That tactic was successful at increasing consumer demand, but it had a big political cost: many voters never noticed that they were getting a tax cut. Similarly, a key part of the stimulus was the billions of dollars that went to state governments. This was crucial in helping states avoid layoffs and spending cuts, but politically it didn't get much notice, because it was the dog that didn't bark -- saving jobs just isn't as conspicuous as creating them. Extending unemployment benefits was also an excellent use of stimulus funds, since that money tends to get spent immediately. Unless you are unemployed this wasn't something you’d pay attention to.

The stimulus was also back-loaded, so that only a third was spent in the first year. This reduced waste, since there was more time to vet projects, and ensure that money would be kept flowing into 2010, lessening the risk of a double-dip recession. It also made the stimulus less potent in 2009 when the economy was in dire straits, leaving voters with the impression that the plan wasn't working. Or subtly, while the plan may end up having a transformative impact on things like the clean energy industry, broadband access and the national power grid, it's hard for voters to find concrete visual evidence of what the stimulus has done (as occasional road signs telling us our tax dollars are at work notwithstanding). That's a sharp contrast with the new deal legacy of new highways, massive dams, and rural electrification. Dramatic, high profile deeds have a profound effect on people's opinions, so, in the absence of another Hoover Dam or Golden Gate Bridge, it's not surprising that the voters view is: "we spent $800 billion and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."

If you take action and things go wrong, you're often held more responsible than if you do nothing, even when the failure to act would lead to a disastrous outcome. Of course, presidents are always blamed or rewarded for the state of the economy. That, in pushing through the stimulus plan, the Administration tied itself to the fate of the economy more tightly than if it had done nothing. It's a harsh lesson: when Rome is burning, trying to put out the fire may cost you more than just sitting by and fiddling.

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Contributor - The Founding Fathers Versus the Tea Party - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Contributor - The Founding Fathers Versus the Tea Party - NYTimes.com: "No single group should ever presume to claim special ownership of the founding fathers or the Constitution they wrought with such skill and ingenuity. Those lofty figures, along with the seminal document they brought forth, form a sacred part of our common heritage as Americans. They should be used for the richness and diversity of their arguments, not tampered with for partisan purposes. The Dutch historian Pieter Geyl once famously asserted that history was an argument without an end. Our contentious founders, who could agree on little else, would certainly have agreed on that."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Why Not Just Add Pepper?

Op-Ed Columnist - The Responsibility Deficit - NYTimes.com: "What the country is really looking for is a restoration of responsibility. If some smart leader is going to help us get out of ideological gridlock, that leader will reframe politics around this end."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Downhill With the G.O.P. - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Downhill With the G.O.P. - NYTimes.com: "Once upon a time, a Latin American political party promised to help motorists save money on gasoline. How? By building highways that ran only downhill."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Add Pepper Dammit!

Last evening Richard Schwab and I attended a beautiful money-raising party in the back yard of the Peppers. And I do mean beautiful.  Not only the setting, under a huge tent, with food and open bar, but, most importantly, three short speeches by, respec-tively, John Pepper, Francie Pepper and the Candidate, David Pep-per, recently Hamilton County Commissioner. 

This is the best of Cincinnati; the best of politics.  I came home to Glendale and carefully, reverently, planted my Pepper for State Auditor sign in the dry, hard ground.

John Pepper's introduction was short and very, very powerful.  Francie's was matter-of-fact and appropriately horatory.

David's was polished and businesslike, emphasizing what the Ohio Auditor's job should entail, including bringing business consolidation and order to the 14 failing municipalities around the state. 

I have been privileged to see this all develop over the years.  John, the Father, well we know his story; Francie, Woman of the Year in Cincinnati, and introducer of her roommate Eunie to me -- well, we know hers as well.  Now David.   

Thus -- if we just add Pepper -- is the world as it should be and I hope to Hell this is the future of Ohio politics.

From last night I conclude this ain't the laid-back "Just Add Pepper."  This is "Add Pepper Dammit! Jalapeno! And quick."  What we will get with David as Auditor of Ohio, just as we got with Hamilton County under his leadership, is William Cooper Procter fairness, humaneness, efficiency and order. 

And humor.  It's was David's crack against his father that brought down the house/tent:  "Would those of you with a last name beginning with 'G' please raise your hand?" (John, with two of his secretaries in attendance, in his introductory speech, had "complained" that when he -- dutifully, as David's father -- sent out emails to what he thought was the complete list, David told him to go back and keep working -- that John he had just done the A-to-F's.)

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Richard--


I want to make one addition to your list:

Too many voters have forgotten that Al Gore had promised to put Clinton's surplus in a "lockbox" for Social Security and that George W. not only squandered it with huge tax cuts favoring the wealthy and with his reckless war in Iraq but also ran up a huge part of the deficit we face.

I think one of the problems we face as a nation is a serious lack of economic and financial education on the part of the populace. Economic experts have debunked the "supply-side" theory of economic stimulus for years. For recovery you need to deficit spend in order to create jobs that will not only put people back to work and put money in their pockets but also serves a public purpose, e.g. infrastructure. Along with tax cuts for the middle class, this promotes spending by those who will put most, if not all, of that money back into the market creating demand, demand stimulates supply. The part of the supply side that does need some impetus is research and development and the proposed tax relief there should help entrepreneurs and businesses to invest and create new and useful products that people would want to buy.

In addition I am convinced that few people have an appreciation for the extent to which our financial system was a house of cards and that the TARP and Recovery Act really did save us from an abyss.

Just a few of my thoughts.

Mary Fran Piepmeier




Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

You Must Read This!

You can blow up the actual copy by clicking on it and then "control +" until it is as big as you like.  (Before I realized you could do this I "Nuanced" the article by reading it into Nuance.  That result is below, with my bolding.)

The New Yorker, September 20, 2010, at 52:

When Pres. Obama unveiled an array of new tax cuts and spending proposals last week, one word was noticeably missing from his speeches: "stimulus." Republicans, meanwhile, energetically set about decrying the plan as "more of the same failed stimulus" and as simply a "second stimulus" -- as if the word itself were a damning indictment....

By any reasonable measure, the $800 million stimulus package that Congress passed in the winter of 2009 was a clear, if limited, success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7% in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted GDP by more than 2%. A recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from respectively, Moody's and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above 11% and that GDP would've been almost half $1 trillion lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policies softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again. It did so without any of the negative effects that deficit spending can entail: interest rates remained at remarkably low levels, and government borrowing didn't crowd out private investment.

Lately, however, none of this has made any difference. Polls show that a sizable majority of voters think that the stimulus either did nothing to help or actively hurt the economy, and most people say that they are opposed to the new stimulus plan. The hostility has numerous sources. Many voters conflate the stimulus bill with the highly unpopular bailouts of the banking sector and the auto industry; Republicans have done a good job of encouraging such misconception, as when Rep. Mike Pence, of Indiana, referred to the "bailout stimulus." Also, the stimulus -- which, to begin with, was too small to completely offset the economy's precipitous drop in demand -- was oversold. The Administration's forecast about the recession "particularly regarding job losses" were too optimistic, and so its promises about what the stimulus would accomplish set the public up for disappointment.

But the most interesting aspect of the stimulus’s image problems concern its design and implementation. Paradoxically, the very things that made the stimulus more effective economically may have made it less popular politically. For instance, because research has shown that lump-sum tax refunds get hoarded rather than spent, the government decided not to give individuals their tax cuts all at once, instead refunding a little on each paycheck. That tactic was successful at increasing consumer demand, but it had a big political cost: many voters never noticed that they were getting a tax cut. Similarly, a key part of the stimulus was the billions of dollars that went to state governments. This was crucial in helping states avoid layoffs and spending cuts, but politically it didn't get much notice, because it was the dog that didn't bark -- saving jobs just isn't as conspicuous as creating them. Extending unemploy-ment benefits was also an excellent use of stimulus funds, since that money tends to get spent immediately. Unless you are unemployed this wasn't something you’d pay attention to.

The stimulus was also back-loaded, so that only a third was spent in the first year. This reduced waste, since there was more time to vet projects, and ensure that money would be kept flowing into 2010, lessening the risk of a double-dip recession. It also made the stimulus less potent in 2009 when the economy was in dire straits, leaving voters with the impression that the plan wasn't working. Or subtly, while the plan may end up having a transformative impact on things like the clean energy industry, broadband access and the national power grid, it's hard for voters to find concrete visual evidence of what the stimulus has done (as occasional road signs telling us our tax dollars are at work notwithstanding). That's a sharp contrast with the new deal legacy of new highways, massive dams, and rural electrification. Dramatic, high profile deeds have a profound effect on people's opinions, so, in the absence of another Hoover Dam or Golden Gate Bridge, it's not surprising that the voters view is: "we spent $800 billion and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."

Bizarre as it may seem, a less well-designed stimulus might have been more popular, and that would've made it easier for Obama to sell the electorate on his new stimulus proposals. But, given the scope and depth of the recession, it's also likely that any stimulus would become a political albatross. As Jonathan Baron -- a professor at the University of Pennsylvania who studies the role of psychology and public policy -- has discussed, if you take action and things go wrong, you're often held more responsible than if you do nothing, even when the failure to act would lead to a disastrous outcome. Of course, presidents are always blamed or rewarded for the state of the economy. That, in pushing through the stimulus plan, the Administration tied itself to the fate of the economy more tightly than if it had done nothing. It's a harsh lesson: when Rome is burning, trying to put out the fire may cost you more than just sitting by and fiddling.

-- James Surowiecki

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Dear BRUCE,


After just a year and a half, President Obama has already repaired much of the damage wrought during the eight years of the Bush Administration - restoring America's reputation on the world stage and bringing an end to combat operations in Iraq.

Republican obstructionists want to halt our progress, take control of Congress and set President Obama up for failure. They want a return to the Bush-era policies.

Just this past week, Republicans spent hundreds of thousands on attack ads in California, Washington and Pennsylvania. We cannot allow them to get away with it. We have to fight back.

If the Democratic grassroots can come together at this crucial moment - just six weeks before Election Day - we can summon the enthusiasm, the resources and the votes we need to win. But it is going to take a massive commitment by Democrats from every region of our country.
The ultraconservative Republican candidates have been outspoken about their desire to close off America's borders and shun cooperation with our partners throughout the world. That is why we Democrats must fight even harder to hold our ground.

It is going to be tough because the Republicans are getting hundreds of millions of dollars in help from right wing organizations like Karl Rove's American Crossroads. The amount of money the Republicans are spending this election cycle is staggering, but I know we can match them. If each and every Democrat rises up and commits to doing his or her part, we will prevail.

This isn't the first time we Democrats have faced a determined opponent. We have beat them before, and we'll do it again. But it will only happen if we all act now.

Thank you for all that you do for our party and our country.


Sincerely,

Madeleine Albright

Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, dscc.org,

and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.




Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Democracy Still Matters - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Democracy Still Matters - NYTimes.com: "“For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live as the greatest he: and therefore truly, sir, I think it’s clear, that every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government.”"

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

I found this somewhat therapeutic - to put my thoughts together, attempting to summarize what I see as the electorate's irrational mood as we approach the mid terms. Hopefully these thoughts will help us as we phone bank, meet voters at the Street Fair, and canvass.


Why are we (supporters of President Obama's administration and the political leaders who support him) feeling frustrated, and a bit demoralized?

Because we are facing too many irrational voters.

•Too many voters refuse to accept the findings of the vast majority of economists: The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (see recovery.gov) prevented our nation from entering into a repeat of a 1930's great depression.

•Too many voters have demonized The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (turning the term "stimulus" toxic) yet applaud the projects made possible by the Reinvestment/Recovery funds such as the improvements to The Glendale Village Square and the improvements to East Sharon Avenue.

•Too many voters blur The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) into the "stimulus" funding program. Too many voters have forgotten TARP was established by President George W. Bush. Too many voters have lost sight of the fact that the vast majority of economists agree the TARP loans prevented the total collapse of the world's financial system. Too many voters have demonized TARP and turned the term "Bank Bailout" toxic. Too many voters fail to see, accept or understand that the vast majority of the TARP funds have already been paid back to the Government by the Banks.

•Too many voters fail to accept the fact that prior to the passage of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, our nation's medical and health insurance system was unsustainable, denied access to millions, and provided protection for no one. Too many voters fail to see that The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the great Civil Rights Legislation of the 21st Century. Too many voters fail to see that the benefits of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 will be seen over time as equally valuable to our nation as are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

•Too many voters confuse the NEED for short term Government deficit spending in a Global recession with the NEED for long term deficit reduction which has nothing to do with the Reinvestment and Recovery funding but everything to do with addressing solutions to strengthening Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid as well as addressing tax reform and a balanced budgeting process.

•Too many irrational voters have forgotten why this nation elected President Barack Obama. Those that are grumbling need to be reminded what this great nation liked about him in the first place.




Richard

Richard O. Schwab
830 Congress Ave.
Glendale, Ohio 45246
H.513-771-4397
M.513-470-4599

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Obama Aides Weigh Bid to Tie the G.O.P. to the Tea Party - NYTimes.com

Obama Aides Weigh Bid to Tie the G.O.P. to the Tea Party - NYTimes.com: "WASHINGTON — President Obama’s political advisers, looking for ways to help Democrats and alter the course of the midterm elections in the final weeks, are considering a range of ideas, including national advertisements, to cast the Republican Party as all but taken over by Tea Party extremists, people involved in the discussion said."


(c) 2010 F. Bruce Abel


Remember how -- still -- the name-calling of our side as "Liberal" was scrotum-withering? Well, let's do the same. Call the opponent a name: "Republican" and leave it at that.

After the Bush years and last two years in Congress, winning an election for any Democrat against the talk-show Republicans -- and all Republicans perforce, must bow to, the talk-show Republicans -- should be as easy as winning a Christian-Democrat -- National Socialist election just after the devastation of WWII.

On the podium (Driehaus, say, or Strickland, or Pillich, with a raised eyebrow and a touch of sarcasm):

"Hey," "This guy, my opponent, is a Republican."

"Case closed."

This was the approach of William F. Buckley Jr. Toward the end of his life he admitted that the key to his successful arguments was not the content he put out, but the one-phrase repost, the raised eyebrow. Let the voters imagine the horrors of the eight years leading up to 2008, when Obama was voted in. Treat the voters like adults. They have lived through those eight years. They know.

P.S. My daughter, upon reading this, points out that "they don't know." If that is true, turn to the Memory Hole argument. Or I have another analogy: the U.S. economy now has pneumonia because the Republicans had it standing coatless in the winter cold for eight years, and even longer in reality, due to intimidating the Clintons, and the Reagan years. Do we dare stand out in another winter coatless?
Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - The Angry Rich and Taxes - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - The Angry Rich and Taxes - NYTimes.com: "No, I’m not talking about the Tea Partiers. I’m talking about the rich."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Aren’t We Clever? - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Aren’t We Clever? - NYTimes.com: "So while America’s Republicans turned “climate change” into a four-letter word — J-O-K-E — China’s Communists also turned it into a four-letter word — J-O-B-S."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Editorial - The Secret Election - NYTimes.com

Editorial - The Secret Election - NYTimes.com: "The Citizens United decision, paradoxically, supported greater disclosure of donors, but Senate Republicans have filibustered a bill that would eliminate the secrecy shield. Just one vote is preventing passage. That act is coming back for another Senate vote. The two Republican senators from Maine, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, might want to read a recent poll by the Maine Citizens for Clean Elections, which showed that 80 percent of the state’s voters support public disclosure."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Editorial - The Secret Election - NYTimes.com

Editorial - The Secret Election - NYTimes.com: "Corporations got the power to pour anonymous money into elections from Supreme Court and Federal Election Commission decisions in the last two years, culminating in the Citizens United opinion earlier this year. The effect is drastic: In 2004 and 2006, virtually all independent groups receiving electioneering donations revealed their donors. In 2008, less than half of the groups reported their donors, according to a study issued last week by the watchdog group Public Citizen. So far this year, only 32 percent of the groups have done so."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Two Different Worlds - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Two Different Worlds - NYTimes.com: "If Republicans take over the policy levers, forget about it. The party of Palin, Limbaugh and Boehner — with its tax cuts for the rich and obsession with the deregulatory, free-market zealotry that brought us the Great Recession — will only accelerate the mass march into poverty."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Two Different Worlds - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Two Different Worlds - NYTimes.com: "If Republicans take over the policy levers, forget about it. The party of Palin, Limbaugh and Boehner — with its tax cuts for the rich and obsession with the deregulatory, free-market zealotry that brought us the Great Recession — will only accelerate the mass march into poverty."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Two Different Worlds - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Two Different Worlds - NYTimes.com: "The movers and shakers of our society seem similarly oblivious to the terrible destruction wrought by the economic storm that has roared through America. They’ve heard some thunder, perhaps, and seen some lightning, and maybe felt a bit of the wind. But there is nothing that society’s leaders are doing — no sense of urgency in their policies or attitudes — that suggests they understand the extent of the economic devastation that has come crashing down like a plague on the poor and much of the middle class."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - The Grand Illusion - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - The Grand Illusion - NYTimes.com: "Democrats have not focused enough time and energy on the economy and job creation, the two subjects that respondents in the Times/CBS News poll identified as the most important issues facing the country. But, even so, when asked whom they think would do a better job of handling economic issues like the recession, creating jobs and helping the middle class and small businesses, people favored Democrats over Republicans."

Editorial - Primary Day 2010 - The Tea Party’s Snarl - NYTimes.com

Editorial - Primary Day 2010 - The Tea Party’s Snarl - NYTimes.com: "On Wednesday, Mr. Boehner invited Tea Party activists to help “drive the debate” in Washington and shape the legislative agenda. That invitation act should be a dose of adrenaline to dispirited Democrats, independents and mainstream Republican voters who had not fully grasped the stakes in November’s election."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

The Morning After: Whose Party Is It? - NYTimes.com

The Morning After: Whose Party Is It? - NYTimes.com: "It is more than Obama, more than the Republican establishment which, like the Democratic establishment, takes us voters for granted."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

The Morning After: Whose Party Is It? - NYTimes.com

The Morning After: Whose Party Is It? - NYTimes.com: "midwesterner
Midwest
September 15th, 2010
10:23 amI just truly hope the Democrats can get themselves together at this point and run a November campaign that reminds people how far out in 'right field' these Tea Party annointees are. Democrats should be hammering home just what these Tea Party 'policies' would mean to real people, in very clear and direct terms."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

The Morning After: Whose Party Is It? - NYTimes.com

The Morning After: Whose Party Is It? - NYTimes.com: "“The fact that these individuals may play well in an overall Republican universe doesn’t mean they will play well in a general election universe,” he said. After November, he said, “Democrats will be in the majority.”"

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

G.O.P. Insurgents Win in Del. and N.Y. - NYTimes.com

G.O.P. Insurgents Win in Del. and N.Y. - NYTimes.com: "Throughout the campaign, Ms. O’Donnell was dogged by reports — many of them generated by members of her own party — that she had trouble with personal finances, had fudged her educational history and was not fit for office. But Ms. O’Donnell continued to rebut, repudiate and push on, with a hefty dose of help from the Tea Party infrastructure and rank-and-file voters who were furious at Washington"

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - The Day After Tomorrow - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - The Day After Tomorrow - NYTimes.com: "The social fabric is fraying. Human capital is being squandered. Society is segmenting. The labor markets are ill. Wages are lagging. Inequality is increasing. The nation is overconsuming and underinnovating. China and India are surging. Not all of these challenges can be addressed by the spontaneous healing powers of the market."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - A Recovery’s Long Odds - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - A Recovery’s Long Odds - NYTimes.com: "There was plenty of growth, but the economic benefits went overwhelmingly — and unfairly — to those already at the top. Mr. Reich cites the work of analysts who have tracked the increasing share of national income that has gone to the top 1 percent of earners since the 1970s, when their share was 8 percent to 9 percent. In the 1980s, it rose to 10 percent to 14 percent. In the late-’90s, it was 15 percent to 19 percent. In 2005, it passed 21 percent. By 2007, the last year for which complete data are available, the richest 1 percent were taking more than 23 percent of all income."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - A Recovery’s Long Odds - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - A Recovery’s Long Odds - NYTimes.com: "The middle class is finally on its knees. Jobs are scarce and good jobs even scarcer. Government and corporate policies have been whacking working Americans every which way for the past three or four decades. While globalization and technological wizardry were wreaking employment havoc, the movers and shakers in government and in the board rooms of the great corporations were embracing privatization and deregulation with the fervor of fanatics. The safety net was shredded, unions were brutally attacked and demonized, employment training and jobs programs were eliminated, higher education costs skyrocketed, and the nation’s infrastructure, a key to long-term industrial and economic health, deteriorated."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Voting Early

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

What Impresses!

Today I found in my mailbox a hand addressed envelope from Driehaus For Congress. Inside the envelope was a hand written note that said the following:


"Richard,

Thanks so much for hosting the event in Glendale last night. What a great turnout!

Thanks for the continued support!

Steve"



How nice and personal. This speaks volumes about the Quality and Character of Congressman Steve Driehaus!

Richard O. Schwab


Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - We’re No. 1(1)! - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - We’re No. 1(1)! - NYTimes.com: "Contrast that with the Baby Boomer Generation. Our big problems are unfolding incrementally — the decline in U.S. education, competitiveness and infrastructure, as well as oil addiction and climate change. Our generation’s leaders never dare utter the word “sacrifice.” All solutions must be painless. Which drug would you like? A stimulus from Democrats or a tax cut from Republicans? A national energy policy? Too hard. For a decade we sent our best minds not to make computer chips in Silicon Valley but to make poker chips on Wall Street, while telling ourselves we could have the American dream — a home — without saving and investing, for nothing down and nothing to pay for two years. Our leadership message to the world (except for our brave soldiers): “After you.”"

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Op-Ed Columnist - Paying the Price - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Paying the Price - NYTimes.com: "That didn’t happen. The Democrats are facing an election debacle because they did not respond adequately to their constituents’ most dire needs. The thing that is really weird is that a strengthened G.O.P. will undoubtedly make matters so much worse."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Richard Schwab's Introduction of Congressman Steve Driehaus at the Iron Horse

I have been asked by a few individuals to share my introduction of Congressman Steve Driehaus at the 9/7 Iron Horse event. So here it is:


"I wish more Political Leaders were like U.S. Representative Steve Driehaus. You won't find him out there demonizing, fear mongering, obstructing, spreading misinformation and half truths. He is TOO BUSY - SITTING AT THE TABLE - working on solutions to the challenges facing Cincinnati, our First District, and our great Nation.

I am humbled, and I am honored. I am pleased, and I am proud to introduce to you tonight our COURAGEOUS and COMMITTED Congressman Steve Driehaus!"

Richard O. Schwab


Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Editorial - Debating the Economy - NYTimes.com

Editorial - Debating the Economy - NYTimes.com: "The president was exactly right when he said that Mr. Boehner’s proposals were nothing more than a return to the past decade of economic mismanagement; the same policies that helped turn budget surpluses into crippling deficits nearly destroyed the financial system and cast millions of Americans into long-term joblessness."

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.

Two Wonderful Speeches -- Driehaus and the President

(c) 2010 F. Bruce Abel

Steve Driehaus did wow them at the Iron Horse Tuesday, September 7, at 6:45 pm before a full house downstairs.  It was the best performance seen around here, eclipsing Brian Kelly's talk at the Glendale Lyceum only a year ago, which, you will recall, preceded a near-perfect season.

I cannot imagine a better, more focused candidate. 

And then President Obama in Cleveland yesterday. He used "our" Car in the Ditch analogy! (see link above to that story using that analogy last week)

And Connie Pillich, running to keep her seat in the Ohio House from the 28th District, was at the Iron Horse event also.

OK, let's go get 'em.

There will be phone banks Monday and Wednesdays from here on in at 10036 Springfield Pike, 5 to 7 pm.  Contact me or Nate and then come!  My number is 772-1045.  Or just come!


The scoop from Washington Obama Cleveland jobs speech. Transcript

By Lynn Sweeton September 8, 2010 12:57 PM
Permalink
Comments (0)

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_______________________________________________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

September 8, 2010



Remarks of President Barack Obama on the Economy - As Prepared for Delivery

Wednesday, September 8th, 2010

Cleveland, Ohio



As Prepared for Delivery--



Good afternoon, Ohio. It's good to be back.

In the fall of 2008, one of the last rallies of my presidential campaign was here in the Cleveland area. It was a hopeful time, just two days before the election. We knew that if we pulled it off, we'd have the chance to tackle some big and difficult challenges that had been facing this country for a long time.

We also hoped for a chance to get beyond some of the old political divides - between Democrats and Republicans, Red states and Blue states - that had prevented us from making progress. Because although we are proud to be Democrats, we are prouder to be Americans - and we believed that no single party has a monopoly on wisdom.

That's not to say that the election didn't expose deep differences between the parties. I ran for President because for much of the last decade, a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work:

Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut regulations for special interests. Cut trade deals even if they didn't benefit our workers. Cut back on investments in our people and our future - in education and clean energy; in research and technology. The idea was that if we had blind faith in the market; if we let corporations play by their own rules; if we left everyone else to fend for themselves, America would grow and prosper.

For a time, this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better televisions.

But while all this was happening, the broader economy was becoming weaker. Job growth between 2000 and 2008 was slower than it had been in any economic expansion since World War II - even slower than it's been over the past year. The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept rising. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many couldn't afford in the first place. Meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit.

I ran for President because I believed that this kind of economy was unsustainable - for the middle-class and for our nation's future. I ran because I had a different idea about how America was built - an idea rooted in my own family's story.

You see, Michelle and I are where we are today because even though our families didn't have much, they worked tirelessly - without complaint - so that we might have a better life. My grandfather marched off to Europe in World War II and my grandmother worked in factories on the home front. I had a single mom who put herself through school, and would wake before dawn to make sure I got a decent education. Michelle can still remember her father heading out to his job as a city worker long after Multiple Sclerosis had made it impossible for him to walk without crutches.

Yes, our families believed in the American values of self-reliance and individual responsibility, and they instilled those values in their children. But they also believed in a country that rewards responsibility. A country that rewards hard work. A country built upon the promise of opportunity and upward mobility.

They believed in an America that gave my grandfather the chance to go to college because of the GI Bill. An America that gave my grandparents the chance to buy a home because of the Federal Housing Authority. An America that gave their children and grandchildren the chance to fulfill our dreams thanks to college loans and college scholarships.

It was an America where you didn't buy things you couldn't afford; where we didn't just think about today - we thought about tomorrow. An America that took pride in the goods it made, not just in the things it consumed. An America where a rising tide really did lift all boats, from the company CEO to the guy on the assembly line.

That's the America I believe in. That's what led me to work in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant on the South Side of Chicago when I was a community organizer. It's what led me to fight for factory workers at manufacturing plants that were closing across Illinois when I was a Senator. It's what led me to run for President - because I don't believe we can have a strong and growing economy without a strong and growing middle-class.

Now, much has happened since that election. The flawed policies and economic weaknesses of the previous decade culminated in the worst recession of our lifetimes. My hope was that the crisis would cause everyone, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. But as we all know, things didn't work out that way.

Some Republican leaders figured it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess. Others believed on principle that government shouldn't meddle in the markets, even when the markets were broken. But with the nation losing nearly 800,000 jobs the month I was sworn in, my most urgent task was to stop a financial meltdown and prevent this recession from becoming a second depression.

We've done that. The economy is growing again. The financial markets have stabilized. The private sector has created jobs for the last eight months in a row. And there are roughly three million Americans who are working today because of the economic plan we put in place.

But the truth is, progress has been painfully slow. Millions of jobs were lost before our policies even had a chance to take effect - a hole so deep that even though we've added jobs again, millions of Americans remain unemployed. Hundreds of thousands of families have lost their homes; millions more can barely pay the bills or make the mortgage. The middle-class is still treading water, while those aspiring to reach the middle class are doing everything they can to keep from drowning.

Meanwhile, some of the very steps that were necessary to save the economy - like temporarily supporting the banks and the auto industry - fed the perception that Washington is still ignoring the middle class in favor of special interests.

And so people are frustrated and angry and anxious about the future. I understand that. I also understand that in a political campaign, the easiest thing for the other side to do is ride this fear and anger all the way to Election Day.

That's what's happening right now. A few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House came here to Cleveland and offered his party's answer to our economic challenges. Now, it would be one thing if he admitted his party's mistakes during the eight years they were in power, and was offering a credible new approach to solving our country's problems.

But that's not what happened. There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner. There were no new ideas. There was just the same philosophy we already tried for the last decade - the same philosophy that led to this mess in the first place: cut more taxes for millionaires and cut more rules for corporations. Instead of coming together like past generations did to build a better country for our children and grandchildren, their argument is that we should let insurance companies go back to denying care to folks who are sick, and let credit card companies go back to raising rates without any reason. Instead of setting our sights higher, they're asking us to settle for a status quo of stagnant growth, eroding competitiveness, and a shrinking middle class.

Cleveland - that is not the America I know. That is not the America we believe in. A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what hasn't is the choice facing this country. It's still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. It's still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That's what this election is about. That's the choice you'll face in November.

I have a different vision for the future. I've never believed that government has all the answers to our problems. I've never believed that government's role is to create jobs or prosperity. I believe it's the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth. I believe it's the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don't hurt others.

But in the words of the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, I also believe that government should do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves.

That means making long-term investments in this country's future that individuals and corporations cannot make on their own: investments in education and clean energy; in basic research, technology, and infrastructure

That means making sure corporations live up to their responsibilities to treat consumers fairly and play by the same rules as everyone else; to look out for their workers and create jobs here at home.

And that means providing a hand up for middle-class families - so that if they work hard and meet their responsibilities, they can afford to raise their children, send them to college, see a doctor when they get sick, and retire with dignity and respect.

That's what we Democrats believe in - a vibrant free market, but one that works for everybody. That's our vision for a stronger economy and a growing middle-class. And that's the difference between what we and the Republicans in Congress are offering the American people right now.

Let me give you a few specific examples of our different approaches. This week, I proposed some additional steps to grow the economy and help businesses spur hiring. One of the keys to job creation is to encourage companies to invest more in the United States. But for years, our tax code has actually given billions of dollars in tax breaks that encourage companies to create jobs and profits in other countries.

I want to change that. Instead of tax loopholes that incentivize investment in overseas jobs, I'm proposing a more generous, permanent extension of the tax credit that goes to companies for all the research and innovation they do right here in America. And I'm proposing that all American businesses should be allowed to write off all the investment they do in 2011. This will help small businesses upgrade their plants and equipment, and will encourage large corporations to get off the sidelines and start putting their profits to work in places like Cleveland and Toledo and Dayton.

To most of you, this is just common sense. But not to Mr. Boehner and his allies. For years, Republicans have fought to keep these corporate loopholes open. In fact, when Mr. Boehner was here in Cleveland he attacked us for closing a few of these loopholes - and using the money to help states like Ohio keep hundreds of thousands of teachers and cops and firefighters on the job. He dismissed these jobs - teaching our kids, patrolling our streets, rushing into burning buildings - as quote "government jobs" - jobs that I guess he thought just weren't worth saving.

I couldn't disagree more. I think teachers and police officers and firefighters are part of what keep America strong. And I think if we're going to give tax breaks to companies, they should go to companies that create jobs in America - not those that create jobs overseas. That's one difference between the Republican vision and the Democratic vision. And that's what this election is all about.

Let me give you another example. We want to put more Americans back to work rebuilding America - our roads, railways, and runways. When the housing sector collapsed and the recession hit, one in every four jobs lost were in the construction industry. That's partly why our economic plan has invested in badly needed infrastructure projects over the last nineteen months - not just roads and bridges, but high-speed railroads and expanded broadband access. Altogether, these are projects that have led to thousands of good, private sector jobs, especially for those in the trades.

Mr. Boehner and the Republicans in Congress said no to these projects. Fought them tooth and nail. Though I should say that didn't stop a lot of them from showing up at the ribbon-cutting ceremonies and trying to take credit. That's always a sight to see.

Now, there are still thousands of miles of roads, railways, and runways left to repair and improve. And engineers, economists, governors and mayors of every political stripe believe that if we want to compete, we need to rebuild this vital infrastructure. There's no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains or the most modern airports - we want to put people to work building them right here in America. So this week, I've proposed a six year infrastructure plan that would start putting Americans to work right away. But despite the fact that this has traditionally been an issue with bipartisan support, Mr. Boehner has so far said no to infrastructure. That's bad for America - and that too is what this election is about.

I'll give you one final example of the differences between us and the Republicans, and that's on the issue of tax cuts. Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year. Now, I believe we ought to make the tax cuts for the middle class permanent. These families are the ones who saw their wages and incomes flatline over the last decade - and they deserve a break. And because they are more likely to spend on basic necessities, this will strengthen the economy as a whole.

But the Republican leader of the House doesn't want to stop there. Make no mistake: he and his party believe we should also give a permanent tax cut to the wealthiest two percent of Americans. With all the other budgetary pressures we have - with all the Republicans' talk about wanting to shrink the deficit - they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next ten years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 to folks who are already millionaires. These are among the only folks who saw their incomes rise when Republicans were in charge. And these are folks who are less likely to spend the money, which is why economists don't think tax breaks for the wealthy would do much to boost the economy.

So let me be clear to Mr. Boehner and everyone else: we should not hold middle class tax cuts hostage any longer. We are ready, this week, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less. For any income over this amount, the tax rates would go back to what they were under President Clinton. This isn't to punish folks who are better off - it's because we can't afford the $700 billion price tag. And for those who claim that this is bad for growth and bad for small businesses, let me remind you that with those tax rates in place, this country created 22 million jobs, raised incomes, and had the largest surplus in history.

In fact, if the Republican leadership in Congress really wants to help small businesses, they'll stop using legislative maneuvers to block an up-or-down vote on a small business jobs bill that's before the Senate right now. This is a bill that would do two things: cut taxes for small businesses and make loans more available for small businesses. It is fully paid for, and it was written by Democrats and Republicans. And yet, the other party continues to block this jobs bill - a delay that small business owners have said is actually leading them to put off hiring.

Look, I recognize that most of the Republicans in Congress have said no to just about every policy I've proposed since taking office. And on some issues, I realize it's because there are genuine philosophical differences. But on issues like this one, the only reason they're holding this up is politics, pure and simple. They're making the same calculation they made just before the inauguration: if I fail, they win. Well, they might think this will get them where they need to go in November, but it won't get our country where it needs to go in the long run.

So that's the choice, Ohio. Do we return to the same failed policies that ran our economy into a ditch, or do we keep moving forward with policies that are slowly pulling us out? Do we settle for a slow decline, or do we reach for an America with a growing economy and a thriving middle-class?

That's the America we see. We may not be there yet, but we know where this country needs to go.

We see a future where we invest in American innovation and American ingenuity; where we export more goods so we create more jobs here at home; where we make it easier to start a business or patent an invention; where we build a homegrown, clean energy industry - because I don't want to see new solar panels or electric cars or advanced batteries manufactured in Europe or Asia. I want to see them made right here in America, by American workers.

We see an America where every citizen has the skills and training to compete with any worker in the world. That's why we've set a goal to once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. That's why we're revitalizing our community colleges, and reforming our education system based on what works for our children - not what perpetuates the status quo.

We see an America where a growing middle-class is the beating heart of a growing economy. That's why I kept my campaign promise and gave a middle-class tax cut to 95% of working Americans. That's why we passed health insurance reform that stops insurance companies from jacking up your premiums at will or denying you coverage just because you get sick. That's why we passed financial reform that will end taxpayer-funded bailouts; reform that will stop credit card companies and mortgage lenders and Wall Street banks from taking advantage of taxpayers and consumers.

That's why we're trying to make it easier for workers to save for retirement, and fighting the efforts of some in the other party to privatize Social Security - because as long as I'm President, no one is going to take the retirement savings of a generation of Americans and hand it over to Wall Street.

That's why we're fighting to extend the child tax credit, and make permanent our new college tax credit. Because if we do, it will mean $10,000 in tuition relief for each child going to four years of college.

And finally, we see an America where we refuse to pass on the debt we inherited to the next generation.

Now, let me spend a minute on this issue, because we've heard a lot of moralizing on the other side about it. Along with tax cuts for the wealthy, the other party's main economic proposal is that they'll stop government spending.

Of course, they are right to be concerned about the long-term deficit - if we don't get a handle on it soon, it can endanger our future. And at a time when folks are tightening their belts at home, I understand why a lot of Americans feel it's time for government to show some discipline too.

But let's look at the facts. When these same Republicans - including Mr. Boehner - were in charge, the number of earmarks and pet projects went up, not down. These same Republicans turned a record surplus that Bill Clinton left into a record deficit. Just this year, these same Republicans voted against a bipartisan fiscal commission that they themselves proposed. And when you ask them what programs they'd actually cut, they usually don't have an answer.

That's not fiscal responsibility. That's not a serious plan to govern.

I'll be honest - I refuse to cut back on those investments that will grow our economy in the future - investments in areas like education and clean energy and technology. That's because economic growth is the single best way to bring down the deficit - and we need these investments to grow. But I am absolutely committed to fiscal responsibility, which is why I've already proposed freezing all discretionary spending unrelated to national security for the next three years. And once the bipartisan fiscal commission finishes its work, I will spend the next year making the tough choices necessary to further reduce our deficit and lower our debt.

Of course, reducing the deficit won't be easy. Making up for the 8 million lost jobs caused by this recession won't happen overnight. Not everything we've done over the last two years has worked as quickly as we had hoped, and I am keenly aware that not all our policies have been popular.

So no, our job is not easy. But you didn't elect me to do what's easy. You didn't elect me to just read the polls and figure out how to keep myself in office. You didn't elect me to avoid big problems. You elected me to do what's right. And as long as I'm President, that's exactly what I'll do.

This country is emerging from an incredibly difficult period in its history - an era of irresponsibility that stretched from Wall Street to Washington and had a devastating effect on a lot of people. We have started turning the corner on that era, but part of moving forward is returning to the time-honored values that built this country: hard work and self-reliance; responsibility for ourselves, but also responsibility for one another. It's about moving from an attitude that said "What's in it for me" to one that asks, "What's best for America? What's best for all our workers? What's best for all our businesses? What's best for our children?"

These values aren't Democratic or Republican. They aren't conservative or liberal values. They're American values. As Democrats, we take pride in what our party has accomplished over the last century: Social Security and the minimum wage; the GI Bill and Medicare; Civil Rights and worker's rights and women's rights. But we also recognize that throughout history, there has been a noble Republican vision as well, of what this country can be. It was the vision of Abraham Lincoln, who set up the first land grant colleges and launched the transcontinental railroad; the vision of Teddy Roosevelt, who used the power of government to break up monopolies; the vision of Dwight Eisenhower, who helped build the Interstate Highway System. And yes, the vision of Ronald Reagan, who despite his aversion to government, was willing to help save Social Security for future generations.

These were serious leaders for serious times. They were great politicians, but they didn't spend all their time playing games or scoring points. They didn't always prey on people's fears and anxieties. They made mistakes, but they did what they thought was in the best interest of their country and its people.

That's what the American people expect of us today - Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. That's the debate they deserve. That's the leadership we owe them.

I know that folks are worried about the future. I know there's still a lot of hurt out here. And when times are tough, I know it can be tempting to give in to cynicism and fear; to doubt and division - to set our sights lower and settle for something less.

But that is not who we are, Ohio. Those are not the values that built this country. We are here today because in the worst of times, the people who came before us brought out the best in America. Because our parents and grandparents and great-grandparents were willing to work and sacrifice for us. They were willing to take great risks, and face great hardship, and reach for a future that would give us the chance at a better life. They knew that this country is greater than the sum of its parts - that America is not about the ambitions of any one individual, but the aspirations of an entire people and an entire nation.

That's who we are. That is our legacy. And I'm convinced that if we're willing to summon those values today; if we're willing again to choose hope over fear; to choose the future over the past; to come together once more around the great project of national renewal, then we will restore our economy; rebuild our middle-class; and reclaim the American Dream for the next generation.

Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.

© Copyright 3910 Sun-Times Media, LLC
Terms of Use • Privacy Policy • Submission Guidelines • About Our Ads

Remember to click on links to registering to vote.