Forward? Or Backward? The 2010 Elections

By Robby Stern

The 2008 election created high expectations. The promise of a new forward thinking President and an overwhelmingly Democratic controlled Congress meant we could not only reverse the terrible policies of the abysmal Bush era but we could finally move a progressive agenda. At the state level, many believed the overwhelming Democratic majorities combined with a Democratic governor meant we could address the terrible economic recession in a humane manner that created the least suffering possible.

Disappointment shadows us as we face the 2010 election. There is a significant distance between what we had hoped for and what has occurred. At the state level, the legislature did raise some revenue, but not enough and they lacked the courage to attack the tax breaks that have been handed out like Halloween candy. The continuing tidal wave of revenue shortfalls promises even more devastating cuts.

At the federal level, the stimulus package, while helpful, was not nearly big enough. The health care reform legislation, while historic, could have been so much better and the same can be said about Wall Street Reform legislation.

So many things are still on the table including Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the Employee Free Choice Act, the Fair Pay Act, Global Warming legislation and legislation that overturns the terrible Supreme Court decision that handed our electoral process over to the wealthy corporations and Wall Street. We feel these disappointments keenly. But we cannot give in to cynicism and despair. WE MUST BE ACTIVE IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION BECAUSE IF WE AREN’T, OUR COUNTRY AND OUR STATE GO IN ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG DIRECTION.

As I am writing this column, the House Republican Caucus just announced their Pledge for our country. They will repeal the health care reform act, retain the tax cuts for the wealthy, scapegoat immigrants, move to privatize Social Security, and cut spending for much needed social programs. They are clear. They are telling us what they will do. They will continue to blame the unemployed for their fate and do as much as they can to weaken organized labor. We can assume, from the filibusters of the Senate Republicans, that they are in lock step with their House Republican colleagues. WE MUST DO ALL THAT WE CAN TO NOT LET THESE PEOPLE GAIN CONTROL OF CONGRESS.

At the state level, both the election of candidates and the initiatives are critical. We are faced with q fundamental question: Who do we want to write the biannual budget for the next two years? It is clear that had the Republicans been in control of the state legislature in 2009-2010, no revenue would have been raised.

On the initiative and referendum front, the choices could not be clearer. I-1107, robs the state of significant revenue raised in the 2010 session – more than $100 million per year by repealing the soda and candy tax. I–1100 and I–1105, privatizing liquor sales, would create an explosion of liquor vendors in our state. In addition, I-1100 would cost state and local governments $275 million over five years and I–1105 would cost more than $700 million over five years. These two initiatives would also eliminate approximately 800 good family wage jobs for workers represented by UFCW 21. I–1053 is Tim Eyeman’s initiative and would absolutely tie the hands of legislators who might want to close tax loopholes or raise additional revenue. I–1082 will privatize our Workers Compensation system and turn it over to the likes of AIG and Liberty Mutual. Corporate interests are spending HUGE dollars to pass these five initiatives and boost their profits at the expense of every day working people. They are the “Dirty Five” and PSARA recommends a “No” vote on each one of them.

Much has been written about I–1098, the high income tax initiative. This could be the biggest assistance in the history of our state to revenue for education and health care since our regressive tax system was developed. The initiative is fair. It supports those things we most value. I–1098 presents us an historic opportunity. Finally, R–52 addresses two desperate needs; 1. It creates between 30,000 & 40,000 jobs and 2. It will allow the long overdue physical upgrading of our educational infrastructure.

Will we continue create the groundwork, giving us the opportunity to move forward? Or will the forces and interests who will take us backward achieve a victory in this election? The answer is up to us!