By Will Parry
PSARA Vice President Bette Reed and I witnessed labor history in the making on the evening of Tuesday, June 7.
The setting: A modest hall at Highline Community College. PSARA was one of an impressive array of faith and social action organizations gathered to support the launch of OUR Walmart – shorthand for Organization United for Respect at Walmart.
The stars of the evening were a group of courageous women and men who actually work – or have worked – at Walmart. One after another, each “associate” -- the company term for its workers –- spoke of life under the soulless merchandising behemoth: Poverty-level wages. Too few hours for a decent paycheck. Arbitrary discipline. Above all, lack of respect.
A heroic special guest, Kalpona Akter, gave a first-hand account of the plight of workers in the Asian sweatshops that make the products Walmart sells. A leader in the Bangladesh Center for Worker Solidarity, Akter is the victim of employer-fabricated charges. Currently out on bail, she faces life in prison or possibly the death penalty if convicted.
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 21 brought the Walmart workers and the community leaders together as part of a nationwide campaign to persuade Walmart to become a decent corporate citizen that respects its workers and its suppliers. The Highline Community College meeting is being replicated in other cities as the campaign picks up momentum.
“At the UFCW, we know what makes our union strong: members standing together for respect and dignity in the workplace,” said Elena Perez, Local 21 community organizer. “In the grocery industry, union contracts guarantee protections and a voice on the job. But at the company with the most grocery sales in America, our fellow workers are not receiving the respect they deserve.
“We are making change at Walmart,” Perez said. “We are making change by working directly with Walmart Associates to claim the respect on the job they deserve. We are making change by holding Walmart corporate managers accountable to hourly employees and the public for their practices.”
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Norm Schut, 89
Norm Schut, the respected founder of both the Retired Public Employees Council of Washington and the Senior Citizens Lobby, died March 18 at the age of 89.
During his seven years as president and chief lobbyist for the Senior Citizens Lobby, Schut applied his mastery of pension issues and of the legislative process to establish and maintain the system of retirement benefits enjoyed by Washington’s retired public employees today.
Recognizing that seniors were a largely untapped political resource, Schut encouraged his union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, to build its strong national retiree organization, which continues today to support the legislative programs of AFSCME and the broader labor movement.
During his seven years as president and chief lobbyist for the Senior Citizens Lobby, Schut applied his mastery of pension issues and of the legislative process to establish and maintain the system of retirement benefits enjoyed by Washington’s retired public employees today.
Recognizing that seniors were a largely untapped political resource, Schut encouraged his union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, to build its strong national retiree organization, which continues today to support the legislative programs of AFSCME and the broader labor movement.
SO MUCH GOING ON!
Because of our terrific activist membership, PSARA is being asked by organizations from many different corners of our community to assist them in their efforts. Much, but not all of what we do is reflected in articles in this newsletter.
Besides actively and continuously working to preserve and improve Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, we are participating in many other important struggles to improve the lives of people in our communities, our state, our nation and our world. PSARA volunteer activists fan out throughout our community doing the work to ‘repair the world’.
All of you make this possible! Thank you for your volunteer time, your financial support and for being members of PSARA. We welcome your participation at whatever level works for you.
PSARA has a new email program to communicate with our members who have email addresses and are willing to hear from us. These emails will ask you to take various actions from sending emails to attending meetings to participating in “street heat”. We will give you the information you need and if you can participate…great!
Just know that by helping to support this newsletter and our organization you are helping PSARA be a progressive community force in the larger struggle for social and economic justice.
Besides actively and continuously working to preserve and improve Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, we are participating in many other important struggles to improve the lives of people in our communities, our state, our nation and our world. PSARA volunteer activists fan out throughout our community doing the work to ‘repair the world’.
All of you make this possible! Thank you for your volunteer time, your financial support and for being members of PSARA. We welcome your participation at whatever level works for you.
PSARA has a new email program to communicate with our members who have email addresses and are willing to hear from us. These emails will ask you to take various actions from sending emails to attending meetings to participating in “street heat”. We will give you the information you need and if you can participate…great!
Just know that by helping to support this newsletter and our organization you are helping PSARA be a progressive community force in the larger struggle for social and economic justice.
Our chance to be heard
Here’s our chance to help Congress address the nation’s crisis of unemployment.
Starting at noon Saturday, July 23, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus will open up a mike at the South Seattle Community College’s Brockey Conference Center.
The Congressional delegation is touring the nation to listen to the people – to hear first-hand the gritty details of what unemployment does to workers, their families and their communities – and to hear the ideas of the people on measures the government can take to create living-wage jobs.
Neighborhood activists throughout the Seattle area are spreading the word to build a turnout that reflects the severity of the crisis.
Sponsored by ProgressiveCongress.org, the forum will hear from Representative Jim McDermott and members of the touring delegation.
But the emphasis will be on hearing from their constituents – their experience and their ideas for a serious Congressional jobs program.
So line up at the mike on July 23 – or write your ideas on the postcards that will be available at the hearing. It’s our chance to speak out – and to be heard!
Starting at noon Saturday, July 23, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus will open up a mike at the South Seattle Community College’s Brockey Conference Center.
The Congressional delegation is touring the nation to listen to the people – to hear first-hand the gritty details of what unemployment does to workers, their families and their communities – and to hear the ideas of the people on measures the government can take to create living-wage jobs.
Neighborhood activists throughout the Seattle area are spreading the word to build a turnout that reflects the severity of the crisis.
Sponsored by ProgressiveCongress.org, the forum will hear from Representative Jim McDermott and members of the touring delegation.
But the emphasis will be on hearing from their constituents – their experience and their ideas for a serious Congressional jobs program.
So line up at the mike on July 23 – or write your ideas on the postcards that will be available at the hearing. It’s our chance to speak out – and to be heard!
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Caring Across Generations
By Hilary Stern
As my parents age, I find myself constantly worrying about the care and support they receive. I know that someday, my children will be doing the same for me. For many, maintaining a quality life in old age means staying at home with a caretaker. Yet we question, are there enough care workers? Are they trained? Do they feel respected in their jobs?
As a nation, we are on the brink of a crisis in care. As we baby boomers age, the number of people needing long-term care is projected to grow from 13 million in 2000 to 27 million by 2050. There are currently only about 3 million long-term care workers. Families already face the challenge of finding quality care for their loved ones.
Currently, direct care workers and domestic workers filling these roles often work in strenuous and exploitative conditions with limited support or rights. These workers are providing a vital service to our families and communities, yet often lack access to training, career growth, and pathways to citizenship.
All of us - retirees, baby boomers, family members, and workers, have a stake in the issue.
Nationally, we are taking bold action to solve the problem. A visionary campaign, Caring Across Generations, seeks to provide dignity and respect to our elderly, and their caregivers. The values driven campaign brings together care providers, care recipients and their families to address the care gap, uplift our caregivers, and ultimately transform long-term care in the United States.
The campaign is being led by a national coalition of organizations representing women, older adults, people with disabilities, domestic workers, community organizations, students, labor and the faith community.
The national campaign has five core policy goals, the “Five Fingers of the Caring Hand”:
1) The creation of new, quality jobs in home care to meet the rapidly growing need for care,
2) Labor standards and improved job quality for the existing jobs and new jobs,
3) Training and career ladders for home care workers, to bring recognition to the work and improve the quality of care,
4) A new visa category and path to citizenship for immigrant care workers,
5) Support for individuals and families in need of support and access to quality care, including a tax credit for people paying out of pocket for care.
On July 12, I will join others from Seattle and from across the country in Washington DC for the Care Congress, uniting a diverse cross section of the community for a national dialogue about the future of care. We plan to bring that energy and dialogue back to Seattle.
We invite you to join us in shaping the effort and defining what care could look like here in Washington State. Your participation and voice as members of PSARA is essential for making change. I look forward to working together to create the support, care, and dignified jobs that will strengthen our families, our economy, and our community.
(Hilary Stern is Executive Director of Casa Latina and a member of PSARA.)
As my parents age, I find myself constantly worrying about the care and support they receive. I know that someday, my children will be doing the same for me. For many, maintaining a quality life in old age means staying at home with a caretaker. Yet we question, are there enough care workers? Are they trained? Do they feel respected in their jobs?
As a nation, we are on the brink of a crisis in care. As we baby boomers age, the number of people needing long-term care is projected to grow from 13 million in 2000 to 27 million by 2050. There are currently only about 3 million long-term care workers. Families already face the challenge of finding quality care for their loved ones.
Currently, direct care workers and domestic workers filling these roles often work in strenuous and exploitative conditions with limited support or rights. These workers are providing a vital service to our families and communities, yet often lack access to training, career growth, and pathways to citizenship.
All of us - retirees, baby boomers, family members, and workers, have a stake in the issue.
Nationally, we are taking bold action to solve the problem. A visionary campaign, Caring Across Generations, seeks to provide dignity and respect to our elderly, and their caregivers. The values driven campaign brings together care providers, care recipients and their families to address the care gap, uplift our caregivers, and ultimately transform long-term care in the United States.
The campaign is being led by a national coalition of organizations representing women, older adults, people with disabilities, domestic workers, community organizations, students, labor and the faith community.
The national campaign has five core policy goals, the “Five Fingers of the Caring Hand”:
1) The creation of new, quality jobs in home care to meet the rapidly growing need for care,
2) Labor standards and improved job quality for the existing jobs and new jobs,
3) Training and career ladders for home care workers, to bring recognition to the work and improve the quality of care,
4) A new visa category and path to citizenship for immigrant care workers,
5) Support for individuals and families in need of support and access to quality care, including a tax credit for people paying out of pocket for care.
On July 12, I will join others from Seattle and from across the country in Washington DC for the Care Congress, uniting a diverse cross section of the community for a national dialogue about the future of care. We plan to bring that energy and dialogue back to Seattle.
We invite you to join us in shaping the effort and defining what care could look like here in Washington State. Your participation and voice as members of PSARA is essential for making change. I look forward to working together to create the support, care, and dignified jobs that will strengthen our families, our economy, and our community.
(Hilary Stern is Executive Director of Casa Latina and a member of PSARA.)
Our readers come through for us…again!
Here they are! Our wonderful supporters! The following members had generously responded to our fund appeal through June 22. We’ll acknowledge those who contribute after that date in our August newsletter.
Patricia Agostino, Gerald Alexander, Max Applebaum, Sally Ashford, Arne Auvinen, Maureen Bo, Sarah Bogar, Forbes Bottomly, David Brennan, Tim Burns, Mordy & Chaya Burstein, Patricia Ceis, Lawrence & Hideko Coghill, Orabelle Connally, Cordy Cooke, Mark Dalton, Charles Davis, Dr. Ronald Dear, Gene & Marilyn Derig, Woodrow Ditlefsen, Bill Dodds, Edward Erickson, Bill & Brigitte Farris, Dianne Fehl, Robert Fletcher, Richard Forester, Jeanette Franks, Beatrice Fritts, Larry Gabrielson,
Steve Garey, Richard Grassl, Phyllis & George Haas, R. E. Hallowell, Sharon Harris,
Rick Horner, Don Houtchens, Randy Joseph, Nancy Juneby, Lawrence Kenney, Tim Klima, Edie Koch, Dvorah Kost, Vivian Lee, Margaret Lemberg, Nydia Levick, Rachael Levine, Owen Linch, Lawrence Lowther, Tim Lynch, Christine Martin, Renee Maurel, Kathy McElhaney, Vanette Molson-Turner, Gerald Mongrain, Shelby Mooney, Don Moreland, Bruce Morris, Bob & Nina Murano, Clarence Opland, Eleanor Owen, Alice Owens, Donnamarie Palermo, Naomi Parry, Will Parry, Henry Pemberton, Donald & Norma Petersen, Herbert & Muriel Pfeiffer, Patricia Prince, Gwen Rench, Marilyn Ring-Nelson,
Nancy Rising, Laurel Robel, Mary Lee Robinson, Randy Rowland, Gladys Russell, Janet Salomone, John Saul, Carl Schwartz, LeRoy Scott, Randy Scott, Chris Sharpe, Oliver Simonson, Jean Slocum, Walter Smith, James & Diane Snell, Millie & Jack Sosne, Robby Stern, Karen Stevenson, Alex Stone, Violet Storm, Tak Takamura, Mason Taylor, Barbara Wenzl, Trudy White, Gordon Wilson, Mary Wood, Elizabeth Yates, Stella Zahn
Aero Machinists Dist. Lodge 751, I.F.P.T.E Local 17, Laborers Local 440, Pacific NW Newspaper Guild.
Patricia Agostino, Gerald Alexander, Max Applebaum, Sally Ashford, Arne Auvinen, Maureen Bo, Sarah Bogar, Forbes Bottomly, David Brennan, Tim Burns, Mordy & Chaya Burstein, Patricia Ceis, Lawrence & Hideko Coghill, Orabelle Connally, Cordy Cooke, Mark Dalton, Charles Davis, Dr. Ronald Dear, Gene & Marilyn Derig, Woodrow Ditlefsen, Bill Dodds, Edward Erickson, Bill & Brigitte Farris, Dianne Fehl, Robert Fletcher, Richard Forester, Jeanette Franks, Beatrice Fritts, Larry Gabrielson,
Steve Garey, Richard Grassl, Phyllis & George Haas, R. E. Hallowell, Sharon Harris,
Rick Horner, Don Houtchens, Randy Joseph, Nancy Juneby, Lawrence Kenney, Tim Klima, Edie Koch, Dvorah Kost, Vivian Lee, Margaret Lemberg, Nydia Levick, Rachael Levine, Owen Linch, Lawrence Lowther, Tim Lynch, Christine Martin, Renee Maurel, Kathy McElhaney, Vanette Molson-Turner, Gerald Mongrain, Shelby Mooney, Don Moreland, Bruce Morris, Bob & Nina Murano, Clarence Opland, Eleanor Owen, Alice Owens, Donnamarie Palermo, Naomi Parry, Will Parry, Henry Pemberton, Donald & Norma Petersen, Herbert & Muriel Pfeiffer, Patricia Prince, Gwen Rench, Marilyn Ring-Nelson,
Nancy Rising, Laurel Robel, Mary Lee Robinson, Randy Rowland, Gladys Russell, Janet Salomone, John Saul, Carl Schwartz, LeRoy Scott, Randy Scott, Chris Sharpe, Oliver Simonson, Jean Slocum, Walter Smith, James & Diane Snell, Millie & Jack Sosne, Robby Stern, Karen Stevenson, Alex Stone, Violet Storm, Tak Takamura, Mason Taylor, Barbara Wenzl, Trudy White, Gordon Wilson, Mary Wood, Elizabeth Yates, Stella Zahn
Aero Machinists Dist. Lodge 751, I.F.P.T.E Local 17, Laborers Local 440, Pacific NW Newspaper Guild.
Is AARP ready to cut a deal on Social Security
By Will Parry
Is AARP’s national leadership ready to cut a deal at the expense of the millions who rely on Social Security for their daily bread?
A story in the Wall Street Journal on June 17 reported that AARP, after a “wrenching” internal debate, “is dropping its long-standing opposition to cutting Social Security benefits.”
CEO A. Barry Rand initially denied that the AARP’s position had changed. But Rand’s “clarifying” follow-up statement did nothing to insulate his organization from the outrage of Social Security’s defenders.
“AARP has now concluded that change is inevitable and wants to be at the table to minimize the pain,” the Journal reported. It quoted AARP Policy Director John Rother: “The ship was sailing. I wanted to be at the wheel when that happens.”
“Everybody knows we need to look at a package of different changes to Social Security to make it stronger for the long term,” said David Certner, AARP legislative policy director. “And we’re certainly willing to talk about a package of changes that will keep Social Security strong.”
The AARP readiness to open Social Security to troubling revisions triggered a firestorm of protest from the many advocates who have been fighting both to preserve the integrity of Social Security and to strengthen its role as the nation’s prime social insurance program. AARP’s own switchboard was reportedly deluged with protest calls from its members.
The New York Times said AARP’s stance “could provide added ammunition to fiscal conservatives who have sought unsuccessfully to restructure Social Security and chip away at the benefits it promises older Americans.”
CNN reported that the AARP’s change in posture “has already sent shock waves through the Beltway’s large and influential entitlement reform community. It’s prompted calls from lawmakers and centrist and conservative groups for Congress to seize the initiative and agree to cut benefits.”
One such centrist group, the think tank “Third Way,” immediately welcomed the news.
“Today marks a watershed moment in American politics,” said Jonathan Cowan, president of Third Way. “Now that they (AARP) have opened the door to reform, it is time for lawmakers to walk through it.”
Significantly, ex-Senator Alan Simpson, an archenemy of Social Security, welcomed the AARP position. “If they come around and say they are ready to do something, it will be like the Arctic icecap cracking,” Simpson said.
AARP’s stance gives cover to those in Congress, Democrat as well as Republican, who are looking for an excuse to rob Social Security in the name of attacking the budget deficit.
“The timing of AARP’s statements was particularly bad,” said Max Richtman, executive vice president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, “because it came in the midst of deliberations between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans about the debt ceiling and overall deficit reduction.
“AARP is the 800-pound gorilla, but they do not speak for seniors,” Richtman said.
The Alliance for Retired Americans immediately rejected AARP’s policy of compromise and retreat.
.
“There is no ambiguity on where the Alliance for Retired Americans stands on Social Security,” said ARA Executive Director Ed Coyle. “Never has been, never will be. We are against Social Security cuts for seniors.”
That fighting position is shared by the broad Strengthen Social Security coalition, whose 300 affiliated organizations include ARA. In recent months, as the deficit hawks stepped up their assault on the integrity of the program, AARP declined an invitation to join the coalition.
“AARP does not speak for all seniors,” Coyle said. “And on this topic, probably not for many of their own members.”
Over the years as advocates fought to defend and strengthen Social Security and Medicare, AARP has largely gone its own way. In 2003, the organization lent critical support to the enactment of a version of Medicare Part D that provided drugs to seniors, but enriched the insurance and pharmaceutical industries in the process.
In Washington State, AARP representatives play a constructive and cooperative role in the Senior Lobby. But no state-level activity can offset failure to defend the integrity of Social Security.
President Robby Stern of the Puget Sound ARA said the AARP stance “has opened the door for the enemies of Social Security and created cover for weak-kneed Congressional representatives and senators to do real damage.”
From AARP CEO Rand’s statement, Stern said, “we really do not know where they stand on such critical proposals as (1) raising the retirement age; (2) changing the COLA to one less advantageous to beneficiaries; (3) reducing benefits for some Social Security recipients; (4) eliminating or raising the cap to fully fund Social Security for the next century; (5) allowing the FICA holiday for wage earners to lapse at the end of the year; or (5) opposing any tax holiday for employer FICA contributions.”
“It is time for AARP to be specific on where they stand on specific proposals, both positive and negative,” Stern said. “It is not enough to state that they are against privatization.”
Is AARP’s national leadership ready to cut a deal at the expense of the millions who rely on Social Security for their daily bread?
A story in the Wall Street Journal on June 17 reported that AARP, after a “wrenching” internal debate, “is dropping its long-standing opposition to cutting Social Security benefits.”
CEO A. Barry Rand initially denied that the AARP’s position had changed. But Rand’s “clarifying” follow-up statement did nothing to insulate his organization from the outrage of Social Security’s defenders.
“AARP has now concluded that change is inevitable and wants to be at the table to minimize the pain,” the Journal reported. It quoted AARP Policy Director John Rother: “The ship was sailing. I wanted to be at the wheel when that happens.”
“Everybody knows we need to look at a package of different changes to Social Security to make it stronger for the long term,” said David Certner, AARP legislative policy director. “And we’re certainly willing to talk about a package of changes that will keep Social Security strong.”
The AARP readiness to open Social Security to troubling revisions triggered a firestorm of protest from the many advocates who have been fighting both to preserve the integrity of Social Security and to strengthen its role as the nation’s prime social insurance program. AARP’s own switchboard was reportedly deluged with protest calls from its members.
The New York Times said AARP’s stance “could provide added ammunition to fiscal conservatives who have sought unsuccessfully to restructure Social Security and chip away at the benefits it promises older Americans.”
CNN reported that the AARP’s change in posture “has already sent shock waves through the Beltway’s large and influential entitlement reform community. It’s prompted calls from lawmakers and centrist and conservative groups for Congress to seize the initiative and agree to cut benefits.”
One such centrist group, the think tank “Third Way,” immediately welcomed the news.
“Today marks a watershed moment in American politics,” said Jonathan Cowan, president of Third Way. “Now that they (AARP) have opened the door to reform, it is time for lawmakers to walk through it.”
Significantly, ex-Senator Alan Simpson, an archenemy of Social Security, welcomed the AARP position. “If they come around and say they are ready to do something, it will be like the Arctic icecap cracking,” Simpson said.
AARP’s stance gives cover to those in Congress, Democrat as well as Republican, who are looking for an excuse to rob Social Security in the name of attacking the budget deficit.
“The timing of AARP’s statements was particularly bad,” said Max Richtman, executive vice president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, “because it came in the midst of deliberations between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans about the debt ceiling and overall deficit reduction.
“AARP is the 800-pound gorilla, but they do not speak for seniors,” Richtman said.
The Alliance for Retired Americans immediately rejected AARP’s policy of compromise and retreat.
.
“There is no ambiguity on where the Alliance for Retired Americans stands on Social Security,” said ARA Executive Director Ed Coyle. “Never has been, never will be. We are against Social Security cuts for seniors.”
That fighting position is shared by the broad Strengthen Social Security coalition, whose 300 affiliated organizations include ARA. In recent months, as the deficit hawks stepped up their assault on the integrity of the program, AARP declined an invitation to join the coalition.
“AARP does not speak for all seniors,” Coyle said. “And on this topic, probably not for many of their own members.”
Over the years as advocates fought to defend and strengthen Social Security and Medicare, AARP has largely gone its own way. In 2003, the organization lent critical support to the enactment of a version of Medicare Part D that provided drugs to seniors, but enriched the insurance and pharmaceutical industries in the process.
In Washington State, AARP representatives play a constructive and cooperative role in the Senior Lobby. But no state-level activity can offset failure to defend the integrity of Social Security.
President Robby Stern of the Puget Sound ARA said the AARP stance “has opened the door for the enemies of Social Security and created cover for weak-kneed Congressional representatives and senators to do real damage.”
From AARP CEO Rand’s statement, Stern said, “we really do not know where they stand on such critical proposals as (1) raising the retirement age; (2) changing the COLA to one less advantageous to beneficiaries; (3) reducing benefits for some Social Security recipients; (4) eliminating or raising the cap to fully fund Social Security for the next century; (5) allowing the FICA holiday for wage earners to lapse at the end of the year; or (5) opposing any tax holiday for employer FICA contributions.”
“It is time for AARP to be specific on where they stand on specific proposals, both positive and negative,” Stern said. “It is not enough to state that they are against privatization.”
A very bad decision: What are they thinking!
By Robby Stern
We recently received notice that the Social Security Administration plans to close their Seattle offices at 9th & Lenora and in the Rainier Valley and consolidate these offices at the Jackson Federal Building in downtown Seattle. They pose it as a cost saving measure.
By closing these two field offices and relocating to the Jackson Federal Building, the Agency is denying access to face-to-face services to individuals without current valid state or federal ID which is required to enter the Jackson Federal Building. Individuals who lose their ID or have it stolen will often make the Social Security office one of their first stops as they try to recreate their essential documents.
Those most heavily impacted are the poor, the homeless, and those living on Social Security Disability. They are the least likely to have the essential ID to enter the Jackson Federal Building. Those who carry all their possessions with them will have enormous difficulty getting their possessions into the building. They will not be able to leave it outside the Federal Building because unattended stuff is viewed as a potential security hazard.
When we discussed the issue at the last PSARA Executive Board meeting, it turns out one of PSARAs Executive Board members would be unable to access the Social Security office if it is relocated as planned.
Recently I heard from a wonderful and compassionate attorney who represents Social Security Disability clients. She stated that the Jackson Federal Building “is an impossible barrier to accessing the local SSA office for many of our clients who are homeless and have had their IDs stolen. This does not touch upon the problem of numerous Social Security disability recipients that deal with active anxiety, personality disorders, or paranoid schizophrenia every day and will not come near such a building.”
We need to persuade the Social Security Administration to back away from this insensitive and unacceptable relocation. We have contacted Rep, McDermott’s office and will also be discussing it with Senators Cantwell and Murray. Rep. McDermott has sent an inquiry to the Social Security Administration and is awaiting a response.
In the meanwhile, I want to urge all of you to email Regional Commissioner Stanley Friendship at stanley.c.friendship@SSA.gov, phone # (206) 615-2107, stating your grave concern with the proposed consolidation in the Jackson Federal Building. It would also be very helpful if you were to contact your Congressional Representative and our two Senators asking them to step in and stop this terrible decision from being implemented.
We recently received notice that the Social Security Administration plans to close their Seattle offices at 9th & Lenora and in the Rainier Valley and consolidate these offices at the Jackson Federal Building in downtown Seattle. They pose it as a cost saving measure.
By closing these two field offices and relocating to the Jackson Federal Building, the Agency is denying access to face-to-face services to individuals without current valid state or federal ID which is required to enter the Jackson Federal Building. Individuals who lose their ID or have it stolen will often make the Social Security office one of their first stops as they try to recreate their essential documents.
Those most heavily impacted are the poor, the homeless, and those living on Social Security Disability. They are the least likely to have the essential ID to enter the Jackson Federal Building. Those who carry all their possessions with them will have enormous difficulty getting their possessions into the building. They will not be able to leave it outside the Federal Building because unattended stuff is viewed as a potential security hazard.
When we discussed the issue at the last PSARA Executive Board meeting, it turns out one of PSARAs Executive Board members would be unable to access the Social Security office if it is relocated as planned.
Recently I heard from a wonderful and compassionate attorney who represents Social Security Disability clients. She stated that the Jackson Federal Building “is an impossible barrier to accessing the local SSA office for many of our clients who are homeless and have had their IDs stolen. This does not touch upon the problem of numerous Social Security disability recipients that deal with active anxiety, personality disorders, or paranoid schizophrenia every day and will not come near such a building.”
We need to persuade the Social Security Administration to back away from this insensitive and unacceptable relocation. We have contacted Rep, McDermott’s office and will also be discussing it with Senators Cantwell and Murray. Rep. McDermott has sent an inquiry to the Social Security Administration and is awaiting a response.
In the meanwhile, I want to urge all of you to email Regional Commissioner Stanley Friendship at stanley.c.friendship@SSA.gov, phone # (206) 615-2107, stating your grave concern with the proposed consolidation in the Jackson Federal Building. It would also be very helpful if you were to contact your Congressional Representative and our two Senators asking them to step in and stop this terrible decision from being implemented.
Healthy send-off for paid sick days measure
Following months of collaboration, the Seattle Coalition for a Healthy Workforce and local business leaders have presented a new, common-ground paid sick days proposal to the Seattle City Council.
Introduced by Councilmember Nick Licata at a press conference June 21, the proposed ordinance has the support of more than 70 organizations and a growing list of local businesses. Also on hand to endorse the proposal were Mayor Mike McGinn and Councilmembers Sally Clark and Jean Godden.
“Everyone gets sick at some point,” Licata said. “We don’t want a situation where people feel they have to stay home and lose a paycheck, or go to work and spread their disease.”
The proposal would apply to all Seattle workers: Food service workers, grocery workers, health care workers, and more. It would allow up to five days’ paid sick leave for businesses with fewer than 50 employees; up to seven days for businesses between 50 and 249 employees; and up to nine days for businesses with more than 250 employees. Part-time and contract workers in businesses of every size could also earn paid sick days.
The proposal was the fruit of collaborative discussions between Seattle business leaders and the Seattle Coalition. “Everyone around the table was committed to the shared goal of creating a healthier Seattle,” said Marilyn Watkins of the coalition. “This innovative proposal was the result. It is a responsible way to protect Seattle workers, children and public health, while giving small business the flexibility they need to provide paid sick leave for their employees.”
“Introduction of the ordinance is the first step in the legislative process,” said PSARA President Robby Stern. “Our members are sure to be active in working for its enactment. The city council needs to know that paid sick days are important to you, your family, friends and neighbors.
“Please take time to spread the word, to phone or e-mail council members, and to turn out for the public hearing from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. July 6 at City Hall.“
To learn more contact Gabriela at 206-529-6363 or Gabriela@eoionline.org or visit the website: www.seattlehealthyworkforce.org.
Introduced by Councilmember Nick Licata at a press conference June 21, the proposed ordinance has the support of more than 70 organizations and a growing list of local businesses. Also on hand to endorse the proposal were Mayor Mike McGinn and Councilmembers Sally Clark and Jean Godden.
“Everyone gets sick at some point,” Licata said. “We don’t want a situation where people feel they have to stay home and lose a paycheck, or go to work and spread their disease.”
The proposal would apply to all Seattle workers: Food service workers, grocery workers, health care workers, and more. It would allow up to five days’ paid sick leave for businesses with fewer than 50 employees; up to seven days for businesses between 50 and 249 employees; and up to nine days for businesses with more than 250 employees. Part-time and contract workers in businesses of every size could also earn paid sick days.
The proposal was the fruit of collaborative discussions between Seattle business leaders and the Seattle Coalition. “Everyone around the table was committed to the shared goal of creating a healthier Seattle,” said Marilyn Watkins of the coalition. “This innovative proposal was the result. It is a responsible way to protect Seattle workers, children and public health, while giving small business the flexibility they need to provide paid sick leave for their employees.”
“Introduction of the ordinance is the first step in the legislative process,” said PSARA President Robby Stern. “Our members are sure to be active in working for its enactment. The city council needs to know that paid sick days are important to you, your family, friends and neighbors.
“Please take time to spread the word, to phone or e-mail council members, and to turn out for the public hearing from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. July 6 at City Hall.“
To learn more contact Gabriela at 206-529-6363 or Gabriela@eoionline.org or visit the website: www.seattlehealthyworkforce.org.
How legislature dealt with health care needs
(Content for the following report was provided by citizen lobbyists affiliated with the Healthy Washington Coalition.)
Washington’s legislature fell well short of dealing effectively with critical health care needs during the 2011 regular and special sessions.
Because legislators failed to offset a multi-billion dollar revenue shortfall by closing any of a multitude of existing tax loopholes, deep cuts in essential services were inevitable to balance the biennial budget.
Legislators wrestled with agonizing decisions about funding for human services in the third year of a grinding recession marked by long-term double-digit unemployment.
Among the programs that felt the budget ax to one degree or another were the Basic Health Plan, Apple Health for Kids, Maternity Support Services for low-income women, Family Planning services, Public Health departments, and Primary Care and Clinic services.
The legislature also confronted the challenge of maintaining a viable healthcare safety net while preparing for the establishment of a state health care exchange in 2014, as mandated by the federal Affordable Care Act.
The health care exchange bill signed by Governor Christine Gregoire provides for the mandated exchange, but advocates were disappointed by its failure either to provide a public option, or to require the exchange to function as an active purchaser of care.
Passage of the bill was essential to maintain the state’s eligibility for federal funding to implement the new exchange.
Here’s the good news/bad news breakdown of legislative action on specific health care programs:
Basic Health Plan: The governor had proposed its elimination. The legislature tempered that drastic proposal, but froze out new enrollees for two years, shrinking BHP coverage to 34,000 by 2013. Some 150,000 uninsured men, women and children are already stuck on the waiting list.
Apple Health for Kids: The governor’s proposal to end coverage of 27,000 undocumented children was shelved, as was a state senate proposal to end the state’s commitment to cover all eligible children. The budget as adopted raises premiums for undocumented children in families whose income is above 200 percent of the poverty level.
Regulating Insurance Companies: A bill requested by the insurance commissioner and signed into law requires that the reasons for any insurance rate increase request be available for public inspection.
Guaranteed Health Care for Children: The federal law requires that children be covered regardless of any pre-existing condition. The legislature enacted a bill requiring private insurers to make any individual insurance plans available to all children under age 19.
Maternity Support Services: Low-income women with high-risk pregnancies will be served by a program whose budget has been cut by 30 percent.
Family Planning: On the plus side, women will have more access to Medicaid family planning services as a result of legislative action. However, funding for Department of Health family planning for low-income women is cut by $2.25 million, a cut that’s likely to generate $9 million in new costs for unintended pregnancies. Funding was maintained for cancer screenings, for HIV/AIDS services, and for screening for most sexually transmitted infection.
Public Health Departments: After the governor’s across-the-board cuts last December, the legislature imposed an additional $10 million cut in flexible funds for these agencies. This will lessen the ability of health departments to implement programs for food safety, safe drinking water, and the control of communicable disease.
Primary Health Care and Clinics: The legislature moderated the cuts originally proposed for community health centers, and it fully funded Disability Lifeline medical services. However, the funding cuts in other health care programs will add thousands to the state’s uninsured ranks. The safety net will be severely strained.
Washington’s legislature fell well short of dealing effectively with critical health care needs during the 2011 regular and special sessions.
Because legislators failed to offset a multi-billion dollar revenue shortfall by closing any of a multitude of existing tax loopholes, deep cuts in essential services were inevitable to balance the biennial budget.
Legislators wrestled with agonizing decisions about funding for human services in the third year of a grinding recession marked by long-term double-digit unemployment.
Among the programs that felt the budget ax to one degree or another were the Basic Health Plan, Apple Health for Kids, Maternity Support Services for low-income women, Family Planning services, Public Health departments, and Primary Care and Clinic services.
The legislature also confronted the challenge of maintaining a viable healthcare safety net while preparing for the establishment of a state health care exchange in 2014, as mandated by the federal Affordable Care Act.
The health care exchange bill signed by Governor Christine Gregoire provides for the mandated exchange, but advocates were disappointed by its failure either to provide a public option, or to require the exchange to function as an active purchaser of care.
Passage of the bill was essential to maintain the state’s eligibility for federal funding to implement the new exchange.
Here’s the good news/bad news breakdown of legislative action on specific health care programs:
Basic Health Plan: The governor had proposed its elimination. The legislature tempered that drastic proposal, but froze out new enrollees for two years, shrinking BHP coverage to 34,000 by 2013. Some 150,000 uninsured men, women and children are already stuck on the waiting list.
Apple Health for Kids: The governor’s proposal to end coverage of 27,000 undocumented children was shelved, as was a state senate proposal to end the state’s commitment to cover all eligible children. The budget as adopted raises premiums for undocumented children in families whose income is above 200 percent of the poverty level.
Regulating Insurance Companies: A bill requested by the insurance commissioner and signed into law requires that the reasons for any insurance rate increase request be available for public inspection.
Guaranteed Health Care for Children: The federal law requires that children be covered regardless of any pre-existing condition. The legislature enacted a bill requiring private insurers to make any individual insurance plans available to all children under age 19.
Maternity Support Services: Low-income women with high-risk pregnancies will be served by a program whose budget has been cut by 30 percent.
Family Planning: On the plus side, women will have more access to Medicaid family planning services as a result of legislative action. However, funding for Department of Health family planning for low-income women is cut by $2.25 million, a cut that’s likely to generate $9 million in new costs for unintended pregnancies. Funding was maintained for cancer screenings, for HIV/AIDS services, and for screening for most sexually transmitted infection.
Public Health Departments: After the governor’s across-the-board cuts last December, the legislature imposed an additional $10 million cut in flexible funds for these agencies. This will lessen the ability of health departments to implement programs for food safety, safe drinking water, and the control of communicable disease.
Primary Health Care and Clinics: The legislature moderated the cuts originally proposed for community health centers, and it fully funded Disability Lifeline medical services. However, the funding cuts in other health care programs will add thousands to the state’s uninsured ranks. The safety net will be severely strained.
High court rules 1.4 million women are not a class
By Will Parry
With its 5-4 decision in the historic, decade-long Walmart discrimination case, the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority has gravely weakened the people’s right to address corporate injustice with a class-action lawsuit.
The court’s ruling was limited to the finding that Walmart women workers’ circumstances did not have enough in common to make them a class for the purposes of a lawsuit. The court did not address the charge of raw, corporation-wide gender discrimination.
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, cited Walmart’s formal policy forbidding discrimination and its practice of granting local managers substantial discretion, which he argued resulted in varied pay and promotion practices in the company’s 4,500 stores.
The right of 1.5 million present and former women Walmart workers to back pay and to a gender-free opportunity for promotions was at stake in the case originally filed in the name of Walmart greeter Betty Dukes, a modest and courageous African American woman.
Having been denied the right to file a class action, it will now be difficult for the company’s female employees to pursue individual claims. The average wages lost for a member of the rejected class – around $1,100 a year – is too small a sum to give lawyers an incentive to prepare and pursue individual suits against a corporate behemoth.
Despite the difficulties, attorneys for the women predicted that many individual claims would be filed and that efforts would be made to construct one or more smaller groups that might meet the Supreme Court majority’s definition of a class.
The plaintiffs presented 130 sworn statements from women employees documenting specific instances of discrimination in pay, in promotions and in the work environment. Since the case was originally filed in 1999, more than 12,000 women Walmart employees have contacted the plaintiffs’ attorneys with issues arising from company practices.
This mass of evidence supported the conclusion, expressed by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissenting opinion, that “gender bias suffused Walmart’s corporate culture.” Ginsburg’s dissent was joined by the other two women justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Elia Kagan, as well as by Justice Stephen Breyer.
The outpouring of corporate support for Walmart during the court case is proof of its watershed importance. More than 20 major corporations, including Bank of America, Microsoft and GE, filed amicus briefs on the company’s behalf – in other words, in support of a corporation’s sovereign right to treat its women employees like second-class citizens
While legal action on behalf of Walmart’s women workers is expected to continue on a smaller scale, company labor relations policies are also being challenged by a growing movement within the ranks of the “associates,” as Walmart calls its employees.
At the company’s stores in many parts of the country, including the Puget Sound area, a movement is taking shape called “OUR Walmart,” which stands for “Organized and United for Respect at Walmart.” Demonstrating their seriousness, more than one hundred workers and supporters marched on the company’s Bentonville, Arkansas, headquarters June 20 to demand better treatment.
Karen Casey, a company senior vice president for labor relations, having met with the delegation and listened to their grievances, replied that “our cornerstone at Walmart is respect for the individual.”
“Well then,” responded Misty Tanner, an “associate” who had traveled from Seattle to take part in the protest, “that needs to drain down to the stores, because your store managers lost it.”
The OUR Walmart delegation said that if they don’t see results from their action they will be back.
Reacting to the Supreme Court decision, the National Organization for Women called on Congress to enact the Paycheck Fairness Act, “which would provide more effective remedies to victims of sex-based wage discrimination.”
“NOW also calls on Walmart to end its unconscionable resistance to employees’ efforts to form unions and bargain collectively over pay, benefits and other conditions of employment,” the statement added.
Indeed, if Walmart’s workers and their labor and community supporters can crack this brutal stronghold of anti-unionism, it could inspire a rebirth of militant unionism across the entire working class.
With its 5-4 decision in the historic, decade-long Walmart discrimination case, the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority has gravely weakened the people’s right to address corporate injustice with a class-action lawsuit.
The court’s ruling was limited to the finding that Walmart women workers’ circumstances did not have enough in common to make them a class for the purposes of a lawsuit. The court did not address the charge of raw, corporation-wide gender discrimination.
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, cited Walmart’s formal policy forbidding discrimination and its practice of granting local managers substantial discretion, which he argued resulted in varied pay and promotion practices in the company’s 4,500 stores.
The right of 1.5 million present and former women Walmart workers to back pay and to a gender-free opportunity for promotions was at stake in the case originally filed in the name of Walmart greeter Betty Dukes, a modest and courageous African American woman.
Having been denied the right to file a class action, it will now be difficult for the company’s female employees to pursue individual claims. The average wages lost for a member of the rejected class – around $1,100 a year – is too small a sum to give lawyers an incentive to prepare and pursue individual suits against a corporate behemoth.
Despite the difficulties, attorneys for the women predicted that many individual claims would be filed and that efforts would be made to construct one or more smaller groups that might meet the Supreme Court majority’s definition of a class.
The plaintiffs presented 130 sworn statements from women employees documenting specific instances of discrimination in pay, in promotions and in the work environment. Since the case was originally filed in 1999, more than 12,000 women Walmart employees have contacted the plaintiffs’ attorneys with issues arising from company practices.
This mass of evidence supported the conclusion, expressed by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissenting opinion, that “gender bias suffused Walmart’s corporate culture.” Ginsburg’s dissent was joined by the other two women justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Elia Kagan, as well as by Justice Stephen Breyer.
The outpouring of corporate support for Walmart during the court case is proof of its watershed importance. More than 20 major corporations, including Bank of America, Microsoft and GE, filed amicus briefs on the company’s behalf – in other words, in support of a corporation’s sovereign right to treat its women employees like second-class citizens
While legal action on behalf of Walmart’s women workers is expected to continue on a smaller scale, company labor relations policies are also being challenged by a growing movement within the ranks of the “associates,” as Walmart calls its employees.
At the company’s stores in many parts of the country, including the Puget Sound area, a movement is taking shape called “OUR Walmart,” which stands for “Organized and United for Respect at Walmart.” Demonstrating their seriousness, more than one hundred workers and supporters marched on the company’s Bentonville, Arkansas, headquarters June 20 to demand better treatment.
Karen Casey, a company senior vice president for labor relations, having met with the delegation and listened to their grievances, replied that “our cornerstone at Walmart is respect for the individual.”
“Well then,” responded Misty Tanner, an “associate” who had traveled from Seattle to take part in the protest, “that needs to drain down to the stores, because your store managers lost it.”
The OUR Walmart delegation said that if they don’t see results from their action they will be back.
Reacting to the Supreme Court decision, the National Organization for Women called on Congress to enact the Paycheck Fairness Act, “which would provide more effective remedies to victims of sex-based wage discrimination.”
“NOW also calls on Walmart to end its unconscionable resistance to employees’ efforts to form unions and bargain collectively over pay, benefits and other conditions of employment,” the statement added.
Indeed, if Walmart’s workers and their labor and community supporters can crack this brutal stronghold of anti-unionism, it could inspire a rebirth of militant unionism across the entire working class.
From coal to clean energy
The transition from fossil fuels to clean energy in Washington State has been significantly advanced with an agreement to phase out the state’s only coal-fired power plant in Centralia.
“Over the next 14 years, we’ll scrub the last of the coal from our in-state power production, while working to reduce imports of coal power,” said K. C. Golden, policy director for the environmental organization Climate Solutions.
Opposition to coal is no longer confined to organizations like the Sierra Club, Golden reported. Readiness to “power past coal” has been expressed by the Centralia Economic Development Council, by organized labor, by Transalta (which owns the Centralia plant) and by Governor Chris Gregoire.
“Steady progress in making the clean-energy economy real in the Northwest is a big part of what makes the coal transition possible,” Golden said. “Energy conservation programs are saving energy and money hand over fist, squeezing more value out of the region’s hydropower. Wind power is online. Solar, geothermal, cogeneration, smart grid and tidal energy initiatives are under way.”
At the same time, Golden warned that “coal giants Arch and Peabody have targeted the region for coal export facilities so they can ship the coal we don’t burn – and a whole lot more – to Asia. If they succeed, we’ll be sending a big Northwest thumbs up for huge coal plant investments in Asia that will lock humanity in to catastrophic climate disruption.”
Clearly, major battles lie ahead, but the phasing out of the Centralia plant suggests that clean energy is the wave of the future.
“Over the next 14 years, we’ll scrub the last of the coal from our in-state power production, while working to reduce imports of coal power,” said K. C. Golden, policy director for the environmental organization Climate Solutions.
Opposition to coal is no longer confined to organizations like the Sierra Club, Golden reported. Readiness to “power past coal” has been expressed by the Centralia Economic Development Council, by organized labor, by Transalta (which owns the Centralia plant) and by Governor Chris Gregoire.
“Steady progress in making the clean-energy economy real in the Northwest is a big part of what makes the coal transition possible,” Golden said. “Energy conservation programs are saving energy and money hand over fist, squeezing more value out of the region’s hydropower. Wind power is online. Solar, geothermal, cogeneration, smart grid and tidal energy initiatives are under way.”
At the same time, Golden warned that “coal giants Arch and Peabody have targeted the region for coal export facilities so they can ship the coal we don’t burn – and a whole lot more – to Asia. If they succeed, we’ll be sending a big Northwest thumbs up for huge coal plant investments in Asia that will lock humanity in to catastrophic climate disruption.”
Clearly, major battles lie ahead, but the phasing out of the Centralia plant suggests that clean energy is the wave of the future.
An elephant is prowling the Capitol
By James Hauser and Kate Hunter
Our leaders are debating the federal budget in the marbled hearing rooms and mahogany chambers of Congress, in the cubicles of the White House West Wing, and in the Oval Office itself.
And in each of these rooms is an elephant; an elephant called the U.S. Defense Budget. The national media urges you to follow our leaders: Don’t think of the Elephant.
• Don’t think about the defense budget having doubled during the past ten years.
• Don’t think that the U.S. spends almost as much on the military (this year alone about $780 billion) as the entire rest of the world combined.
• Don’t think about the Pentagon never having completed an audit, nor about the General Accountability Office finding $300 billion in cost overruns in the past five years.
• Don’t think that here in Washington State we have paid $28 billion just for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; nor that our state legislators and governor have proposed drastic cuts in our safety net to fill a $5 billion shortfall projected over the next two years. Don’t divide 5 into 28.
• Don’t think of the dead – nearly one million soldiers and civilians dead as a direct result of military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Iraq Body Count).
• Don’t think that with Osama bin Laden dead, there is no justification for remaining in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In fact, to follow our leaders, perhaps we should not think at all.
Luckily for us some in Congress HAVE been thinking and have drafted “The Peoples’ Budget.” Presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, it would:
• End the wars in Iraq and Afghani¬stan and bring home the troops.
• End overseas military emergency supplemental funding starting in Fiscal Year 2013.
• Reduce baseline defense spending.
It would also:
Allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire at the end of 2012, but extend marriage relief, credits, and incentives for children, families, and education.
• Immediately rescind the upper-income tax cuts in December’s tax deal.
• Increase millionaire tax rates (add¬ing 45%, 46%, 47%, 48%, and 49% top rates).
• Tax all capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income.
• Tax U.S. corporate foreign income as it is earned.
• Eliminate corporate welfare for oil, gas, and coal companies.
• Add a financial speculation tax (derivatives, foreign exchange)
• Reinstate Superfund taxes.
• Negotiate costs of pharmaceuticals with companies.
These major shifts in government policy would allow Congress to:
• Enact a public health care option.
• Raise the taxable Social Security maximum on the employee side to 90% of earnings and eliminate the taxable maximum on the employer side.
• Increase Social Security benefits based on higher contributions on the employee side.
• Search out and punish Medicare and Medicaid provider fraud.
• Prevent a cut in Medicare physician payments for a decade.
• Invest $1.45 trillion in job creation, education, clean energy and broadband infrastructure, housing, and R&D.
It’s time we urged our leaders to cut military spending to free up money for states’ needs. According to a University of Massachusetts-Amherst study, military dollars spent in a state yield the least number of jobs, compared to public investments in health, education, transportation and even tax cuts.
The elephant in Washington, D.C. tramples the grass in every state.
Our leaders are debating the federal budget in the marbled hearing rooms and mahogany chambers of Congress, in the cubicles of the White House West Wing, and in the Oval Office itself.
And in each of these rooms is an elephant; an elephant called the U.S. Defense Budget. The national media urges you to follow our leaders: Don’t think of the Elephant.
• Don’t think about the defense budget having doubled during the past ten years.
• Don’t think that the U.S. spends almost as much on the military (this year alone about $780 billion) as the entire rest of the world combined.
• Don’t think about the Pentagon never having completed an audit, nor about the General Accountability Office finding $300 billion in cost overruns in the past five years.
• Don’t think that here in Washington State we have paid $28 billion just for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; nor that our state legislators and governor have proposed drastic cuts in our safety net to fill a $5 billion shortfall projected over the next two years. Don’t divide 5 into 28.
• Don’t think of the dead – nearly one million soldiers and civilians dead as a direct result of military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Iraq Body Count).
• Don’t think that with Osama bin Laden dead, there is no justification for remaining in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In fact, to follow our leaders, perhaps we should not think at all.
Luckily for us some in Congress HAVE been thinking and have drafted “The Peoples’ Budget.” Presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, it would:
• End the wars in Iraq and Afghani¬stan and bring home the troops.
• End overseas military emergency supplemental funding starting in Fiscal Year 2013.
• Reduce baseline defense spending.
It would also:
Allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire at the end of 2012, but extend marriage relief, credits, and incentives for children, families, and education.
• Immediately rescind the upper-income tax cuts in December’s tax deal.
• Increase millionaire tax rates (add¬ing 45%, 46%, 47%, 48%, and 49% top rates).
• Tax all capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income.
• Tax U.S. corporate foreign income as it is earned.
• Eliminate corporate welfare for oil, gas, and coal companies.
• Add a financial speculation tax (derivatives, foreign exchange)
• Reinstate Superfund taxes.
• Negotiate costs of pharmaceuticals with companies.
These major shifts in government policy would allow Congress to:
• Enact a public health care option.
• Raise the taxable Social Security maximum on the employee side to 90% of earnings and eliminate the taxable maximum on the employer side.
• Increase Social Security benefits based on higher contributions on the employee side.
• Search out and punish Medicare and Medicaid provider fraud.
• Prevent a cut in Medicare physician payments for a decade.
• Invest $1.45 trillion in job creation, education, clean energy and broadband infrastructure, housing, and R&D.
It’s time we urged our leaders to cut military spending to free up money for states’ needs. According to a University of Massachusetts-Amherst study, military dollars spent in a state yield the least number of jobs, compared to public investments in health, education, transportation and even tax cuts.
The elephant in Washington, D.C. tramples the grass in every state.
Strengthen Social Security...don’t cut it!
By Steve Kofahl
We’re advocating for improvements in benefit adequacy and equity, not just pushing back hard against the forces determined to cut payments and deform Social Security. By scrapping the $106,800 cap on earnings subject to payroll and self-employment taxes, we would gain revenue to fund program enhancements, while laying to rest any concerns about Trust Fund solvency.
At the Social Security implementation strategy session at the December 2005 White House Conference on Aging, the delegation from the Puget Sound Alliance made important recommendations, and got all of them approved. We suggested raising the surviving spouse benefit to 75% of the combined amount formerly paid to the couple, recognizing that the remaining individual needs more than one- half of the couple’s prior income to meet basic needs.
For workers who care for young children, we called for dropping their years with little or no earnings from the calculation of lifetime average earnings. Average indexed monthly earnings over the best 35 years are the basis for computing payment amounts, and this would allow fewer years to be averaged. A guaranteed minimum benefit would be established to keep low income workers out of poverty.
These changes would be gender neutral, but would primarily benefit women, who generally spend fewer years than men in the workforce, and continue to earn less for comparable work. For the disabled, we recommended an end to the five-month waiting period before benefits are paid following disability onset, and elimination of the 29-month waiting period for Medicare.
The national Strengthen Social Security coalition supports increased revenue from those most able to pay, as well as benefit improvements. Seattle’s Economic Opportunity Institute (EOI) is on the Steering Committee, and serves with PSARA and 18 other member organizations in Social Security Works Washington.
EOI calls for expiration of the 2% payroll tax “holiday” at the end of the year; for scrapping the cap; for a more progressive benefit computation formula; and for a drop in computation years from 35 to 30 in order to raise payments for those who must temporarily leave the workforce to provide childcare and eldercare.
Senator Maria Cantwell will introduce a bill to raise cost of living adjustments by pegging them to a modified Consumer Price Index that measures costs of a “market basket” of goods and services required by seniors and other beneficiaries. We really need to get behind this one, because our opponents are pushing for a reduced COLA for current and future beneficiaries. The costs of health care, food, and housing represent a greater portion of what is spend by beneficiaries than by the general population, and they are growing much faster than the standard CPI.
The October 2009 National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI) report, “Fixing Social Security: Adequate Benefits, Adequate Financing,” prepared for the Senate Select Committee on Aging, describes a menu of Social Security financing and benefit improvement options, including many of those described above.
The Congressional Budget Office followed NASI with “Social Security Policy Options.” NASI and CBO are non-partisan, and not advocacy organizations, so the choices are presented in a neutral and objective manner. If you want more information, check them out! It’s time we played offense, as well as defense, when it comes to Social Security.
(Steve Kofahl is president of Local 3937 of the American Federation of Government Employees and a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
We’re advocating for improvements in benefit adequacy and equity, not just pushing back hard against the forces determined to cut payments and deform Social Security. By scrapping the $106,800 cap on earnings subject to payroll and self-employment taxes, we would gain revenue to fund program enhancements, while laying to rest any concerns about Trust Fund solvency.
At the Social Security implementation strategy session at the December 2005 White House Conference on Aging, the delegation from the Puget Sound Alliance made important recommendations, and got all of them approved. We suggested raising the surviving spouse benefit to 75% of the combined amount formerly paid to the couple, recognizing that the remaining individual needs more than one- half of the couple’s prior income to meet basic needs.
For workers who care for young children, we called for dropping their years with little or no earnings from the calculation of lifetime average earnings. Average indexed monthly earnings over the best 35 years are the basis for computing payment amounts, and this would allow fewer years to be averaged. A guaranteed minimum benefit would be established to keep low income workers out of poverty.
These changes would be gender neutral, but would primarily benefit women, who generally spend fewer years than men in the workforce, and continue to earn less for comparable work. For the disabled, we recommended an end to the five-month waiting period before benefits are paid following disability onset, and elimination of the 29-month waiting period for Medicare.
The national Strengthen Social Security coalition supports increased revenue from those most able to pay, as well as benefit improvements. Seattle’s Economic Opportunity Institute (EOI) is on the Steering Committee, and serves with PSARA and 18 other member organizations in Social Security Works Washington.
EOI calls for expiration of the 2% payroll tax “holiday” at the end of the year; for scrapping the cap; for a more progressive benefit computation formula; and for a drop in computation years from 35 to 30 in order to raise payments for those who must temporarily leave the workforce to provide childcare and eldercare.
Senator Maria Cantwell will introduce a bill to raise cost of living adjustments by pegging them to a modified Consumer Price Index that measures costs of a “market basket” of goods and services required by seniors and other beneficiaries. We really need to get behind this one, because our opponents are pushing for a reduced COLA for current and future beneficiaries. The costs of health care, food, and housing represent a greater portion of what is spend by beneficiaries than by the general population, and they are growing much faster than the standard CPI.
The October 2009 National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI) report, “Fixing Social Security: Adequate Benefits, Adequate Financing,” prepared for the Senate Select Committee on Aging, describes a menu of Social Security financing and benefit improvement options, including many of those described above.
The Congressional Budget Office followed NASI with “Social Security Policy Options.” NASI and CBO are non-partisan, and not advocacy organizations, so the choices are presented in a neutral and objective manner. If you want more information, check them out! It’s time we played offense, as well as defense, when it comes to Social Security.
(Steve Kofahl is president of Local 3937 of the American Federation of Government Employees and a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
Brockey hearing : Our chance to be heard
Here’s our chance to help Congress address the nation’s crisis of unemployment.
Starting at noon Saturday, July 23, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus will open up a mike at the South Seattle Community College’s Brockey Conference Center.
The Congressional delegation is touring the nation to listen to the people – to hear first-hand the gritty details of what unemployment does to workers, their families and their communities – and to hear the ideas of the people on measures the government can take to create living-wage jobs.
Neighborhood activists throughout the Seattle area are spreading the word to build a turnout that reflects the severity of the crisis.
Sponsored by ProgressiveCongress.org, the forum will hear from Representative Jim McDermott and members of the touring delegation.
But the emphasis will be on hearing from their constituents – their experience and their ideas for a serious Congressional jobs program.
So line up at the mike on July 23 – or write your ideas on the postcards that will be available at the hearing. It’s our chance to speak out – and to be heard!
Starting at noon Saturday, July 23, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus will open up a mike at the South Seattle Community College’s Brockey Conference Center.
The Congressional delegation is touring the nation to listen to the people – to hear first-hand the gritty details of what unemployment does to workers, their families and their communities – and to hear the ideas of the people on measures the government can take to create living-wage jobs.
Neighborhood activists throughout the Seattle area are spreading the word to build a turnout that reflects the severity of the crisis.
Sponsored by ProgressiveCongress.org, the forum will hear from Representative Jim McDermott and members of the touring delegation.
But the emphasis will be on hearing from their constituents – their experience and their ideas for a serious Congressional jobs program.
So line up at the mike on July 23 – or write your ideas on the postcards that will be available at the hearing. It’s our chance to speak out – and to be heard!
Friday, June 3, 2011
SENIOR PROGRAMS SLASHED IN FINAL STATE BUDGET
By Jerry Reilly
Services and programs important to older people are severely slashed in the budget adopted by the Legislature for the next two years. Nearly one half billion dollars in state and federal funds have been cut from the budget for services vital to seniors
Home care hours have been cut by 10% for people who get help from home care workers in order to remain in their own homes. Additional training for home care workers approved by Initiative 1029 has been postponed once again.
Enrollment in the Basic Health Plan (BHP) program will continue to decline. Approximately one third of BHP enrollees are between 50 and 65 years old.
The state will no longer pay the prescription co-pay for low income seniors enrolled in the Medicare Part D Pharmacy program. There is some hope that the federal government will end the co-pay requirement for these people in January, 2012.
Changes in the Adult Day Health program may force as many as 700 people living with developmental disabilities out of the program. Some Adult Day Health Centers will likely close.
The Senior Citizens Services Act will have reductions to the Meals on Wheels and other services provided through the Area Agencies on Aging.
Dental coverage for Adults on Medicaid will be severely restricted to only emergency services. Services will still be available for people who receive long term care services.
Eyeglasses and hearing aids will no longer be available to adults on Medicaid.
One positive step taken by the Legislature was to enact a Safety Net Assessment Fee on nursing homes that will provide funds to generate additional federal Medicaid dollars. This program avoided about $80 million in cuts that would otherwise have been imposed on the funding for the care of about 11,000 Medicaid residents in nursing homes.
The sweep and severity of the cuts to senior programs is difficult to comprehend. Without doubt this is the worse budget we have ever seen. Senior programs are not alone. There were harmful cuts throughout the safety net programs that affect children, people with disabilities, mentally ill people and all low income people. Education programs, especially higher education, have also been deeply cut.
How did things get this bad? The twin drivers of this sad situation were the steep decline in state revenues driven by the great recession and the straightjacket the voters imposed on the legislature when they overwhelmingly passed Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1053 last November. This initiative re-imposed a two-thirds requirement for the legislature to pass any revenue measure or to close any tax loophole.
Once it became the accepted conventional wisdom in Olympia that the voters wanted an “all-cuts” budget, the legislature set about the task of delivering what they believed the public wanted. Some tried to make the cuts in the most responsible way available to them. Some seemed to enjoy the prospect of shrinking the footprint of state services and keeping taxes as low as possible. But almost no one argued for any real alternative to an “all-cuts” approach. Toward the end of the session, there was some attention paid to a set of notoriously outrageous tax loopholes, but in the end nothing was done to change our regressive, preference ridden, and inadequate tax structure.
Most discouraging of all was that nothing was done to lay the groundwork for a legal challenge to Eyman’s Initiative 1053 on grounds that it violates the state Constitution. So instead of a sharing of the burden of replacing the revenue lost through the recession, the old, the sick, the poor and the children were asked to shoulder a grossly disproportionate share of the load.
We now await the next revenue forecast that is due around mid-June. Hopefully, revenue will be stable and we can begin to plan getting through the next two years without further reductions.
We need also to develop a plan to convince the public that we can no longer operate a prosperous, decent, and progressive state based upon a tax structure that cannot keep pace with the needs of our people.
Jerry Reilly is Chair of the ElderCare Alliance and former Assistant Secretary of the Department of Social and Health Services. He can be reached at jerryreilly@msn.com.
Services and programs important to older people are severely slashed in the budget adopted by the Legislature for the next two years. Nearly one half billion dollars in state and federal funds have been cut from the budget for services vital to seniors
Home care hours have been cut by 10% for people who get help from home care workers in order to remain in their own homes. Additional training for home care workers approved by Initiative 1029 has been postponed once again.
Enrollment in the Basic Health Plan (BHP) program will continue to decline. Approximately one third of BHP enrollees are between 50 and 65 years old.
The state will no longer pay the prescription co-pay for low income seniors enrolled in the Medicare Part D Pharmacy program. There is some hope that the federal government will end the co-pay requirement for these people in January, 2012.
Changes in the Adult Day Health program may force as many as 700 people living with developmental disabilities out of the program. Some Adult Day Health Centers will likely close.
The Senior Citizens Services Act will have reductions to the Meals on Wheels and other services provided through the Area Agencies on Aging.
Dental coverage for Adults on Medicaid will be severely restricted to only emergency services. Services will still be available for people who receive long term care services.
Eyeglasses and hearing aids will no longer be available to adults on Medicaid.
One positive step taken by the Legislature was to enact a Safety Net Assessment Fee on nursing homes that will provide funds to generate additional federal Medicaid dollars. This program avoided about $80 million in cuts that would otherwise have been imposed on the funding for the care of about 11,000 Medicaid residents in nursing homes.
The sweep and severity of the cuts to senior programs is difficult to comprehend. Without doubt this is the worse budget we have ever seen. Senior programs are not alone. There were harmful cuts throughout the safety net programs that affect children, people with disabilities, mentally ill people and all low income people. Education programs, especially higher education, have also been deeply cut.
How did things get this bad? The twin drivers of this sad situation were the steep decline in state revenues driven by the great recession and the straightjacket the voters imposed on the legislature when they overwhelmingly passed Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1053 last November. This initiative re-imposed a two-thirds requirement for the legislature to pass any revenue measure or to close any tax loophole.
Once it became the accepted conventional wisdom in Olympia that the voters wanted an “all-cuts” budget, the legislature set about the task of delivering what they believed the public wanted. Some tried to make the cuts in the most responsible way available to them. Some seemed to enjoy the prospect of shrinking the footprint of state services and keeping taxes as low as possible. But almost no one argued for any real alternative to an “all-cuts” approach. Toward the end of the session, there was some attention paid to a set of notoriously outrageous tax loopholes, but in the end nothing was done to change our regressive, preference ridden, and inadequate tax structure.
Most discouraging of all was that nothing was done to lay the groundwork for a legal challenge to Eyman’s Initiative 1053 on grounds that it violates the state Constitution. So instead of a sharing of the burden of replacing the revenue lost through the recession, the old, the sick, the poor and the children were asked to shoulder a grossly disproportionate share of the load.
We now await the next revenue forecast that is due around mid-June. Hopefully, revenue will be stable and we can begin to plan getting through the next two years without further reductions.
We need also to develop a plan to convince the public that we can no longer operate a prosperous, decent, and progressive state based upon a tax structure that cannot keep pace with the needs of our people.
Jerry Reilly is Chair of the ElderCare Alliance and former Assistant Secretary of the Department of Social and Health Services. He can be reached at jerryreilly@msn.com.
‘Don’t mess with Medicare!’ voters say
By Will Parry
Politicians mess with Medicare at their peril.
Republican Congressional candidate Jane Corwin ran into that rock-hard reality May 24, when her widely expected victory in an ultra-conservative upstate New York district was upended over her stance – and her party’s – on Medicare.
Democrat Kathy Hochul won 48 percent of the vote to Corwin’s 42 percent. Tea Party candidate Jack Davis trailed with 8 percent. The district had sent Republicans to Congress for 40 years.
At the outset of the campaign, Hochul honed in on Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to wreck Medicare by turning it into a voucher system – and she never let up. Post-election surveys confirmed that voters of both parties had chosen Hochul because they trusted her to protect Medicare.
“The results set off elation among Democrats and soul-searching among Republicans,” The New York Times reported. The results were a blow to Ryan’s proposed restructuring of Medicare, crafted to save money by sharply reducing coverage for seniors.
The Ryan proposal was incorporated in a budget adopted on a party-line vote in the Republican-controlled House.
Meanwhile, advocates warned that the integrity of Medicare was in jeopardy in bipartisan debt-reduction talks initiated by President Obama and presided over by Vice President Joseph Biden. Referring to these talks, Rep. Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat, declared that “I have said it over and over again, everything needs to be on the table. Medicare is one of the things that needs to be on the table.”
Medicaid a major GOP target
After encountering a firestorm of voter anger over their scheme to destroy Medicare by turning it into a voucher program, House Republicans are training their Congressional gun sights instead on a program that serves children and the poorest Americans: Medicaid.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee was expected to move a bill that would repeal the vital “maintenance of effort” (MOE) requirement in the health care reform law. The MOE provision blocks the states from cutting their Medicaid rolls before the establishment of health care exchanges in 2014.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that eliminating the MOE requirement would cut about 300,000 beneficiaries --- mostly children -- from the program.
The Hill, a news service that summarizes activity in Congress, quoted both Bruce Lesley, president of the children’s advocacy group First Focus, and Director Ron Pollack of Families USA, as expressing deep concern over the threat to Medicaid. “I’ve always worried that Medicare and Social Security would go off the table and Medicaid would the only thing left standing,” Lesley said.
“More than $1.3 trillion of the savings in Representative Paul Ryan’s budget proposal would come from Medicaid,” The Hill reported. “So far, those plans haven’t attracted the same political furor as the budget’s Medicare components. Some Democrats have been blunt about the reason: Seniors vote in large numbers, whereas Medicaid primarily serves children and the poor.”
Medicaid advocates are also concerned about a second proposal in the GOP budget, to convert federal Medicaid funding into block grants for the states. Either Republican proposal would be “all about rationing care and cutting people off of coverage,” Lesley, the children’s advocate, told The Hill.
But Medicaid also benefits legions of seniors. About 70 percent of the nation’s 1.4 million nursing home residents are dependent on Medicaid, the Kaiser Family Foundation reports. Medicaid also helps fill the infamous “donut hole” in Medicare’s prescription drug coverage. Democrats who support deep cuts in Medicaid as a deficit reduction measure could find themselves in serious trouble.
Politicians mess with Medicare at their peril.
Republican Congressional candidate Jane Corwin ran into that rock-hard reality May 24, when her widely expected victory in an ultra-conservative upstate New York district was upended over her stance – and her party’s – on Medicare.
Democrat Kathy Hochul won 48 percent of the vote to Corwin’s 42 percent. Tea Party candidate Jack Davis trailed with 8 percent. The district had sent Republicans to Congress for 40 years.
At the outset of the campaign, Hochul honed in on Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to wreck Medicare by turning it into a voucher system – and she never let up. Post-election surveys confirmed that voters of both parties had chosen Hochul because they trusted her to protect Medicare.
“The results set off elation among Democrats and soul-searching among Republicans,” The New York Times reported. The results were a blow to Ryan’s proposed restructuring of Medicare, crafted to save money by sharply reducing coverage for seniors.
The Ryan proposal was incorporated in a budget adopted on a party-line vote in the Republican-controlled House.
Meanwhile, advocates warned that the integrity of Medicare was in jeopardy in bipartisan debt-reduction talks initiated by President Obama and presided over by Vice President Joseph Biden. Referring to these talks, Rep. Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat, declared that “I have said it over and over again, everything needs to be on the table. Medicare is one of the things that needs to be on the table.”
Medicaid a major GOP target
After encountering a firestorm of voter anger over their scheme to destroy Medicare by turning it into a voucher program, House Republicans are training their Congressional gun sights instead on a program that serves children and the poorest Americans: Medicaid.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee was expected to move a bill that would repeal the vital “maintenance of effort” (MOE) requirement in the health care reform law. The MOE provision blocks the states from cutting their Medicaid rolls before the establishment of health care exchanges in 2014.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that eliminating the MOE requirement would cut about 300,000 beneficiaries --- mostly children -- from the program.
The Hill, a news service that summarizes activity in Congress, quoted both Bruce Lesley, president of the children’s advocacy group First Focus, and Director Ron Pollack of Families USA, as expressing deep concern over the threat to Medicaid. “I’ve always worried that Medicare and Social Security would go off the table and Medicaid would the only thing left standing,” Lesley said.
“More than $1.3 trillion of the savings in Representative Paul Ryan’s budget proposal would come from Medicaid,” The Hill reported. “So far, those plans haven’t attracted the same political furor as the budget’s Medicare components. Some Democrats have been blunt about the reason: Seniors vote in large numbers, whereas Medicaid primarily serves children and the poor.”
Medicaid advocates are also concerned about a second proposal in the GOP budget, to convert federal Medicaid funding into block grants for the states. Either Republican proposal would be “all about rationing care and cutting people off of coverage,” Lesley, the children’s advocate, told The Hill.
But Medicaid also benefits legions of seniors. About 70 percent of the nation’s 1.4 million nursing home residents are dependent on Medicaid, the Kaiser Family Foundation reports. Medicaid also helps fill the infamous “donut hole” in Medicare’s prescription drug coverage. Democrats who support deep cuts in Medicaid as a deficit reduction measure could find themselves in serious trouble.
Becoming a “friend” of Facebook.
By Anita Nath
The age of social media is upon us. For many, this extreme change can be overwhelming and very confusing. Facebook is a great tool to keep you connected, once you get the hang of it. Even for us so-called “Facebook kids,” some things are just downright confusing.
Facebook is a free online networking and connection site. You create a profile and can control how much information other Facebook members can see about you. To get started, all you need is an e-mail address.
Head to www.facebook .com. It is pretty simple to sign up and all that is essentially required is a name and e-mail address. Once you begin the sign-up process, Facebook guides you through setting up your Profile. You can provide as much information as you want. You can also choose to add a picture of yourself or a picture of anything you wish to post to your page.
Once you have set up your profile, you can search for people and organizations to become “friends” with. Use the search bar at the top of your Facebook page. To find someone, simply type in their name or e-mail address and click search. Then once you find the person or organization, simple click “Add as friend” or “Like.” This will send a personal request to that person or organization to be connected to your page.
Once connected, you can communicate by posting and commenting on what is known as the “wall.” With a Facebook page, you have a “wall” area and also a “news feed" area. On your “wall,” you can post a comment about anything, post a link to another website, or post pictures and information that is important to you. On the “news feed” your friends will be able to see what you posted on your “wall.” You will also be able to see the postings of your friends and of the organizations you have become connected with, on your personal “news feed.”
If you run into any kind of trouble, the Facebook Help section is very user-friendly and searchable. You could type in a question in the help section, such as “How do I post a Link?” and it will give you great directions.
Facebook is a another tool when it comes to staying informed. Many organizations and groups (including PSARA!) post about important topics and upcoming events. Once you have a Facebook account, you will be able to see all of these posts on your news feed. Even if you only log into your Facebook account once a week, you will still be able to see many of the past updates. Also, when someone wants to become friends with you, you will get an e-mail notification sent to the e-mail address you provide. This is helpful if you do not frequent the Facebook site.
Privacy is always a concern when being active on the internet. Facebook has many privacy options that you can utilize. To work with your privacy settings, simply login to Facebook and click on “account” in the upper right corner. This will allow you to access your personal privacy settings where you can determine how much to share.
If you are interested in Facebook, use the instructions in this article to get you started. Once you have a Facebook account , be sure to add PSARA by searching for “Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans” in the search bar and give it a thum
bs up once you go to the page. Give it a try. It sure helped the Egyptian people!
The age of social media is upon us. For many, this extreme change can be overwhelming and very confusing. Facebook is a great tool to keep you connected, once you get the hang of it. Even for us so-called “Facebook kids,” some things are just downright confusing.
Facebook is a free online networking and connection site. You create a profile and can control how much information other Facebook members can see about you. To get started, all you need is an e-mail address.
Head to www.facebook .com. It is pretty simple to sign up and all that is essentially required is a name and e-mail address. Once you begin the sign-up process, Facebook guides you through setting up your Profile. You can provide as much information as you want. You can also choose to add a picture of yourself or a picture of anything you wish to post to your page.
Once you have set up your profile, you can search for people and organizations to become “friends” with. Use the search bar at the top of your Facebook page. To find someone, simply type in their name or e-mail address and click search. Then once you find the person or organization, simple click “Add as friend” or “Like.” This will send a personal request to that person or organization to be connected to your page.
Once connected, you can communicate by posting and commenting on what is known as the “wall.” With a Facebook page, you have a “wall” area and also a “news feed" area. On your “wall,” you can post a comment about anything, post a link to another website, or post pictures and information that is important to you. On the “news feed” your friends will be able to see what you posted on your “wall.” You will also be able to see the postings of your friends and of the organizations you have become connected with, on your personal “news feed.”
If you run into any kind of trouble, the Facebook Help section is very user-friendly and searchable. You could type in a question in the help section, such as “How do I post a Link?” and it will give you great directions.
Facebook is a another tool when it comes to staying informed. Many organizations and groups (including PSARA!) post about important topics and upcoming events. Once you have a Facebook account, you will be able to see all of these posts on your news feed. Even if you only log into your Facebook account once a week, you will still be able to see many of the past updates. Also, when someone wants to become friends with you, you will get an e-mail notification sent to the e-mail address you provide. This is helpful if you do not frequent the Facebook site.
Privacy is always a concern when being active on the internet. Facebook has many privacy options that you can utilize. To work with your privacy settings, simply login to Facebook and click on “account” in the upper right corner. This will allow you to access your personal privacy settings where you can determine how much to share.
If you are interested in Facebook, use the instructions in this article to get you started. Once you have a Facebook account , be sure to add PSARA by searching for “Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans” in the search bar and give it a thum
bs up once you go to the page. Give it a try. It sure helped the Egyptian people!
Remembering Silme and Gene
By Frank Irigon
Thirty years ago, on June 1, 1981, Silme Domingo and Gene Viernes were murdered in the office of Alaska Cannery Workers Local 37 of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union (ILWU) near Pioneer Square in Seattle.
Silme and Gene were both the anchor and rudder that gave meaning and direction to those who followed them in reforming Local 37, and in building the anti-Marcos movement in Seattle. They were murdered because of their determined and successful efforts to restore democracy within their union and because of their efforts to expose and resist the corrupt regime of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philipines.
Gene died at the scene, but Silme lived another 24 hours -- long enough to identify the gunmen. The murderers were Pompeyo Benito Guloy Jr. and Jimmy Bulosan Ramil, two cannery workers and members of the Tulisan, a Filipino street gang. On September 24, 1981, Guloy and Ramil were found guilty of aggravated first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison. On May 12, 1982, their leader, Tony Dictado, was convicted of ordering the murders. In 1990, Tony Baruso, the former president of Local 37 who had ties to the Marcos regime, was convicted for the two murders. Both Dictado and Baruso were sentenced to life in prison.
A subsequent civil law suit brought against Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos and their co-conspirators established the ties between the murderers of these two union leaders and the corrupt and murderous Marcos regime.
Thirty years have now passed since their deaths. The Alaskero Foundation; the International Longshore and Warehouse Union; the Inlandboatmen’s Union; and the University of Washington Harry Bridges Center for Labor Studies are jointly sponsoring a Memorial Anniversary of the assassination of Silme and Gene on Saturday, June 4, at the University of Washington Center for Urban Horticulture.
From June 29 to July 4, other 30th Anniversary events will be scheduled. The theme of these events is “Global Activism and the Struggle for Philippine Democracy,” To find out more about these events, go to www.lelo.org.
The work that Silme and Gene led, both in the struggle to win union democracy and in the struggle to overthrow the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines will be remembered and honored. The contribution of these two men will not be forgotten.
Thirty years ago, on June 1, 1981, Silme Domingo and Gene Viernes were murdered in the office of Alaska Cannery Workers Local 37 of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union (ILWU) near Pioneer Square in Seattle.
Silme and Gene were both the anchor and rudder that gave meaning and direction to those who followed them in reforming Local 37, and in building the anti-Marcos movement in Seattle. They were murdered because of their determined and successful efforts to restore democracy within their union and because of their efforts to expose and resist the corrupt regime of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philipines.
Gene died at the scene, but Silme lived another 24 hours -- long enough to identify the gunmen. The murderers were Pompeyo Benito Guloy Jr. and Jimmy Bulosan Ramil, two cannery workers and members of the Tulisan, a Filipino street gang. On September 24, 1981, Guloy and Ramil were found guilty of aggravated first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison. On May 12, 1982, their leader, Tony Dictado, was convicted of ordering the murders. In 1990, Tony Baruso, the former president of Local 37 who had ties to the Marcos regime, was convicted for the two murders. Both Dictado and Baruso were sentenced to life in prison.
A subsequent civil law suit brought against Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos and their co-conspirators established the ties between the murderers of these two union leaders and the corrupt and murderous Marcos regime.
Thirty years have now passed since their deaths. The Alaskero Foundation; the International Longshore and Warehouse Union; the Inlandboatmen’s Union; and the University of Washington Harry Bridges Center for Labor Studies are jointly sponsoring a Memorial Anniversary of the assassination of Silme and Gene on Saturday, June 4, at the University of Washington Center for Urban Horticulture.
From June 29 to July 4, other 30th Anniversary events will be scheduled. The theme of these events is “Global Activism and the Struggle for Philippine Democracy,” To find out more about these events, go to www.lelo.org.
The work that Silme and Gene led, both in the struggle to win union democracy and in the struggle to overthrow the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines will be remembered and honored. The contribution of these two men will not be forgotten.
Building power
Our banner and members have taken to the streets at one demonstration after another, for labor rights, for taxing the rich, for social justice. No two ways about it. People respect PSARA!
Our bold activities have everything to do with our membership growth. Good people support organizations that get into the action. “Older and Bolder” is more than just a slogan for us.
We’re going to continue to grow. The times demand it, and we’re responding. We’re shooting for 250 new members in calendar 2011. Our mission is to work with others to build a stable, ongoing movement strong enough to challenge the corporate powers that today dominate the economics and politics of our country. Adding 250 new members this year brings us an important stride closer to establishing that mighty movement.
That new member you’re going to sign up is an indispensable contribution toward political power.
Millions are in motion, here and across the country. Across the world, for that matter! The times are ripe for growth. We don’t have to do it all. Just our share
Our bold activities have everything to do with our membership growth. Good people support organizations that get into the action. “Older and Bolder” is more than just a slogan for us.
We’re going to continue to grow. The times demand it, and we’re responding. We’re shooting for 250 new members in calendar 2011. Our mission is to work with others to build a stable, ongoing movement strong enough to challenge the corporate powers that today dominate the economics and politics of our country. Adding 250 new members this year brings us an important stride closer to establishing that mighty movement.
That new member you’re going to sign up is an indispensable contribution toward political power.
Millions are in motion, here and across the country. Across the world, for that matter! The times are ripe for growth. We don’t have to do it all. Just our share
PAID SICK DAYS, A PSARA ISSUE
By Robby Stern
PSARA strongly supports the enactment of an ordinance mandating a minimum standard for paid sick days in Seattle. Here are the reasons why.
During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the key public health message was “stay home when you’re sick.” Some were able to heed that message, but many others were not. The H1N1 virus spread in work places and schools as children were sent to school sick because their parents could not afford to take time off work without pay.
The Economic Opportunity Institute (EOI), reports that four in ten Seattle workers get no sick leave, among them thousands of restaurant, grocery, and health care workers who are on the front lines of food safety and public health. In all, an estimated 190,000 Seattle workers have no paid sick days.
Quoting from the EOI Report:
“Food borne illness has a major impact on health and the economy in the United States. According to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), every year one out of six Americans gets sick from food, resulting in 125,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths. About 20 percent of cases can be traced to an ill food worker. Elderly people are particularly vulnerable to food borne illnesses such as norovirus … The CDC estimates there are more than 21 million annual cases of norovirus, and half of all cases of food-borne illness in the U.S. can be attributed to norovirus infection. Norovirus symptoms include vomiting, diarrhea, cramping and fever…Of the cases analyzed by the CDC from July 1997 to June 2000, 57% were caused by food, which most often became contaminated by an infected food handler immediately prior to consumption.”
The CDC advises that the measures most likely to significantly reduce the incidence of norovirus are “correct handling of cold foods, frequent hand washing, and provision of paid sick leave...” The King County Public Health Department strongly supports a paid sick days ordinance.
Since most restaurants do not offer paid sick time, ill employees are forced to choose between taking unpaid leave or going to work sick. A recent report in the Journal of Food Protection found that, in the past year, 19.8 percent had worked while experiencing vomiting or diarrhea. Another survey of more than 4,300 U.S. restaurant workers in eight metropolitan regions of the U.S. found that 88 percent did not receive paid sick time and that 63 percent had worked serving or preparing food while sick.
Access to paid sick days is unequal. Eighty percent of people earning above the median hourly wage get paid sick days; only 19 percent of the bottom 10 percent wage earners receive paid sick days. Women are far more likely than men not to have paid sick days. Latinos and African Americans are also less likely to have paid sick days.
My wife is a school nurse in a school with a high percentage of lower income families. She frequently tells me of children being sent to school with fevers, or children getting sick at school. When she calls the parents, all too often they are unable to pick up their children. Another frequent phenomenon is older siblings missing a day of school because they have to stay home with a younger sister or brother who is too sick to go to school.
Elderly people are particularly vulnerable to the spread of viruses and infections. The well-publicized growth in resistance of infections to antibiotics makes the spread of diseases even more dangerous for all of us, but particularly for seniors. The realization that people who handle our food in the grocery stores and people who help us care for ourselves often do not have access to paid sick days makes the need for a minimum standard even more apparent.
Although some employers support the establishment of a paid sick days standard, very powerful forces are lined up against it. The same business associations who declared the sky was falling when they opposed the 1998 minimum wage standard are now contending that a paid sick days standard will ruin businesses in Seattle. The Seattle Times, using the term “nanny government,” has announced its opposition. Opponents’ economic arguments are countered by the fact that San Francisco has had a similar standard for four years and has seen an increase in employment.
Several Seattle City Council members who greeted the proponents of the ordinance with expressions of support may now be getting cold feet and seeking to delay consideration of the ordinance.
Kudos go to Councilmembers (and PSARA members) Nick Licata, sponsor of the ordinance, and Jean Godden, co-sponsor. Councilmember Bruce Harrell (not yet a PSARA member) has also agreed to co-sponsor the ordinance. These councilmembers are supporting immediate consideration and passage of the ordinance.
Some have said this should not be a “campaign” issue. Well, it IS a campaign issue. We’ll be calling on our members to attend various actions and hearings to express your support for a minimum paid sick days standard. We will also let you know where all council members and Mayor McGinn stand on the issue.
This ordinance will protect our parents, children and grandchildren. It is good for our community. We’ll be calling on you for help to establish paid sick days in the city of Seattle.
PSARA strongly supports the enactment of an ordinance mandating a minimum standard for paid sick days in Seattle. Here are the reasons why.
During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the key public health message was “stay home when you’re sick.” Some were able to heed that message, but many others were not. The H1N1 virus spread in work places and schools as children were sent to school sick because their parents could not afford to take time off work without pay.
The Economic Opportunity Institute (EOI), reports that four in ten Seattle workers get no sick leave, among them thousands of restaurant, grocery, and health care workers who are on the front lines of food safety and public health. In all, an estimated 190,000 Seattle workers have no paid sick days.
Quoting from the EOI Report:
“Food borne illness has a major impact on health and the economy in the United States. According to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), every year one out of six Americans gets sick from food, resulting in 125,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths. About 20 percent of cases can be traced to an ill food worker. Elderly people are particularly vulnerable to food borne illnesses such as norovirus … The CDC estimates there are more than 21 million annual cases of norovirus, and half of all cases of food-borne illness in the U.S. can be attributed to norovirus infection. Norovirus symptoms include vomiting, diarrhea, cramping and fever…Of the cases analyzed by the CDC from July 1997 to June 2000, 57% were caused by food, which most often became contaminated by an infected food handler immediately prior to consumption.”
The CDC advises that the measures most likely to significantly reduce the incidence of norovirus are “correct handling of cold foods, frequent hand washing, and provision of paid sick leave...” The King County Public Health Department strongly supports a paid sick days ordinance.
Since most restaurants do not offer paid sick time, ill employees are forced to choose between taking unpaid leave or going to work sick. A recent report in the Journal of Food Protection found that, in the past year, 19.8 percent had worked while experiencing vomiting or diarrhea. Another survey of more than 4,300 U.S. restaurant workers in eight metropolitan regions of the U.S. found that 88 percent did not receive paid sick time and that 63 percent had worked serving or preparing food while sick.
Access to paid sick days is unequal. Eighty percent of people earning above the median hourly wage get paid sick days; only 19 percent of the bottom 10 percent wage earners receive paid sick days. Women are far more likely than men not to have paid sick days. Latinos and African Americans are also less likely to have paid sick days.
My wife is a school nurse in a school with a high percentage of lower income families. She frequently tells me of children being sent to school with fevers, or children getting sick at school. When she calls the parents, all too often they are unable to pick up their children. Another frequent phenomenon is older siblings missing a day of school because they have to stay home with a younger sister or brother who is too sick to go to school.
Elderly people are particularly vulnerable to the spread of viruses and infections. The well-publicized growth in resistance of infections to antibiotics makes the spread of diseases even more dangerous for all of us, but particularly for seniors. The realization that people who handle our food in the grocery stores and people who help us care for ourselves often do not have access to paid sick days makes the need for a minimum standard even more apparent.
Although some employers support the establishment of a paid sick days standard, very powerful forces are lined up against it. The same business associations who declared the sky was falling when they opposed the 1998 minimum wage standard are now contending that a paid sick days standard will ruin businesses in Seattle. The Seattle Times, using the term “nanny government,” has announced its opposition. Opponents’ economic arguments are countered by the fact that San Francisco has had a similar standard for four years and has seen an increase in employment.
Several Seattle City Council members who greeted the proponents of the ordinance with expressions of support may now be getting cold feet and seeking to delay consideration of the ordinance.
Kudos go to Councilmembers (and PSARA members) Nick Licata, sponsor of the ordinance, and Jean Godden, co-sponsor. Councilmember Bruce Harrell (not yet a PSARA member) has also agreed to co-sponsor the ordinance. These councilmembers are supporting immediate consideration and passage of the ordinance.
Some have said this should not be a “campaign” issue. Well, it IS a campaign issue. We’ll be calling on our members to attend various actions and hearings to express your support for a minimum paid sick days standard. We will also let you know where all council members and Mayor McGinn stand on the issue.
This ordinance will protect our parents, children and grandchildren. It is good for our community. We’ll be calling on you for help to establish paid sick days in the city of Seattle.
Selling out injured workers
By Jeff Johnson
Just a month after celebrating the 100th anniversary of Washington’s workers’ compensation system, Governor Christine Gregoire, along with Senate Democrat and Republican leadership and House Democrat leadership, passed HB 2123, undermining the security of the safety net for injured workers by approving “structured settlement agreements” (compromise and release agreements) whereby workers will receive less than what they are entitled to under the law.
Injured workers 55 years of age or older, ratcheting down to those 50 or older by 2016, will be able to settle their claims at less than their statutory amount. You might ask why workers would agree to lower their benefits. For many workers it won’t be a choice. Strapped financially from receiving only partial wage replacement benefits, many injured workers will accept a lump-sum payment paid out over several months to meet family needs. And once the money is gone, they are just out of luck.
And it will happen. The Department of Labor and Industries assumes that the workers’ compensation state fund will save $335 million in fiscal year 2012 and over half a billion dollars by 2015. Most of these so-called savings will be in the form of lower benefits to injured workers.
Even worse, these settlement agreements are a lure for private insurers. After Initiative 1082, that would have allowed private insurance into our comp system, was defeated by nearly 60% and was voted down in every county, HB 2123 lays out a welcome mat for the private insurance industry. Denying claims and reaching settlement agreements are the means by which private insurers profit in the workers’ compnsation arena. Until now, Washington’s workers’ compensation market has not been all that attractive to private insurers. HB 2123 changes that.
HB 2123 also places a one-year cost of living freeze on injured workers’ time-loss and pension benefits, and offsets the value of a permanent partial disability award against an injured worker’s pension award – both these provisions will lower benefits for our most disabled workers.
The bill includes a positive program modeled after the Oregon “stay at work” program. This measure incentivizes small and medium size employers to bring their injured workers back to employment through offering wage, equipment, and training subsidies to the employer for 66 days. If this works, it will return workers to the job more quickly and reduce long term disability and costs.
The bill also sets up three studies which will look at occupational disease, structured settlement agreements, and the claims management process. Finally the bill continues some funding for health and safety grants that focus on workplace safety training.
While labor could have lived with many portions of the bill, the radical change to compromise and release is a huge and grotesque corporate give-away at the expense of our older and most disabled workers. Shame on the Democrats for selling out injured workers.
(Jeff Johnson is president of the Washington State Labor Council and a PSARA member.)
Just a month after celebrating the 100th anniversary of Washington’s workers’ compensation system, Governor Christine Gregoire, along with Senate Democrat and Republican leadership and House Democrat leadership, passed HB 2123, undermining the security of the safety net for injured workers by approving “structured settlement agreements” (compromise and release agreements) whereby workers will receive less than what they are entitled to under the law.
Injured workers 55 years of age or older, ratcheting down to those 50 or older by 2016, will be able to settle their claims at less than their statutory amount. You might ask why workers would agree to lower their benefits. For many workers it won’t be a choice. Strapped financially from receiving only partial wage replacement benefits, many injured workers will accept a lump-sum payment paid out over several months to meet family needs. And once the money is gone, they are just out of luck.
And it will happen. The Department of Labor and Industries assumes that the workers’ compensation state fund will save $335 million in fiscal year 2012 and over half a billion dollars by 2015. Most of these so-called savings will be in the form of lower benefits to injured workers.
Even worse, these settlement agreements are a lure for private insurers. After Initiative 1082, that would have allowed private insurance into our comp system, was defeated by nearly 60% and was voted down in every county, HB 2123 lays out a welcome mat for the private insurance industry. Denying claims and reaching settlement agreements are the means by which private insurers profit in the workers’ compnsation arena. Until now, Washington’s workers’ compensation market has not been all that attractive to private insurers. HB 2123 changes that.
HB 2123 also places a one-year cost of living freeze on injured workers’ time-loss and pension benefits, and offsets the value of a permanent partial disability award against an injured worker’s pension award – both these provisions will lower benefits for our most disabled workers.
The bill includes a positive program modeled after the Oregon “stay at work” program. This measure incentivizes small and medium size employers to bring their injured workers back to employment through offering wage, equipment, and training subsidies to the employer for 66 days. If this works, it will return workers to the job more quickly and reduce long term disability and costs.
The bill also sets up three studies which will look at occupational disease, structured settlement agreements, and the claims management process. Finally the bill continues some funding for health and safety grants that focus on workplace safety training.
While labor could have lived with many portions of the bill, the radical change to compromise and release is a huge and grotesque corporate give-away at the expense of our older and most disabled workers. Shame on the Democrats for selling out injured workers.
(Jeff Johnson is president of the Washington State Labor Council and a PSARA member.)
Bankers grow fat as teachers are laid off
By Mike Andrew
Seventy-five people – including Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich – protested in front of the Chase Bank in Seattle’s Wallingford district May 21.
The protest was called by the Seattle Education Association, Social Equality Educators, and Martin Luther King County Jobs with Justice. It was supported by the Service Employees’ State Council, Working Washington, Washington Citizen Action Network, US Uncut, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, and SNOW.
Chase was targeted because corporate tax loopholes exempt it from many state taxes at a time when the state legislature is cutting essential services to close a $5 billion revenue shortfall. Chase pays no state taxes whatsoever on its mortgage interest income thanks to a loophole that allows banks based in Washington to avoid these taxes.
Chase is based in New York, but Washington Mutual, which Chase acquired in September 2008,was Washington-based, enabling Chase to apply their tax credit to its earnings. Had Chase paid its fair share, it would have added nearly $100 million per year to the state’s revenue.
As part of the federal bailout, Chase was loaned billions of dollars at zero percent interest, money that they are now loaning back to the federal government at 5% interest – actually making money off taxpayers.
Last year, Chase compensated CEO Jamie Dimon with a $1 million base salary, a $5 million bonus, over $6 million in options, and nearly $8 million worth of stock. The $20.8 million total was a 1,500 percent increase over his 2009 income. The average U.S. household income for 2010, in contrast, was just $49,777
On April 16, Bank of America was also the target of a protest picketline. For 2008 and 2009, the banking giant paid no federal income taxes at all and actually received tax refunds of $3 billion. Its CEO, Brian Moynihan, lost money in 2010, when his pay was cut to $1.9 million. Early this year he did get a $9 million bonus, however.
Bonuses paid to executives at the nation's six largest banks totaled $140 billion in 2009, a sum equivalent to the total of all state budget deficits combined.
Meanwhile, 70 Seattle teachers in Seattle are facing layoff as the state tries to fill the $5 billion hole in its budget with cuts rather than raising new revenue.
The legislature is also considering an across-the-board pay freeze for teachers. Funding to reduce class size in schools has taken a 70 percent cut, college tuition has increased, and public library hours are being reduced. Some 40,000 people have lost their Basic Health coverage. More cuts are projected for city, county, and state services.
This is not a spending crisis. It’s a revenue crisis, caused when corporations like Chase pay little to no taxes on their huge earnings. Working people who had no part in creating the crisis are being made to pay for it.
The money to pay for social services is there, enriching banks and bankers. It just needs to be tapped to meet the needs of the people.
Seventy-five people – including Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich – protested in front of the Chase Bank in Seattle’s Wallingford district May 21.
The protest was called by the Seattle Education Association, Social Equality Educators, and Martin Luther King County Jobs with Justice. It was supported by the Service Employees’ State Council, Working Washington, Washington Citizen Action Network, US Uncut, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, and SNOW.
Chase was targeted because corporate tax loopholes exempt it from many state taxes at a time when the state legislature is cutting essential services to close a $5 billion revenue shortfall. Chase pays no state taxes whatsoever on its mortgage interest income thanks to a loophole that allows banks based in Washington to avoid these taxes.
Chase is based in New York, but Washington Mutual, which Chase acquired in September 2008,was Washington-based, enabling Chase to apply their tax credit to its earnings. Had Chase paid its fair share, it would have added nearly $100 million per year to the state’s revenue.
As part of the federal bailout, Chase was loaned billions of dollars at zero percent interest, money that they are now loaning back to the federal government at 5% interest – actually making money off taxpayers.
Last year, Chase compensated CEO Jamie Dimon with a $1 million base salary, a $5 million bonus, over $6 million in options, and nearly $8 million worth of stock. The $20.8 million total was a 1,500 percent increase over his 2009 income. The average U.S. household income for 2010, in contrast, was just $49,777
On April 16, Bank of America was also the target of a protest picketline. For 2008 and 2009, the banking giant paid no federal income taxes at all and actually received tax refunds of $3 billion. Its CEO, Brian Moynihan, lost money in 2010, when his pay was cut to $1.9 million. Early this year he did get a $9 million bonus, however.
Bonuses paid to executives at the nation's six largest banks totaled $140 billion in 2009, a sum equivalent to the total of all state budget deficits combined.
Meanwhile, 70 Seattle teachers in Seattle are facing layoff as the state tries to fill the $5 billion hole in its budget with cuts rather than raising new revenue.
The legislature is also considering an across-the-board pay freeze for teachers. Funding to reduce class size in schools has taken a 70 percent cut, college tuition has increased, and public library hours are being reduced. Some 40,000 people have lost their Basic Health coverage. More cuts are projected for city, county, and state services.
This is not a spending crisis. It’s a revenue crisis, caused when corporations like Chase pay little to no taxes on their huge earnings. Working people who had no part in creating the crisis are being made to pay for it.
The money to pay for social services is there, enriching banks and bankers. It just needs to be tapped to meet the needs of the people.
Sweeter than maple syrup!
On May 26, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin signed into law a plan that will give the Green Mountain State the nation’s first single payer system. To be implemented in stages, the government-administered system offers a uniform benefits package to all 620,000 Vermonters.
“It will produce savings of 24.3 percent of total health care expenditures between 2015 and 2024,” according to Harvard economist William Hsiao, who guided Vermont legislators in drafting the historic legislation.
“It will produce savings of 24.3 percent of total health care expenditures between 2015 and 2024,” according to Harvard economist William Hsiao, who guided Vermont legislators in drafting the historic legislation.
Health care: The right of every American
By Senator Bernie Sanders
The United States is the only major nation in the industrialized world that does not guarantee healthcare as a right to its people. Meanwhile, we spend about twice as much per capita on healthcare and, in a wide number of instances, our outcomes are not as good as others that spend far less.
It is time that we bring about a fundamental transformation of the American healthcare system. It is time for us to end private, for-profit participation in delivering basic coverage. It is time for the United States to provide a Medicare-for-all, single payer health coverage program.
Under our dysfunctional system, 45,000 Americans a year die because they delay seeking care they cannot afford. We spent 17.6% of our gross domestic product on healthcare in 2009, which is projected to go up to 20% by 2020, yet we still rank 26th among major, developed nations on life expectancy, and 31st on infant mortality. We must demand a better model of health coverage that emphasizes preventive and primary care for every single person without regard for their ability to pay.
It is certainly a step forward that the new health reform law is projected to cover 32 million additional Americans, out of the more than 50 million uninsured today. Yet projections suggest that roughly 23 million will still be without insurance in 2019, while healthcare costs will continue to skyrocket.
Twenty-three million Americans still without health insurance after health reform is implemented? This is unacceptable.
And that is why, this week, Representative Jim McDermott and I are announcing the re-introduction of the American Health Security Act, recognizing health care as a human right and providing every U.S. citizen and permanent resident with healthcare coverage and services through a state-administered single payer program. Let’s face it: Until we put patients over profits, our system will not work for ordinary Americans.
It is incomprehensible that drug companies still get away with charging Americans twice as much, or more, than citizens of Canada or Europe for the exact same drugs manufactured by the exact same companies. It is an outrage that insurers still often hike premiums 20%, 40% and 60% a year on individual policy holders; and some insurers still spend 40 cents of every premium dollar on administration and profits while lavishing multimillion-dollar payouts on their CEOs.
I am very proud that my home state of Vermont is now taking big steps to lead the nation in healthcare by moving forward on a plan to establish a single payer healthcare system that puts the interests of patients over chasing profits. The American Health Security Act would make sure every state does the same - taking profits out of the equation by implementing a single payer system, but letting each state administer its own program, according to strict standards, in a way best suited to its needs.
The goal of real healthcare reform must be high-quality, universal coverage in a cost-effective way. We must ensure, to as great a degree as possible, that the money we put into health coverage goes to the delivery of healthcare, not to paper-pushing, astronomical profits and lining CEOs' pockets.
(Reprinted from the Guardian UK.)
The United States is the only major nation in the industrialized world that does not guarantee healthcare as a right to its people. Meanwhile, we spend about twice as much per capita on healthcare and, in a wide number of instances, our outcomes are not as good as others that spend far less.
It is time that we bring about a fundamental transformation of the American healthcare system. It is time for us to end private, for-profit participation in delivering basic coverage. It is time for the United States to provide a Medicare-for-all, single payer health coverage program.
Under our dysfunctional system, 45,000 Americans a year die because they delay seeking care they cannot afford. We spent 17.6% of our gross domestic product on healthcare in 2009, which is projected to go up to 20% by 2020, yet we still rank 26th among major, developed nations on life expectancy, and 31st on infant mortality. We must demand a better model of health coverage that emphasizes preventive and primary care for every single person without regard for their ability to pay.
It is certainly a step forward that the new health reform law is projected to cover 32 million additional Americans, out of the more than 50 million uninsured today. Yet projections suggest that roughly 23 million will still be without insurance in 2019, while healthcare costs will continue to skyrocket.
Twenty-three million Americans still without health insurance after health reform is implemented? This is unacceptable.
And that is why, this week, Representative Jim McDermott and I are announcing the re-introduction of the American Health Security Act, recognizing health care as a human right and providing every U.S. citizen and permanent resident with healthcare coverage and services through a state-administered single payer program. Let’s face it: Until we put patients over profits, our system will not work for ordinary Americans.
It is incomprehensible that drug companies still get away with charging Americans twice as much, or more, than citizens of Canada or Europe for the exact same drugs manufactured by the exact same companies. It is an outrage that insurers still often hike premiums 20%, 40% and 60% a year on individual policy holders; and some insurers still spend 40 cents of every premium dollar on administration and profits while lavishing multimillion-dollar payouts on their CEOs.
I am very proud that my home state of Vermont is now taking big steps to lead the nation in healthcare by moving forward on a plan to establish a single payer healthcare system that puts the interests of patients over chasing profits. The American Health Security Act would make sure every state does the same - taking profits out of the equation by implementing a single payer system, but letting each state administer its own program, according to strict standards, in a way best suited to its needs.
The goal of real healthcare reform must be high-quality, universal coverage in a cost-effective way. We must ensure, to as great a degree as possible, that the money we put into health coverage goes to the delivery of healthcare, not to paper-pushing, astronomical profits and lining CEOs' pockets.
(Reprinted from the Guardian UK.)
Libya and the Hitler mythology
By Alfredo Peppard
History rapidly becomes myth, and once myth replaces reality it propagates more nonsense until stupidity is passed off as wisdom. When the political discourse of an empire comes to this point, priesthoods arise that can seemingly explain events. The priests employ a method of thought that we find amusing when we read about its use in medieval times. They reason by analogy and employing a crushing reductionism wherein the mythic common knowledge is used as the ultimate authority and diverging from this authority can only invite disaster. Our myths are many, but one of the most popular is the WWII mythology.
Once you have your enemy pegged as a Hitler all facts are swept aside. The fact that the irrelevance and stupidity of this reasoning is not at anytime challenged on television or in the Congress demonstrates how much of our crucial political discourse has been reduced to mindless references to the WWII mythology. The paralysis of imagination that adherence to this mythology requires is nowhere more apparent than in the antics of that gang of clowns we call the Republican Party. And of course the best place to watch them perform is on television.
In the nineteen thirties and forties, George Orwell observed how Hitler, Roosevelt, and Churchill used radio and film to manipulate the masses. This did much to form the ideas he put forward in his major work, 1984. In this novel he projected a future in which television was the state’s main instrument for controlling the population. The State was always at war and as the war ground on, the Plebs willingly worked longer hours for less pay. The TV watched the watchers and controlled their very sex-lives. Lacking the intellectual equipment to question this arbitrary arrangement, their critical faculties having been aborted by the din emanating from the TV, the Plebs plodded on.
In 1984, Big Brother, the head of state, speaks for the God Ford He is both the ruler, protecting them from the slavering hordes of the east, and High Priest. He is on TV constantly explaining events in the language of New Speak in which anything he says is true because he said it, even though it might be the very opposite of reality. It’s much like what we encountered in the Bush era.
A few days before writing this, I was watching the TV news about Libya. Keep in mind that President Obama says we are not at war with that country; we are just bombarding their air defense system so that the unarmed civilians we are defending can get their tanks and missiles into the field. In fact it is such a piddling little humanitarian mission the White House saw no need to pester Congress about it. Nevertheless, here are the Republicans yapping at Obama’s heels demanding more vigorous action; with the leader of the pack, Senator John McCain, the Sage of Arizona, arguing that Kaddafi’s aggression had to be stopped, as he was another Hitler -- a serious threat to world peace.
My God, another Hitler! Never mind the fact that any state has the right to put down an armed uprising; the sacred mythology of WWII had been evoked. Thought is no longer appropriate; intervention is necessary to save the world. Yes, McCain in invoking scripture and promoting Kaddafi to Hitler had lifted the discussion out of the mundane ordinary affairs of state; the struggle was then elevated to an elemental conflict between good and evil. I couldn’t help noticing that as he referred to scripture he looked even more beady-eyed and stupid than usual.
Once we have wheeled Hitler onto the stage, the sacred mythology of WWII takes over. An entire series of conclusions comes into play. When on CNN Anderson Cooper of New Orleans fame openly sneers at a Libyan spokesman who claims that a group of 13 coffins are civilians killed by American missiles, Cooper demands proof that the bodies in the coffins are indeed civilians. When he is shown a devastated industrial plant, he points out to the increasingly agitated Libyan that this was a legitimate military target. As a highly popular priest, it is his role to determine legitimacy. After all he is dealing with the minions of a Hitler. And so Anderson Cooper, employing his “awe shucks home town kinda guy” good looks, explains the rights and wrongs of an attack upon a sovereign nation.
One more layer of obscurity is added to events when the intervention is taken over by NATO. Again reality is turned upside down; NATO, a creation and a tool of American military policy, is now in charge, not the US. The tool has become the hand and the hand the tool. Believe that if you will.
Will Rogers said, “All I know is what I read in the newspapers.” It worries me to think that so many Americans can say the same thing about TV.
History rapidly becomes myth, and once myth replaces reality it propagates more nonsense until stupidity is passed off as wisdom. When the political discourse of an empire comes to this point, priesthoods arise that can seemingly explain events. The priests employ a method of thought that we find amusing when we read about its use in medieval times. They reason by analogy and employing a crushing reductionism wherein the mythic common knowledge is used as the ultimate authority and diverging from this authority can only invite disaster. Our myths are many, but one of the most popular is the WWII mythology.
Once you have your enemy pegged as a Hitler all facts are swept aside. The fact that the irrelevance and stupidity of this reasoning is not at anytime challenged on television or in the Congress demonstrates how much of our crucial political discourse has been reduced to mindless references to the WWII mythology. The paralysis of imagination that adherence to this mythology requires is nowhere more apparent than in the antics of that gang of clowns we call the Republican Party. And of course the best place to watch them perform is on television.
In the nineteen thirties and forties, George Orwell observed how Hitler, Roosevelt, and Churchill used radio and film to manipulate the masses. This did much to form the ideas he put forward in his major work, 1984. In this novel he projected a future in which television was the state’s main instrument for controlling the population. The State was always at war and as the war ground on, the Plebs willingly worked longer hours for less pay. The TV watched the watchers and controlled their very sex-lives. Lacking the intellectual equipment to question this arbitrary arrangement, their critical faculties having been aborted by the din emanating from the TV, the Plebs plodded on.
In 1984, Big Brother, the head of state, speaks for the God Ford He is both the ruler, protecting them from the slavering hordes of the east, and High Priest. He is on TV constantly explaining events in the language of New Speak in which anything he says is true because he said it, even though it might be the very opposite of reality. It’s much like what we encountered in the Bush era.
A few days before writing this, I was watching the TV news about Libya. Keep in mind that President Obama says we are not at war with that country; we are just bombarding their air defense system so that the unarmed civilians we are defending can get their tanks and missiles into the field. In fact it is such a piddling little humanitarian mission the White House saw no need to pester Congress about it. Nevertheless, here are the Republicans yapping at Obama’s heels demanding more vigorous action; with the leader of the pack, Senator John McCain, the Sage of Arizona, arguing that Kaddafi’s aggression had to be stopped, as he was another Hitler -- a serious threat to world peace.
My God, another Hitler! Never mind the fact that any state has the right to put down an armed uprising; the sacred mythology of WWII had been evoked. Thought is no longer appropriate; intervention is necessary to save the world. Yes, McCain in invoking scripture and promoting Kaddafi to Hitler had lifted the discussion out of the mundane ordinary affairs of state; the struggle was then elevated to an elemental conflict between good and evil. I couldn’t help noticing that as he referred to scripture he looked even more beady-eyed and stupid than usual.
Once we have wheeled Hitler onto the stage, the sacred mythology of WWII takes over. An entire series of conclusions comes into play. When on CNN Anderson Cooper of New Orleans fame openly sneers at a Libyan spokesman who claims that a group of 13 coffins are civilians killed by American missiles, Cooper demands proof that the bodies in the coffins are indeed civilians. When he is shown a devastated industrial plant, he points out to the increasingly agitated Libyan that this was a legitimate military target. As a highly popular priest, it is his role to determine legitimacy. After all he is dealing with the minions of a Hitler. And so Anderson Cooper, employing his “awe shucks home town kinda guy” good looks, explains the rights and wrongs of an attack upon a sovereign nation.
One more layer of obscurity is added to events when the intervention is taken over by NATO. Again reality is turned upside down; NATO, a creation and a tool of American military policy, is now in charge, not the US. The tool has become the hand and the hand the tool. Believe that if you will.
Will Rogers said, “All I know is what I read in the newspapers.” It worries me to think that so many Americans can say the same thing about TV.
An elephant is prowling the Capitol
By James Hauser and Kate Hunter
Our leaders are debating the federal budget in the marbled hearing rooms and mahogany chambers of Congress, in the cubicles of the White House West Wing, and in the Oval Office itself.
And in each of these rooms is an elephant; an elephant called the U.S. Defense Budget. The national media urges you to follow our leaders: Don’t think of the Elephant.
Don’t think about the defense budget having doubled during the past ten years.
Don’t think that the U.S. spends almost as much on the military (this year alone about $780 billion) as the entire rest of the world combined.
Don’t think about the Pentagon never having completed an audit, nor about the General Accountability Office finding $300 billion in cost overruns in the past five years.
Don’t think that here in Washington State we have paid $28 billion just for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; nor that our State legislators and Governor have proposed drastic cuts in our safety net to fill a $5 billion shortfall projected over the next two years. Don’t divide 5 into 28.
Don’t think of the dead – nearly one million soldiers and civilians dead as a direct result of military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Iraq Body Count).
Don’t think that with Osama bin Laden dead, there is no justification for remaining in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In fact, to follow our leaders, perhaps we should not think at all.
Luckily for us some in Congress HAVE been thinking and have drafted “The Peoples’ Budget.” Presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, it would:
End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring home the troops.
End overseas military emergency supplemental funding starting in Fiscal Year 2013.
Reduce baseline defense spending.
It would also:
Allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire at the end of 2012, but extend marriage relief, credits, and incentives for children, families, and education.
Immediately rescind the upper-income tax cuts in December’s tax deal.
Increase millionaire tax rates (adding 45%, 46%, 47%, 48%, and 49% top rates).
Tax all capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income.
Tax U.S. corporate foreign income as it is earned.
Eliminate corporate welfare for oil, gas, and coal companies.
Add a financial speculation tax (derivatives, foreign exchange)
Reinstate Superfund taxes.
Negotiate costs of pharmaceuticals with companies
These major shifts in government policy would allow Congress to:
Enact a public health care option.
Raise the taxable Social Security maximum on the employee side to 90% of earnings and eliminate the taxable maximum on the employer side.
Increase Social Security benefits based on higher contributions on the employee side.
Search out and punish Medicare and Medicaid provider fraud.
Prevent a cut in Medicare physician payments for a decade.
Invest $1.45 trillion in job creation, education, clean energy and broadband infrastructure, housing, and R&D.
All of this while reducing the federal deficit and balancing the budget. Not bad!!!
It’s time we urged our leaders to cut military spending to free up money for states’ needs. According to a University of Massachusetts-Amherst study, military dollars spent in a state yield the least number of jobs, compared to public investments in health, education, transportation and even tax cuts.
The elephant in Washington, D.C. tramples the grass in every state.
Our leaders are debating the federal budget in the marbled hearing rooms and mahogany chambers of Congress, in the cubicles of the White House West Wing, and in the Oval Office itself.
And in each of these rooms is an elephant; an elephant called the U.S. Defense Budget. The national media urges you to follow our leaders: Don’t think of the Elephant.
Don’t think about the defense budget having doubled during the past ten years.
Don’t think that the U.S. spends almost as much on the military (this year alone about $780 billion) as the entire rest of the world combined.
Don’t think about the Pentagon never having completed an audit, nor about the General Accountability Office finding $300 billion in cost overruns in the past five years.
Don’t think that here in Washington State we have paid $28 billion just for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; nor that our State legislators and Governor have proposed drastic cuts in our safety net to fill a $5 billion shortfall projected over the next two years. Don’t divide 5 into 28.
Don’t think of the dead – nearly one million soldiers and civilians dead as a direct result of military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Iraq Body Count).
Don’t think that with Osama bin Laden dead, there is no justification for remaining in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In fact, to follow our leaders, perhaps we should not think at all.
Luckily for us some in Congress HAVE been thinking and have drafted “The Peoples’ Budget.” Presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, it would:
End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring home the troops.
End overseas military emergency supplemental funding starting in Fiscal Year 2013.
Reduce baseline defense spending.
It would also:
Allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire at the end of 2012, but extend marriage relief, credits, and incentives for children, families, and education.
Immediately rescind the upper-income tax cuts in December’s tax deal.
Increase millionaire tax rates (adding 45%, 46%, 47%, 48%, and 49% top rates).
Tax all capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income.
Tax U.S. corporate foreign income as it is earned.
Eliminate corporate welfare for oil, gas, and coal companies.
Add a financial speculation tax (derivatives, foreign exchange)
Reinstate Superfund taxes.
Negotiate costs of pharmaceuticals with companies
These major shifts in government policy would allow Congress to:
Enact a public health care option.
Raise the taxable Social Security maximum on the employee side to 90% of earnings and eliminate the taxable maximum on the employer side.
Increase Social Security benefits based on higher contributions on the employee side.
Search out and punish Medicare and Medicaid provider fraud.
Prevent a cut in Medicare physician payments for a decade.
Invest $1.45 trillion in job creation, education, clean energy and broadband infrastructure, housing, and R&D.
All of this while reducing the federal deficit and balancing the budget. Not bad!!!
It’s time we urged our leaders to cut military spending to free up money for states’ needs. According to a University of Massachusetts-Amherst study, military dollars spent in a state yield the least number of jobs, compared to public investments in health, education, transportation and even tax cuts.
The elephant in Washington, D.C. tramples the grass in every state.
Our July 7 Membership Gala with Mayor McGinn
Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn will be our guest Thursday, July 7, at our annual party and membership meeting at the Greenwood Senior Center, 525 N 85th Street.
The party starts with a potluck dinner at 4:30 p.m. At 5 p.m., Mayor McGinn will make brief remarks with plenty of time left over for questions and answers. The Mayor says he is looking forward to the meeting.
“Thank you to PSARA leadership and members for inviting me to attend your annual membership meeting,” Mayor McGinn said in a statement to The Advocate. “Your advocacy for progressive causes and the well-being of older people is essential. I hope you can attend the annual meeting and tell me about the issues that matter most to you.”
Please bring a main dish, salad, fruit, or soft drinks for the potluck if you can.
At 6 p.m. we’ll have a brief PSARA business meeting, followed by more time for socializing. If you can be there, please RSVP to the PSARA office, 206-448-9646 or email adminvp@psara.org. Metro route #48 passes the Senior Center on 85th Street. Limited parking is available in the Center’s lot, and on-street parking in the surrounding neighborhood. See you there!
The party starts with a potluck dinner at 4:30 p.m. At 5 p.m., Mayor McGinn will make brief remarks with plenty of time left over for questions and answers. The Mayor says he is looking forward to the meeting.
“Thank you to PSARA leadership and members for inviting me to attend your annual membership meeting,” Mayor McGinn said in a statement to The Advocate. “Your advocacy for progressive causes and the well-being of older people is essential. I hope you can attend the annual meeting and tell me about the issues that matter most to you.”
Please bring a main dish, salad, fruit, or soft drinks for the potluck if you can.
At 6 p.m. we’ll have a brief PSARA business meeting, followed by more time for socializing. If you can be there, please RSVP to the PSARA office, 206-448-9646 or email adminvp@psara.org. Metro route #48 passes the Senior Center on 85th Street. Limited parking is available in the Center’s lot, and on-street parking in the surrounding neighborhood. See you there!
Social Security funding is sound, but program remains at risk
By Steve Kofahl
The recent report by the Social Security Trustees shows only a slight deterioration in future funding projections, with the Trust Fund reserves now expected to last until 2036, rather than 2037. After that date, 77% of scheduled benefits would still be payable, with checks actually being higher than those issued today, even when adjusted for price inflation. That is because benefit amounts and cost-of-living adjustments are calculated based on wages, and in most years wages rise faster than prices. This period of recession, high unemployment, and wage suppression is the exception, not the rule. The trustees’ “intermediate” economic assumptions have proved to be pessimistic assumptions in normal times, with most of their previous reports extending the projected date by which the reserves would run out.
Annual surpluses ($69 billion this year) continue until 2025, when the current $2.6 trillion Trust Funds will have grown to well over $4 trillion. You wouldn’t know it if you relied on the major media, which misrepresents the finances of the program by failing to count interest payments as income. The Social Security chief actuary has told us that the law requires that all income and assets be included when describing the financial health of the program. Too many politicians refer to Trust Fund assets as “worthless IOUs.” They’re just as real and secure as U.S. Savings Bonds, and our debt held by China and other nations, and we need to keep saying it.
What we clearly need is first, to get more Americans back to work now in jobs that pay a living wage, and second, to scrap the $106,800 cap on wages and self-employment income that is subject to Social Security contributions. Politicians need to make real investments in education and job creation, and stop busting the unions that created the middle class. They should stop slashing public sector jobs. The vast majority of local, state, and federal workers now pay into Social Security.
Economist Dean Baker points out that projected increases in life expectancy in this year’s report also made a difference in the trustees’ projections. How much you can expect to benefit from these increases depends largely on your race and economic class. Those with low and moderate incomes, and African-Americans, have seen little increase in life expectancy. Rich white folks are the ones who are living much longer. That should only strengthen our resolve to defend the majority of the population that is not enjoying increased longevity, and that therefore will not receive significantly more checks in their lives than did previous generations. We must not tolerate any cuts in benefits or in cost of living calculations, period.
As I write this, it appears that the infamous “Gang of Six” is disintegrating. Faced by angry crowds at home, some of our elected representatives are now saying that they will not include Social Security in their plans to address growing budget deficits. However, we must remain vigilant. The President has Joe Biden negotiating with both political parties, and says he wants no lines drawn in the sand, and a bipartisan compromise.
The greatest threat now is that Congress and the White House may agree to binding caps or “triggers” that would automatically cut future domestic spending, including Social Security payments, when overall spending exceeds a certain level. There would be no new revenues, just more shredding of the social safety net.
This approach to deficit reduction would not only be cowardly, but cruel and inequitable. The wealthiest among us would continue to avoid paying their fair share from the riches they have accumulated, while the vast majority of Americans would suffer even more. No individual politician who holds office today would be held accountable for the future damage done.
We will not be fooled into accepting that kind of raw deal. We will press lawmakers to make the right choices, insist on healthy cuts in war spending, and demand an end to tax breaks that benefit only big corporations and the richest Americans. The battle is far from over, and the Alliance will never stop fighting.
The recent report by the Social Security Trustees shows only a slight deterioration in future funding projections, with the Trust Fund reserves now expected to last until 2036, rather than 2037. After that date, 77% of scheduled benefits would still be payable, with checks actually being higher than those issued today, even when adjusted for price inflation. That is because benefit amounts and cost-of-living adjustments are calculated based on wages, and in most years wages rise faster than prices. This period of recession, high unemployment, and wage suppression is the exception, not the rule. The trustees’ “intermediate” economic assumptions have proved to be pessimistic assumptions in normal times, with most of their previous reports extending the projected date by which the reserves would run out.
Annual surpluses ($69 billion this year) continue until 2025, when the current $2.6 trillion Trust Funds will have grown to well over $4 trillion. You wouldn’t know it if you relied on the major media, which misrepresents the finances of the program by failing to count interest payments as income. The Social Security chief actuary has told us that the law requires that all income and assets be included when describing the financial health of the program. Too many politicians refer to Trust Fund assets as “worthless IOUs.” They’re just as real and secure as U.S. Savings Bonds, and our debt held by China and other nations, and we need to keep saying it.
What we clearly need is first, to get more Americans back to work now in jobs that pay a living wage, and second, to scrap the $106,800 cap on wages and self-employment income that is subject to Social Security contributions. Politicians need to make real investments in education and job creation, and stop busting the unions that created the middle class. They should stop slashing public sector jobs. The vast majority of local, state, and federal workers now pay into Social Security.
Economist Dean Baker points out that projected increases in life expectancy in this year’s report also made a difference in the trustees’ projections. How much you can expect to benefit from these increases depends largely on your race and economic class. Those with low and moderate incomes, and African-Americans, have seen little increase in life expectancy. Rich white folks are the ones who are living much longer. That should only strengthen our resolve to defend the majority of the population that is not enjoying increased longevity, and that therefore will not receive significantly more checks in their lives than did previous generations. We must not tolerate any cuts in benefits or in cost of living calculations, period.
As I write this, it appears that the infamous “Gang of Six” is disintegrating. Faced by angry crowds at home, some of our elected representatives are now saying that they will not include Social Security in their plans to address growing budget deficits. However, we must remain vigilant. The President has Joe Biden negotiating with both political parties, and says he wants no lines drawn in the sand, and a bipartisan compromise.
The greatest threat now is that Congress and the White House may agree to binding caps or “triggers” that would automatically cut future domestic spending, including Social Security payments, when overall spending exceeds a certain level. There would be no new revenues, just more shredding of the social safety net.
This approach to deficit reduction would not only be cowardly, but cruel and inequitable. The wealthiest among us would continue to avoid paying their fair share from the riches they have accumulated, while the vast majority of Americans would suffer even more. No individual politician who holds office today would be held accountable for the future damage done.
We will not be fooled into accepting that kind of raw deal. We will press lawmakers to make the right choices, insist on healthy cuts in war spending, and demand an end to tax breaks that benefit only big corporations and the richest Americans. The battle is far from over, and the Alliance will never stop fighting.
Pride at Work
Join Pride at Work for the annual LGBT Pride Parade!
Click on the Meetings and Events link for details about this and other PSARA/community events.
Click on the Meetings and Events link for details about this and other PSARA/community events.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)