For a calendar of events, go to http://www.psara.org/events.htm
Updates will be posted to this link on the PSARA webpage.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Nancy Altman keynoter at Everett forum
Nancy J. Altman, a nationally-recognized expert on Social Security, will keynote a forum on that subject from 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m. Tuesday, October 18, at the Jackson Event Center on the campus of Everett Community College.
Sponsored by a coalition of community, labor and retiree organizations, the forum is entitled, “The Threat to Social Security: An Issue for All Generations.”
Altman has a 30-year background in private pensions and Social Security. She chairs the board of the Pension Rights Center, and was a member of the faculty at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. She is the author of many reports, editorials and opinion pieces, and of a new book, The Battle for Social Security.
Altman will puncture myths and misinformation circulating about Social Security, intensified by the rhetoric of the campaign season. She will also discuss possible ways to strengthen the program’s benefits, and will emphasize its importance to all generations of Americans – from children of the Great Depression to those born in the current Great Recession.
She will be joined in the speaking program by Jeff Johnson, president of the Washington State Labor Council, whose family were early recipients of Social Security survivor benefits.
A second forum, at 2 p.m. Monday, November 21, on the University of Washington campus, will feature as a keynote speaker Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women.
Both forums are free and open to the public. Events at other Puget Sound communities are being planned.
Sponsored by a coalition of community, labor and retiree organizations, the forum is entitled, “The Threat to Social Security: An Issue for All Generations.”
Altman has a 30-year background in private pensions and Social Security. She chairs the board of the Pension Rights Center, and was a member of the faculty at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. She is the author of many reports, editorials and opinion pieces, and of a new book, The Battle for Social Security.
Altman will puncture myths and misinformation circulating about Social Security, intensified by the rhetoric of the campaign season. She will also discuss possible ways to strengthen the program’s benefits, and will emphasize its importance to all generations of Americans – from children of the Great Depression to those born in the current Great Recession.
She will be joined in the speaking program by Jeff Johnson, president of the Washington State Labor Council, whose family were early recipients of Social Security survivor benefits.
A second forum, at 2 p.m. Monday, November 21, on the University of Washington campus, will feature as a keynote speaker Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women.
Both forums are free and open to the public. Events at other Puget Sound communities are being planned.
Obama Jobs Bill: Pass it – then do more!
By Mike Andrew
With more than 14 million Americans unemployed, President Obama had his work cut out for him when he announced the American Jobs Act in a speech on September 8.
Republican leaders rejected the president’s plan even before he gave the speech, but no one really expected a party committed to “making Obama a one-term president” to sign on to anything he proposed, no matter how good it might be.
President Obama’s real task was to convince the people who supported him in 2008, and are now increasingly skeptical of his leadership, that he is willing and able to lead the country out of economic crisis.
Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman, who has criticized the president’s economic policies in the past, pronounced himself “favorably surprised” by the American Jobs Act.
It was “significantly bolder and better than I expected,” Krugman said, and if enacted “it would probably make a significant dent in unemployment.”
Almost every important labor leader, from AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka to SEIU president Mary Kay Henry, called on Congress to pass the bill.
The president called for some $200 billion in new federal spending – most of it on infrastructure projects like repairing roads, bridges, and schools – with some additional money going to help retain currently employed teachers.
Obama’s plan also calls for $240 billion in tax cuts. Some of them might actually help create more jobs – incentives for businesses hiring new employees, for example.
However, the experience of the first stimulus package shows that on the whole temporary tax cuts do not result in new economic activity, and therefore new hiring, instead they result in debt reduction or in savings, which do not increase demand for labor.
Two hundred billion of spending sounds like a lot of money, but it’s not – not when compared to the $1 trillion hole in the US economy created by the collapse of the housing bubble and the resulting overhang of household debt.
The president’s plan will obviously fill only part of that hole.
There is a deeper problem, however, and that problem is structural and can’t be solved by stopgap stimulus bills, even good ones.
Since the end of World War II, domestic consumption accounted for some 62-63% of GDP.
In other words, almost two-thirds of all economic activity in the US came from people buying things – as opposed to investments in infrastructure, or new manufacturing opportunities, for example.
That means ordinary working families going about their day-to-day business are the real “jobs creators” in the US economy, not the corporate CEOs.
Starting in the 1980s, domestic consumption rose to 70% of GDP, and that’s where it was before the 2008 crash.
The problem is that the increase in domestic consumption did not come from an increase in the real incomes of working families. Just the opposite. Real incomes have been declining since the Reagan period.
Rather than being financed by an increase in real wealth, the increase in consumption was financed by easy credit,
Since the collapse of the housing bubble, easy credit is a thing of the past, but nothing has replaced it as the motor of consumption.
The credit scheme at least gave working people the illusion that they were participating in a period of national prosperity, but it also led to our present problem – working people saddled with personal debt, without the ability to repay it, and for 14 million working people, without a job at all.
The way out of our economic crisis is not just to create more jobs, but to find a way to create real wealth for the real jobs creators – America’s working people.
With more than 14 million Americans unemployed, President Obama had his work cut out for him when he announced the American Jobs Act in a speech on September 8.
Republican leaders rejected the president’s plan even before he gave the speech, but no one really expected a party committed to “making Obama a one-term president” to sign on to anything he proposed, no matter how good it might be.
President Obama’s real task was to convince the people who supported him in 2008, and are now increasingly skeptical of his leadership, that he is willing and able to lead the country out of economic crisis.
Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman, who has criticized the president’s economic policies in the past, pronounced himself “favorably surprised” by the American Jobs Act.
It was “significantly bolder and better than I expected,” Krugman said, and if enacted “it would probably make a significant dent in unemployment.”
Almost every important labor leader, from AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka to SEIU president Mary Kay Henry, called on Congress to pass the bill.
The president called for some $200 billion in new federal spending – most of it on infrastructure projects like repairing roads, bridges, and schools – with some additional money going to help retain currently employed teachers.
Obama’s plan also calls for $240 billion in tax cuts. Some of them might actually help create more jobs – incentives for businesses hiring new employees, for example.
However, the experience of the first stimulus package shows that on the whole temporary tax cuts do not result in new economic activity, and therefore new hiring, instead they result in debt reduction or in savings, which do not increase demand for labor.
Two hundred billion of spending sounds like a lot of money, but it’s not – not when compared to the $1 trillion hole in the US economy created by the collapse of the housing bubble and the resulting overhang of household debt.
The president’s plan will obviously fill only part of that hole.
There is a deeper problem, however, and that problem is structural and can’t be solved by stopgap stimulus bills, even good ones.
Since the end of World War II, domestic consumption accounted for some 62-63% of GDP.
In other words, almost two-thirds of all economic activity in the US came from people buying things – as opposed to investments in infrastructure, or new manufacturing opportunities, for example.
That means ordinary working families going about their day-to-day business are the real “jobs creators” in the US economy, not the corporate CEOs.
Starting in the 1980s, domestic consumption rose to 70% of GDP, and that’s where it was before the 2008 crash.
The problem is that the increase in domestic consumption did not come from an increase in the real incomes of working families. Just the opposite. Real incomes have been declining since the Reagan period.
Rather than being financed by an increase in real wealth, the increase in consumption was financed by easy credit,
Since the collapse of the housing bubble, easy credit is a thing of the past, but nothing has replaced it as the motor of consumption.
The credit scheme at least gave working people the illusion that they were participating in a period of national prosperity, but it also led to our present problem – working people saddled with personal debt, without the ability to repay it, and for 14 million working people, without a job at all.
The way out of our economic crisis is not just to create more jobs, but to find a way to create real wealth for the real jobs creators – America’s working people.
Holiday feast…and Jay Inslee, too!
Hear our special guest, Congressman Jay Inslee (he will be with us unless Congress is in session)….enjoy a sumptuous holiday potluck …help elect two PSARA officers and several Executive Board members.
It all happens at the General Membership Meeting from 12:30 to 3 p.m. Thursday, December 15, at Joe Crump Hall at UFCW Local 21, 5030 First Ave. S. Seattle.
Like to serve on PSARA’s lively Executive Board? Please contact Bette Reed, our Nominating Committee chair, at outreachvp@psara.org or call PSARA at (206) 448-9646. Leave a message if no one answers.
It all happens at the General Membership Meeting from 12:30 to 3 p.m. Thursday, December 15, at Joe Crump Hall at UFCW Local 21, 5030 First Ave. S. Seattle.
Like to serve on PSARA’s lively Executive Board? Please contact Bette Reed, our Nominating Committee chair, at outreachvp@psara.org or call PSARA at (206) 448-9646. Leave a message if no one answers.
PSARA Needs a Webmaster
Our wonderful volunteer webmaster, Lorraine Pozzi. has indicated that she needs to move on to other worthy involvements. We are deeply grateful to Lorraine for her stellar work and want to relieve her as soon as we find a good replacement. If you are interested in serving as PSARA’s webmaster and have the requisite skills, please contact Robby at president@psara.org.
Help us archive our newsletters
We are preparing PSARA and Puget Sound Council of Senior Citizens (PSCSC) files for archiving in the University of Washington Special Collections to preserve our history, especially Will Parry’s writing. Because we are missing many issues, we turn to our long-time members who may be able to help us complete our collection. Please contact Maureen Bo by leaving a message at the office, (206) 448-9646, or by e-mail at adminvp@psara.org if you have any of the following issues that we can copy for the archives:
PSARA RETIREE ADVOCATE: July, 2006; August, 2003; July, 2001; October and June, 2000.
PSCSC SENIOR NEWS: January, 1998; June and December, 1997; February and December, 1995; January, 1990;; and any issues from 1985 sthsrough 1989. We have no issues for those years.
If you have any missing issues, we’d appreciate hearing from you as soon s possible. We hope to complete the current archiving soon.
PSARA RETIREE ADVOCATE: July, 2006; August, 2003; July, 2001; October and June, 2000.
PSCSC SENIOR NEWS: January, 1998; June and December, 1997; February and December, 1995; January, 1990;; and any issues from 1985 sthsrough 1989. We have no issues for those years.
If you have any missing issues, we’d appreciate hearing from you as soon s possible. We hope to complete the current archiving soon.
‘We’ll see that day come ‘round!’
There’s an old song that speaks a basic truth about organizing. “One man’s hands,” the song tells us, “can’t tear a prison down.” Nor can two men’s hands.
But listen to the old song’s ringing affirmation: “But if two and two and fifty make a million, we’ll see that day come round!”
In our monthly page 2 column we’ve emphasized again and again the importance of each and every new member we can sign up. And our members are responding. Our membership is now growing at an impressive 250 a year.
Yes, indeed, “two and two” are figuratively beginning to “make fifty.”
In the process, as the song tells us, we’re building a solid base for more explosive growth in the future.
Well, maybe not a million, but for sure in time we can enroll new members in the thousands. Those thousands are out there, and they need our action-oriented, sharp-edged politics.
We simply have to find them, one by one and two by two, and introduce them to The Retiree Advocate and invite them to join us. Every new member has a circle of family and friends in his or her community. That makes every new member a potential organizer. Drop the pebble in the pool, and the circles widen!
And this is how we multiply our strength. This is how “two and two and fifty make a million.” And this is how “we’ll see that day come ‘round!”
But listen to the old song’s ringing affirmation: “But if two and two and fifty make a million, we’ll see that day come round!”
In our monthly page 2 column we’ve emphasized again and again the importance of each and every new member we can sign up. And our members are responding. Our membership is now growing at an impressive 250 a year.
Yes, indeed, “two and two” are figuratively beginning to “make fifty.”
In the process, as the song tells us, we’re building a solid base for more explosive growth in the future.
Well, maybe not a million, but for sure in time we can enroll new members in the thousands. Those thousands are out there, and they need our action-oriented, sharp-edged politics.
We simply have to find them, one by one and two by two, and introduce them to The Retiree Advocate and invite them to join us. Every new member has a circle of family and friends in his or her community. That makes every new member a potential organizer. Drop the pebble in the pool, and the circles widen!
And this is how we multiply our strength. This is how “two and two and fifty make a million.” And this is how “we’ll see that day come ‘round!”
Paid Sick Days ordinance a model for the nation
By Marilyn Watkins
Almost everyone working in Seattle will be guaranteed a few days of sick leave each year starting next September. Mayor McGinn signed Seattle’s Paid Sick and Safe Leave ordinance into law on September 23 in a lively ceremony at Plum Bistro, following an 8-to-1 vote by the City Council.
In addition to improving daily lives in Seattle and surrounding communities, this ordinance will have a powerful impact around the country. People in other cities and states want to use our ordinance as a model for their own. They also want to know how we won council passage despite intense opposition.
The Ordinance is great news for the 190,000 workers who don’t get any paid sick leave now, and for the many additional workers who are penalized if they take the leave they’ve earned. It’s good news for all of us who shop, eat out, or ride the bus – and now risk exposure to illness from people who can’t afford to stay home when sick. It’s good news for all the children whose health and schooling have suffered because their parents can’t get off work to take them to the pediatrician or nurse them through illness.
Paid sick days will help restore economic security to working families, reclaim the dignity of labor, and rebuild the middle class.
PSARA members helped win this historic victory. Without the outpouring of e-mails and phone calls, and the standing-room only crowds at hearings and forums, the City Council would have followed the road urged by the Chamber of Commerce – delaying action until we just gave up.
Seattle’s ordinance covers most of the half million workers within the city limits. Starting in September 2012, companies with the equivalent of 5 to 49 full-time workers must allow workers to earn up to 5 paid sick days, firms with 50 to 249 must provide 7 days, and larger firms 9 days. Companies are free to provide leave as flexible-use paid time off (PTO), so long as the leave can be used as needed for the health needs of the worker or close family members, or to deal with consequences of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Large firms, if they do use PTO, must provide at least 13.5 days.
Key to our success was collaborating from the beginning with small business owners on designing the policy. People like Makini Howell, owner of Plum Bistro and Jody Hall, owner of Cupcake Royale, became vocal advocates. These small employers and many others like them are organized into the Main Street Alliance, a new, more progressive association of small business owners. While the Main Street Alliance did not take a position on the Paid Sick Days ordinance, a number of the small business owners within the Alliance supported the ordinance.
Working people and seniors also turned out in force and spoke about the real cost of being forced to choose between taking care of health needs or paying the bills. And we had staunch champions on the City Council, especially in Nick Licata and Jean Godden. In the end, only Richard Conlin voted no.
We succeeded because we listened to each other and worked together – and because people who usually don’t have much say in policymaking had a chance to participate here. We can all be proud both of passing good groundbreaking policy and of demonstrating democracy at its best.
Almost everyone working in Seattle will be guaranteed a few days of sick leave each year starting next September. Mayor McGinn signed Seattle’s Paid Sick and Safe Leave ordinance into law on September 23 in a lively ceremony at Plum Bistro, following an 8-to-1 vote by the City Council.
In addition to improving daily lives in Seattle and surrounding communities, this ordinance will have a powerful impact around the country. People in other cities and states want to use our ordinance as a model for their own. They also want to know how we won council passage despite intense opposition.
The Ordinance is great news for the 190,000 workers who don’t get any paid sick leave now, and for the many additional workers who are penalized if they take the leave they’ve earned. It’s good news for all of us who shop, eat out, or ride the bus – and now risk exposure to illness from people who can’t afford to stay home when sick. It’s good news for all the children whose health and schooling have suffered because their parents can’t get off work to take them to the pediatrician or nurse them through illness.
Paid sick days will help restore economic security to working families, reclaim the dignity of labor, and rebuild the middle class.
PSARA members helped win this historic victory. Without the outpouring of e-mails and phone calls, and the standing-room only crowds at hearings and forums, the City Council would have followed the road urged by the Chamber of Commerce – delaying action until we just gave up.
Seattle’s ordinance covers most of the half million workers within the city limits. Starting in September 2012, companies with the equivalent of 5 to 49 full-time workers must allow workers to earn up to 5 paid sick days, firms with 50 to 249 must provide 7 days, and larger firms 9 days. Companies are free to provide leave as flexible-use paid time off (PTO), so long as the leave can be used as needed for the health needs of the worker or close family members, or to deal with consequences of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Large firms, if they do use PTO, must provide at least 13.5 days.
Key to our success was collaborating from the beginning with small business owners on designing the policy. People like Makini Howell, owner of Plum Bistro and Jody Hall, owner of Cupcake Royale, became vocal advocates. These small employers and many others like them are organized into the Main Street Alliance, a new, more progressive association of small business owners. While the Main Street Alliance did not take a position on the Paid Sick Days ordinance, a number of the small business owners within the Alliance supported the ordinance.
Working people and seniors also turned out in force and spoke about the real cost of being forced to choose between taking care of health needs or paying the bills. And we had staunch champions on the City Council, especially in Nick Licata and Jean Godden. In the end, only Richard Conlin voted no.
We succeeded because we listened to each other and worked together – and because people who usually don’t have much say in policymaking had a chance to participate here. We can all be proud both of passing good groundbreaking policy and of demonstrating democracy at its best.
Three Initiatives and a Special Session
By Robby Stern
Our ballots will arrive in the mail within several weeks. PSARA has taken a position on three important initiatives on the ballot. The fate of these initiatives will have an impact on our future and the future of our state. For those of you who do not want to read more, we recommend:
NO on I-1125. NO on I-1183. YES on I-1163.
Tim Eyman’s newest broadside is Initiative 1125. The bulk of the contributions to I-1125, over $1 million, come from Kemper Freeman, a Bellevue developer. According to Eyman, I - 1125 is intended to block the voter-approved construction of light rail on I–90 across the Lake Washington Bridge. I–1125 also threatens the Evergreen Point floating bridge replacement, Clark County’s Columbia River Crossing, the Alaska Way Viaduct replacement and multiple other projects around the state. It also threatens thousands of much-needed good-paying jobs.
The vehicle Eyman uses to achieve his purposes is to remove the setting of toll rates from an independent nonpartisan commission and instead require the legislature to set toll rates. Every other state in the country has an independent commission setting toll rates to avoid the political gridlock that frequently occurs when elected politicians make these decisions. According to an independent analysis for the State Treasurer, the initiative will cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in increased bond costs to pay for transportation projects.
PSARA recommends we vote NO on I-1125.
In 2008, voters overwhelmingly passed I–1029, which required criminal background checks and increased training for long-term care workers who assist vulnerable seniors and people with disabilities. In the 2010 legislative session, the legislature reduced the training requirements and delayed the criminal background checks. Initiative 1163, on the ballot this year, restores the training requirements and criminal background checks for long-term care workers.
Hairdressers must have 1000 hours of training and nail technicians 600 hours of training. Home care workers do difficult and important work visiting seriously ill seniors and people with disabilities. They help them dress, bathe, clean, get out of bed and cook so they can stay in their own homes. Under present law, they will not be getting the training and certification they need. Nursing home caregivers must have 85 hours of training while home care workers who provide the same kind of care in a more isolated setting get no similar level of training.
I have not yet met a senior who has told me they want to age in a nursing home. All of us aspire to age in our own homes where we feel more connected to our families and communities. Without qualified and trained caregivers who can help us live safely in our own homes, the most vulnerable among us will be forced into nursing homes. Requiring training and background checks is a common sense approach to the growing need for home care workers.
PSARA members at our membership meeting voted to endorse I-1163 and to recommend a YES vote.
Last November, Washington voters said NO to privatization of liquor sales. Costco and other large retailers have returned with I-1183, which will create five times as many hard liquor retailers. The Centers for Disease Control says that will likely lead to more than a 50 percent increase in consumption. It is predicted that one of every four minors attempting to buy alcohol from private retailers will succeed. When big corporations spend large amounts of money to pass an initiative like I-1183, you can bet it is not for the public good.
PSARA recommends a NO vote on I-1183.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
The Upcoming Special Session
The damage that Wall Street and the banks have done to our economy is just astonishing. The suffering they caused is growing worse and worse. Those who created this recession/depression continue to do very well. The wealth gap continues to grow to historic proportions.
Revenue to the state has declined even more than had been anticipated in the 2010 legislative session. The September revenue forecast predicted an additional $1.4 billion decline in revenue and Gov. Gregoire indicated the need for a special session after the November forecast to address the reduced revenue.
PSARA believes that cuts to education, healthcare and other essential services undermine any hope for an economic recovery. After billions and billions in cuts, our communities cannot afford any more cuts to jobs, our future and our quality of life. We will not be able to cut ourselves out of this crisis. Revenue must be part of the solution. Our elected leaders should pass a referendum to the people (if they cannot muster the required 60% vote) ending unfair tax breaks. Let voters decide whether we end unfair tax breaks -- or make deeper budget cuts.
Our ballots will arrive in the mail within several weeks. PSARA has taken a position on three important initiatives on the ballot. The fate of these initiatives will have an impact on our future and the future of our state. For those of you who do not want to read more, we recommend:
NO on I-1125. NO on I-1183. YES on I-1163.
Tim Eyman’s newest broadside is Initiative 1125. The bulk of the contributions to I-1125, over $1 million, come from Kemper Freeman, a Bellevue developer. According to Eyman, I - 1125 is intended to block the voter-approved construction of light rail on I–90 across the Lake Washington Bridge. I–1125 also threatens the Evergreen Point floating bridge replacement, Clark County’s Columbia River Crossing, the Alaska Way Viaduct replacement and multiple other projects around the state. It also threatens thousands of much-needed good-paying jobs.
The vehicle Eyman uses to achieve his purposes is to remove the setting of toll rates from an independent nonpartisan commission and instead require the legislature to set toll rates. Every other state in the country has an independent commission setting toll rates to avoid the political gridlock that frequently occurs when elected politicians make these decisions. According to an independent analysis for the State Treasurer, the initiative will cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in increased bond costs to pay for transportation projects.
PSARA recommends we vote NO on I-1125.
In 2008, voters overwhelmingly passed I–1029, which required criminal background checks and increased training for long-term care workers who assist vulnerable seniors and people with disabilities. In the 2010 legislative session, the legislature reduced the training requirements and delayed the criminal background checks. Initiative 1163, on the ballot this year, restores the training requirements and criminal background checks for long-term care workers.
Hairdressers must have 1000 hours of training and nail technicians 600 hours of training. Home care workers do difficult and important work visiting seriously ill seniors and people with disabilities. They help them dress, bathe, clean, get out of bed and cook so they can stay in their own homes. Under present law, they will not be getting the training and certification they need. Nursing home caregivers must have 85 hours of training while home care workers who provide the same kind of care in a more isolated setting get no similar level of training.
I have not yet met a senior who has told me they want to age in a nursing home. All of us aspire to age in our own homes where we feel more connected to our families and communities. Without qualified and trained caregivers who can help us live safely in our own homes, the most vulnerable among us will be forced into nursing homes. Requiring training and background checks is a common sense approach to the growing need for home care workers.
PSARA members at our membership meeting voted to endorse I-1163 and to recommend a YES vote.
Last November, Washington voters said NO to privatization of liquor sales. Costco and other large retailers have returned with I-1183, which will create five times as many hard liquor retailers. The Centers for Disease Control says that will likely lead to more than a 50 percent increase in consumption. It is predicted that one of every four minors attempting to buy alcohol from private retailers will succeed. When big corporations spend large amounts of money to pass an initiative like I-1183, you can bet it is not for the public good.
PSARA recommends a NO vote on I-1183.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
The Upcoming Special Session
The damage that Wall Street and the banks have done to our economy is just astonishing. The suffering they caused is growing worse and worse. Those who created this recession/depression continue to do very well. The wealth gap continues to grow to historic proportions.
Revenue to the state has declined even more than had been anticipated in the 2010 legislative session. The September revenue forecast predicted an additional $1.4 billion decline in revenue and Gov. Gregoire indicated the need for a special session after the November forecast to address the reduced revenue.
PSARA believes that cuts to education, healthcare and other essential services undermine any hope for an economic recovery. After billions and billions in cuts, our communities cannot afford any more cuts to jobs, our future and our quality of life. We will not be able to cut ourselves out of this crisis. Revenue must be part of the solution. Our elected leaders should pass a referendum to the people (if they cannot muster the required 60% vote) ending unfair tax breaks. Let voters decide whether we end unfair tax breaks -- or make deeper budget cuts.
Staff and budget cuts jeopardize Social Security
By Steve Kofahl
George W. Bush wanted to privatize Social Security, and we fought off those efforts during his second term. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction will soon consider benefit cuts in the name of deficit reduction, and we are gearing up to defeat those proposals as well. But a more insidious attack has been underway for more than a quarter century. Deep cuts have been made in the spending and staffing needed to properly run the Social Security Administration (SSA), and bad management decisions have harmed service delivery.
In spite of these problems, the public has been generally well-served due to the commitment and dedication of front-line SSA employees. However, proposals from Congress, and decisions being made by the SSA Commissioner and his subordinates, may soon rob the employees of the capacity to continue that proud tradition. If the public loses confidence in SSA's ability to deliver quality service, Social Security itself becomes far more vulnerable to attack from the program's enemies. Recent surveys by the Agency show that the public is already becoming less satisfied.
Between1985 and 1989, President Reagan and SSA Commissioner Dorcas Hardy cut staff through attrition, from about 83,000 to 62,000 positions. A hostile labor-management relationship was established in the Agency at the same time. Pressure from Congress and the public led Reagan to replace Ms. Hardy with Gwendolyn King, who stopped the staff cuts and healed SSA's relationship with AFGE.
With the arrival of George W. Bush, an adversarial labor-management relationship was again established, while thousands of front-line positions were chopped through attrition. President Obama restored those lost positions, but ignored recommendations made by his transition team, and by the AFL-CIO (including the Washington State Labor Council) to replace Bush's SSA Commissioner, Michael J. Astrue. It isn't just labor that has problems with Astrue's oligarchic management style. Well-respected senior Agency officials at Headquarters who dared to express views different than his have been fired, or threatened with firing.
Current year funding of SSA operations is nearly $1 billion less than the President requested, and there has been a near-total hiring freeze for most of the past year. Republican proposals have been made to gut staffing and spending at all Federal agencies, including SSA.
Using spending constraints as an excuse, Astrue stopped sending annual Personal Earnings and Benefit Estimate (PEBES) statements to workers early this year. That means that wage posting errors are not revealed in time for them to be easily corrected. AFGE and the Alliance for Retired Americans are considering legal action in response to this suspension of PEBES, since the issuance of the statements is required by law.
The Commissioner has mounted an aggressive campaign in recent years to steer the public toward Internet self-service when they apply for benefits, and to encourage and train third parties (some of whom charge fees) to perform the work traditionally done by the Agency's Claims Representatives. SSA employees find that numerous errors are made when the public uses these alternate service methods. Early this year, Astrue closed 300 contact stations where SSA employees made themselves available to serve clients who had difficulty getting to field offices, and reportedly told Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown that he intends to close as many as one-half of the Agency's 1300 field offices.
Since that time, dozens of offices have been targeted for closure (see the July Retiree Advocate regarding Seattle office closures). A few weeks ago, hours of service were cut by 30 minutes at the end of the day in each of the Agency's field offices, to reduce the need to pay employees overtime for late interviews.
New leadership is needed that would repair the damaged labor-management relationship, so that SSA employees would again have a voice at work, with their ideas considered when the Agency makes decisions about how to save money. Elimination of unnecessary middle management Headquarters and Regional Office positions that do nothing to improve service might be a good place to start.
Because just 0.9% of income is used to administer the program, and because the Trust Funds continue to receive more money than is paid out in benefits, there is enough money to restore quality public service delivery by trained SSA employees. Administrative funding should be taken off-budget, and not be subject to arbitrary spending caps, since Social Security is self-funded and workers already have paid for the quality service delivery that they need and deserve.
Please contact your Senators, and ask them to be our champions on these issues!
(Steve Kofahl is president of Local 3937 of the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO and a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
George W. Bush wanted to privatize Social Security, and we fought off those efforts during his second term. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction will soon consider benefit cuts in the name of deficit reduction, and we are gearing up to defeat those proposals as well. But a more insidious attack has been underway for more than a quarter century. Deep cuts have been made in the spending and staffing needed to properly run the Social Security Administration (SSA), and bad management decisions have harmed service delivery.
In spite of these problems, the public has been generally well-served due to the commitment and dedication of front-line SSA employees. However, proposals from Congress, and decisions being made by the SSA Commissioner and his subordinates, may soon rob the employees of the capacity to continue that proud tradition. If the public loses confidence in SSA's ability to deliver quality service, Social Security itself becomes far more vulnerable to attack from the program's enemies. Recent surveys by the Agency show that the public is already becoming less satisfied.
Between1985 and 1989, President Reagan and SSA Commissioner Dorcas Hardy cut staff through attrition, from about 83,000 to 62,000 positions. A hostile labor-management relationship was established in the Agency at the same time. Pressure from Congress and the public led Reagan to replace Ms. Hardy with Gwendolyn King, who stopped the staff cuts and healed SSA's relationship with AFGE.
With the arrival of George W. Bush, an adversarial labor-management relationship was again established, while thousands of front-line positions were chopped through attrition. President Obama restored those lost positions, but ignored recommendations made by his transition team, and by the AFL-CIO (including the Washington State Labor Council) to replace Bush's SSA Commissioner, Michael J. Astrue. It isn't just labor that has problems with Astrue's oligarchic management style. Well-respected senior Agency officials at Headquarters who dared to express views different than his have been fired, or threatened with firing.
Current year funding of SSA operations is nearly $1 billion less than the President requested, and there has been a near-total hiring freeze for most of the past year. Republican proposals have been made to gut staffing and spending at all Federal agencies, including SSA.
Using spending constraints as an excuse, Astrue stopped sending annual Personal Earnings and Benefit Estimate (PEBES) statements to workers early this year. That means that wage posting errors are not revealed in time for them to be easily corrected. AFGE and the Alliance for Retired Americans are considering legal action in response to this suspension of PEBES, since the issuance of the statements is required by law.
The Commissioner has mounted an aggressive campaign in recent years to steer the public toward Internet self-service when they apply for benefits, and to encourage and train third parties (some of whom charge fees) to perform the work traditionally done by the Agency's Claims Representatives. SSA employees find that numerous errors are made when the public uses these alternate service methods. Early this year, Astrue closed 300 contact stations where SSA employees made themselves available to serve clients who had difficulty getting to field offices, and reportedly told Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown that he intends to close as many as one-half of the Agency's 1300 field offices.
Since that time, dozens of offices have been targeted for closure (see the July Retiree Advocate regarding Seattle office closures). A few weeks ago, hours of service were cut by 30 minutes at the end of the day in each of the Agency's field offices, to reduce the need to pay employees overtime for late interviews.
New leadership is needed that would repair the damaged labor-management relationship, so that SSA employees would again have a voice at work, with their ideas considered when the Agency makes decisions about how to save money. Elimination of unnecessary middle management Headquarters and Regional Office positions that do nothing to improve service might be a good place to start.
Because just 0.9% of income is used to administer the program, and because the Trust Funds continue to receive more money than is paid out in benefits, there is enough money to restore quality public service delivery by trained SSA employees. Administrative funding should be taken off-budget, and not be subject to arbitrary spending caps, since Social Security is self-funded and workers already have paid for the quality service delivery that they need and deserve.
Please contact your Senators, and ask them to be our champions on these issues!
(Steve Kofahl is president of Local 3937 of the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO and a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
A bank of, by and for the people
By Will Parry
The developing campaign to establish a publicly-owned bank in Washington State will bring Ellen Brown, a nationally-recognized authority on the subject, to speak in Seattle at 7 p.m. Wednesday, October 26, in 120 Kane Hall on the University of Washington campus.
State Representative Bob Hasegawa, the prime sponsor of the State Bank bill in Washington, will share the podium to speak about the campaign in our state.
The State Bank concept has caught fire in Washington and other states because of the remarkable economic achievements of North Dakota, which since 1919 has had the nation’s only publicly-owned bank.
Hasegawa’s bill, House Bill 2040, called for a bank patterned after North Dakota’s. HB 2040 didn’t pass in the 2011 session, but drew strong support from House Democrats and some support from House Republicans as well, Hasegawa reported.
“Speaker of the House Frank Chopp, who has been very supportive of this concept, initiated an Infrastructure Financing Task Force to work in the interim between sessions,” Hasegawa said. Its mission is to recommend, for consideration by the 2012 legislature, ways to establish “a financial institution to be owned by the public.”
Washington’s state funds are currently deposited with Bank of America, one of the four banking giants that dominate the industry and that have earned the nation’s contempt, both for their failure to make the loans that could revive the economy, and for the unvarnished greed of their executives.
The state-owned Bank of North Dakota, in contrast, partners with small and medium-sized banks in that state to finance farms, start-up businesses, and business expansions, spurring economic growth.
North Dakota also has the nation’s fastest growth in payrolls, 3.2 percent in the last year. It has the nation’s lowest foreclosure rate. And it is the only state to be in continuous budget surplus since the banking crisis of 2008. Its balance sheet is so strong that it recently reduced individual income taxes and property taxes by a combined $400 million.
The author of eleven books, Ellen Brown is about to release a twelfth, Web of Debt, tracing the evolution of the existing privately-owned banking system. She has also written nearly one hundred articles on issues related to public banking.
Her Seattle appearance is being sponsored by Keep Our Money in Washington and by Just Sustainable Economy. The Puget Sound ARA has signed on as a co-sponsor. A $5 admission fee will be charged at the October 26 Kane Hall event. Students with ID will be admitted free.
The developing campaign to establish a publicly-owned bank in Washington State will bring Ellen Brown, a nationally-recognized authority on the subject, to speak in Seattle at 7 p.m. Wednesday, October 26, in 120 Kane Hall on the University of Washington campus.
State Representative Bob Hasegawa, the prime sponsor of the State Bank bill in Washington, will share the podium to speak about the campaign in our state.
The State Bank concept has caught fire in Washington and other states because of the remarkable economic achievements of North Dakota, which since 1919 has had the nation’s only publicly-owned bank.
Hasegawa’s bill, House Bill 2040, called for a bank patterned after North Dakota’s. HB 2040 didn’t pass in the 2011 session, but drew strong support from House Democrats and some support from House Republicans as well, Hasegawa reported.
“Speaker of the House Frank Chopp, who has been very supportive of this concept, initiated an Infrastructure Financing Task Force to work in the interim between sessions,” Hasegawa said. Its mission is to recommend, for consideration by the 2012 legislature, ways to establish “a financial institution to be owned by the public.”
Washington’s state funds are currently deposited with Bank of America, one of the four banking giants that dominate the industry and that have earned the nation’s contempt, both for their failure to make the loans that could revive the economy, and for the unvarnished greed of their executives.
The state-owned Bank of North Dakota, in contrast, partners with small and medium-sized banks in that state to finance farms, start-up businesses, and business expansions, spurring economic growth.
North Dakota also has the nation’s fastest growth in payrolls, 3.2 percent in the last year. It has the nation’s lowest foreclosure rate. And it is the only state to be in continuous budget surplus since the banking crisis of 2008. Its balance sheet is so strong that it recently reduced individual income taxes and property taxes by a combined $400 million.
The author of eleven books, Ellen Brown is about to release a twelfth, Web of Debt, tracing the evolution of the existing privately-owned banking system. She has also written nearly one hundred articles on issues related to public banking.
Her Seattle appearance is being sponsored by Keep Our Money in Washington and by Just Sustainable Economy. The Puget Sound ARA has signed on as a co-sponsor. A $5 admission fee will be charged at the October 26 Kane Hall event. Students with ID will be admitted free.
Medicare: Playing games and causing pain
By Will Parry
President Obama has drawn up a plan to reduce the federal budget deficit by another $3 trillion over ten years, including $320 billion in cuts in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. His proposal will go to the Congressional “super committee” for their consideration.
The White House admitted the plan would impose “a lot of pain,” and Robert Pear, writing in the New York Times, said the pain is certainly there in the Medicare and Medicaid cuts.
“Mr. Obama proposed higher premiums and deductibles for many Medicare beneficiaries” and would “start charging co-payments to frail homebound older people who receive home health services,” Pear said.
The Center for Medicare Advocacy (CMA) judged the Obama plan as an improvement over the Republican voucher proposal but found some aspects of it “troubling,” including “increased cost-sharing for beneficiaries – especially for people with long-term conditions.”
The Obama plan would require new beneficiaries to pay higher deductibles before Medicare’s excellent coverage kicks in. It would sock new beneficiaries who buy private Medigap policies with a 30 percent premium increase. It would charge higher premiums to higher-income beneficiaries. And starting in 2017, the plan would saddle new beneficiaries with a co-payment for home health care.
Such co-payments would “significantly increase out-of-pocket costs for many low-income widows with multiple chronic conditions,” said Howard J. Bedlin, vice president of the National Council on Aging.
On the positive side, the President would maintain the present eligibility age for Social Security and Medicare; would not tamper with the provision for annual cost-of-living adjustments; and would reduce drug costs for low-income beneficiaries.
CMA offered an alternative Medicare proposal that would reduce the federal deficit substantially without shifting the cost to the program’s beneficiaries. Here is CMA’s “Six-Point Solution”:
• Negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical companies. The industry picked up 47 million customers with the enactment of Medicare drug coverage in 2003, but ever since has adjusted the prices of its products only in one direction -- upwards.
• Stop paying private Medicare plans more than traditional Medicare.
• Include a drug benefit in traditional Medicare.
• Extend Medicaid drug rebates to Medicare dual eligibles. People eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid make up one fourth of all Medicare drug users. Rebates already available to those on Medicaid should be extended to all dual eligibles.
•Lower the age of Medicare eligibility. Lowering the age of eligibility to 55 would add revenue from people likely to need less care than older enrollees. And it would provide Medicare’s excellent coverage for millions aged 55 to 64 who are now unable to afford private insurance.
• Let the Affordable Care Act do its job. Beat back all efforts to repeal or defund health care reform. Many provisions in the new law will reduce health care costs for all Americans.
Judith Stein, Executive Director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy, is appealing for citizen pressure on President Obama and the Congress.
“Tell them that shifting costs from the federal government to beneficiaries and their families – whether through a voucher program or increased cost-sharing – is a perversion of Medicare’s original intent to protect older people and their families from illness and financial ruin due to health care costs,” Stein said, adding:
“Plus it’s not needed for deficit reduction!”
President Obama has drawn up a plan to reduce the federal budget deficit by another $3 trillion over ten years, including $320 billion in cuts in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. His proposal will go to the Congressional “super committee” for their consideration.
The White House admitted the plan would impose “a lot of pain,” and Robert Pear, writing in the New York Times, said the pain is certainly there in the Medicare and Medicaid cuts.
“Mr. Obama proposed higher premiums and deductibles for many Medicare beneficiaries” and would “start charging co-payments to frail homebound older people who receive home health services,” Pear said.
The Center for Medicare Advocacy (CMA) judged the Obama plan as an improvement over the Republican voucher proposal but found some aspects of it “troubling,” including “increased cost-sharing for beneficiaries – especially for people with long-term conditions.”
The Obama plan would require new beneficiaries to pay higher deductibles before Medicare’s excellent coverage kicks in. It would sock new beneficiaries who buy private Medigap policies with a 30 percent premium increase. It would charge higher premiums to higher-income beneficiaries. And starting in 2017, the plan would saddle new beneficiaries with a co-payment for home health care.
Such co-payments would “significantly increase out-of-pocket costs for many low-income widows with multiple chronic conditions,” said Howard J. Bedlin, vice president of the National Council on Aging.
On the positive side, the President would maintain the present eligibility age for Social Security and Medicare; would not tamper with the provision for annual cost-of-living adjustments; and would reduce drug costs for low-income beneficiaries.
CMA offered an alternative Medicare proposal that would reduce the federal deficit substantially without shifting the cost to the program’s beneficiaries. Here is CMA’s “Six-Point Solution”:
• Negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical companies. The industry picked up 47 million customers with the enactment of Medicare drug coverage in 2003, but ever since has adjusted the prices of its products only in one direction -- upwards.
• Stop paying private Medicare plans more than traditional Medicare.
• Include a drug benefit in traditional Medicare.
• Extend Medicaid drug rebates to Medicare dual eligibles. People eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid make up one fourth of all Medicare drug users. Rebates already available to those on Medicaid should be extended to all dual eligibles.
•Lower the age of Medicare eligibility. Lowering the age of eligibility to 55 would add revenue from people likely to need less care than older enrollees. And it would provide Medicare’s excellent coverage for millions aged 55 to 64 who are now unable to afford private insurance.
• Let the Affordable Care Act do its job. Beat back all efforts to repeal or defund health care reform. Many provisions in the new law will reduce health care costs for all Americans.
Judith Stein, Executive Director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy, is appealing for citizen pressure on President Obama and the Congress.
“Tell them that shifting costs from the federal government to beneficiaries and their families – whether through a voucher program or increased cost-sharing – is a perversion of Medicare’s original intent to protect older people and their families from illness and financial ruin due to health care costs,” Stein said, adding:
“Plus it’s not needed for deficit reduction!”
‘Tax Wall Street!’ union nurses say
By Rap Lewis
Aiming squarely at Wall Street greed, an estimated ten thousand nurses and their labor and community allies organized simultaneous demonstrations at 61 Congressional offices in 21 states on September 1.
At each event, they called on senators and representatives to pledge to “support a Wall Street transaction tax that will raise sufficient revenue to make Wall Street pay for the devastation it has caused on Main Street.”
On the initiative of the 170,000-member National Nurses United (NNU), the demonstrators organized street theater, community speakouts, soup kitchens and old-fashioned picketlines at Congressmembers’ offices in Boston, San Francisco and Chicago; Corpus Christi, Texas; Marquette, Michigan; Dayton, Ohio, and many other cities.
“America’s nurses every day see broad declines in health and living standards that are a direct result of patients and families struggling with lack of jobs, un-payable medical bills, hunger and homelessness, said NNU Co-President Karen Higgins, RN, at a picketline outside the Richmond, Virginia, office of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.
The single demand uniting the demonstrators was for Congress to enact a “transaction tax” to be imposed for each Wall Street trade in stocks, derivatives, currencies, credit default swaps, and futures.
Because of the great number of such Wall Street transactions, even a modest tax on each would generate hundreds of billions of dollars a year to address the social damage for which Wall Street bears the responsibility, the nurses union says.
Aiming squarely at Wall Street greed, an estimated ten thousand nurses and their labor and community allies organized simultaneous demonstrations at 61 Congressional offices in 21 states on September 1.
At each event, they called on senators and representatives to pledge to “support a Wall Street transaction tax that will raise sufficient revenue to make Wall Street pay for the devastation it has caused on Main Street.”
On the initiative of the 170,000-member National Nurses United (NNU), the demonstrators organized street theater, community speakouts, soup kitchens and old-fashioned picketlines at Congressmembers’ offices in Boston, San Francisco and Chicago; Corpus Christi, Texas; Marquette, Michigan; Dayton, Ohio, and many other cities.
“America’s nurses every day see broad declines in health and living standards that are a direct result of patients and families struggling with lack of jobs, un-payable medical bills, hunger and homelessness, said NNU Co-President Karen Higgins, RN, at a picketline outside the Richmond, Virginia, office of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.
The single demand uniting the demonstrators was for Congress to enact a “transaction tax” to be imposed for each Wall Street trade in stocks, derivatives, currencies, credit default swaps, and futures.
Because of the great number of such Wall Street transactions, even a modest tax on each would generate hundreds of billions of dollars a year to address the social damage for which Wall Street bears the responsibility, the nurses union says.
Hey, look at Argentina!
By Mike Andrew
“You can’t spend your way out of a recession!”
So say Republicans and all economic conservatives.
And yet Argentina did just that, bouncing back not just from mere recession but from national bankruptcy, in less than 10 years.
In 2001 Argentina defaulted on $100 billion of sovereign debt. Its banks were collapsing like a house of cards. Its people were occupying shut-down factories.
In the four years between 1998 and 2002, Argentina’s economy shrank by almost 20%.
The problem was easy to see. Argentina was the victim of a series of right-wing military dictatorships trying one supply-side economic experiment after another, all of them failures.
The solution was a brave gamble by the Argentine government.
First, the government intervened in the currency market to keep the value of its own currency low. This in turn boosted local industry by making Argentina’s exports cheap, while keeping foreign imports expensive.
It then taxed imports and exports, and spent the revenue on a series of public works projects. Today, Argentine government spending is 25% of GDP, compared with only 14% in 2003.
As a result of the government-financed construction projects, the country has 400,000 new low-income housing units, and a new 235-mile highway between the northern cities of Rosario and Córdoba.
The Argentine government also strengthened its social safety net.
The Universal Child Allowance gives 1.9 million low-income families a monthly stipend of about $42 per child, which helps increase consumption. The Allowance began in 2009 with bipartisan support from both the ruling party and the opposition. Because the amount of the stipend depends in part on the child’s school attendance, the allowance is also a measure to promote public education.
The Argentine economy has grown by over 6% a year for seven of the last eight years, unemployment has been cut to under 8% today from a whopping 20% in 2002, and the poverty level has fallen by almost half over the last decade.
Argentines are expected to buy some 800,000 new vehicles this year. Plasma TVs and BlackBerrys have become common among Argentina’s growing middle class.
Obviously, this policy is inflationary, with the inflation rate now well over 20%. It remains to be seen how well Argentina’s working people will be able to cope with that.
Nevertheless, Argentina is another example that runs counter to the all-cuts austerity response to economic crisis.
“You can’t spend your way out of a recession!”
So say Republicans and all economic conservatives.
And yet Argentina did just that, bouncing back not just from mere recession but from national bankruptcy, in less than 10 years.
In 2001 Argentina defaulted on $100 billion of sovereign debt. Its banks were collapsing like a house of cards. Its people were occupying shut-down factories.
In the four years between 1998 and 2002, Argentina’s economy shrank by almost 20%.
The problem was easy to see. Argentina was the victim of a series of right-wing military dictatorships trying one supply-side economic experiment after another, all of them failures.
The solution was a brave gamble by the Argentine government.
First, the government intervened in the currency market to keep the value of its own currency low. This in turn boosted local industry by making Argentina’s exports cheap, while keeping foreign imports expensive.
It then taxed imports and exports, and spent the revenue on a series of public works projects. Today, Argentine government spending is 25% of GDP, compared with only 14% in 2003.
As a result of the government-financed construction projects, the country has 400,000 new low-income housing units, and a new 235-mile highway between the northern cities of Rosario and Córdoba.
The Argentine government also strengthened its social safety net.
The Universal Child Allowance gives 1.9 million low-income families a monthly stipend of about $42 per child, which helps increase consumption. The Allowance began in 2009 with bipartisan support from both the ruling party and the opposition. Because the amount of the stipend depends in part on the child’s school attendance, the allowance is also a measure to promote public education.
The Argentine economy has grown by over 6% a year for seven of the last eight years, unemployment has been cut to under 8% today from a whopping 20% in 2002, and the poverty level has fallen by almost half over the last decade.
Argentines are expected to buy some 800,000 new vehicles this year. Plasma TVs and BlackBerrys have become common among Argentina’s growing middle class.
Obviously, this policy is inflationary, with the inflation rate now well over 20%. It remains to be seen how well Argentina’s working people will be able to cope with that.
Nevertheless, Argentina is another example that runs counter to the all-cuts austerity response to economic crisis.
Toothache
by Rap Lewis
For the story of Kyle Willis, we are indebted to Matthew Yglesias, who blogs for The American Prospect.
Like 15 million other Americans, Willis was unemployed. Like many more millions, he had no health insurance. Therefore, when Willis’ wisdom tooth started hurting, he toughed it out for two weeks. When dentists told him it should be pulled, he held off because he had no way of paying for the procedure.
When his face stated swelling and his head began to ache, he went to a hospital emergency room. There he received prescriptions for antibiotics and pain medication. He couldn’t afford both, so he chose the pain medication.
The tooth infection spread, causing his brain to swell. On August 30, at the age of 24, Kyle Willis died.
The United States of America can pay for two wars, bail out the biggest banks, and dish out billions in tax “relief” to corporations and millionaires. All that wealth, swollen like an infected tooth -- yet it cannot provide, at modest cost, the most basic health services to Kyle Willis and millions like him.
Our country has a toothache and needs some radical dentistry.
For the story of Kyle Willis, we are indebted to Matthew Yglesias, who blogs for The American Prospect.
Like 15 million other Americans, Willis was unemployed. Like many more millions, he had no health insurance. Therefore, when Willis’ wisdom tooth started hurting, he toughed it out for two weeks. When dentists told him it should be pulled, he held off because he had no way of paying for the procedure.
When his face stated swelling and his head began to ache, he went to a hospital emergency room. There he received prescriptions for antibiotics and pain medication. He couldn’t afford both, so he chose the pain medication.
The tooth infection spread, causing his brain to swell. On August 30, at the age of 24, Kyle Willis died.
The United States of America can pay for two wars, bail out the biggest banks, and dish out billions in tax “relief” to corporations and millionaires. All that wealth, swollen like an infected tooth -- yet it cannot provide, at modest cost, the most basic health services to Kyle Willis and millions like him.
Our country has a toothache and needs some radical dentistry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)