The New Progressive

The Right Lives - God Save Us All

 The rigid right lives in Connecticut as the  <a href="http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/general_news/hartfords_taxpayer_tea_party">Connecticut </a> News Junkie reports.

 I like all this response to so called "pork" in the stimulus plan.  And to say that there is no pork would be disingenuous.  But what is the difference between calling it pork or "tax-cuts".  Its the same thing.  Except that "tax-cuts" usually has no strings attached.  You know, no oversight.  The government cannot dictate how you spend your money.  

The problem is this.  Tax cuts are not deep enough for the average person on the street to actually get ahead.  I mean the last tax incentive check paid for the increase in oil and gas for heating my home and commuting to work.  So if you want real stimulus, that little $600 check merely offsets inflation and does not even begin to creep into the problems that real people are facing.  

So, what are these people really protesting?  Not the fact that there is really any "pork" in the legislation.  They are protesting because all that money they saved in tax cuts over the last 8 years will finally have to see the light of day.  They may actually have to divest themselves of investments to pay taxes.  

Now I do not advocate a policy of soak the rich.  I think that that would be futile.  However, I do think that they should re-educated themselves.  1.  They claim to be patriotic, well put you money where your mouth is.  Ask yourself, would you be as rich as you are if you did not live in this country.  I know this requires deprogramming and the development of a conscience.  2.  Throw away some of those ridiculous economic theories of old.  In case you have not been noticing, THEY DON'T WORK.  Trickle down economics doesn't trickle or drip it stops at the top and the rich do not invest they put the money in the bank.  

We need percolate up politics and it is time.  As someone once said, "money, if you pardon the expression, is like manure.  It's not worth a thing unless its spread around encouraging things to grow."

I too hope these people keep up the protest.  It's about time that the other side knows what futility feels like.  I know I seem to be picking fun.  I do not challenge their patriotism.  I challenge the principles that they have been advocating. 

The President Needs Some Slack

Well according to the Washington Post <a href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/21/AR2009022100911.html>the Obama Administration is putting forth a budget proposal to cut the federal deficit in 4 years.  Well, since Republicans have little credit on this issue, I hope he succeeds.  We need to not just have fiscal discipline and invest.  That is what government is for.  To do the things that business and the rich will not do.  And he plans to do it by raising taxes on the rich, well since they benefited from the last 8 years of unchecked regulation and increased incomes, they should pay their fair share.   The Repbulicans want to say that we should not get into class warfare tactics.  Well, what kind of war are they fighting when they ignore an economy for the last 8 years that has overheated.  What about the housing problems?  They ignored regulation and let it fester.  Banking?  I never thought I would see the day that I questioned the safety of my deposits.  There is an endless list. 

I was not originally an Obama supporter, but from what I have seen I like.  He has show that he understands people are hurting.  He has tried to work with the Republicans, who have turned their noses.  No President since FDR has gotten results like this,  Ronald Reagan had to work a bit longer but he did manage a tax cut for all his freinds who gave him a campaign contribution.  I hope that the new President manages a few more things because he seems to be on the right track.

Politics as Usual in the Governor's Office

In an article in the Hartford Courant, (http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-govwatch0215.artfeb15,0,3329924.column), It has come to the attention of the public that she is willing to play the political game she so characteristically has asked others not to employ. 

Last December, Melissa Farley, the judicial branch's executive director of external affairs and legislative liaison, called the governor's office to request that 9 judicial positions not be appointed because they were not needed.  This would save about $2 million dollars that is so desperately needed for the budget deficit.  In more than 2 incidents documented by the Courant, the governor's office refused to back down from nominating judges to save the money.  The governor's office is claiming that the judges are needed.  This is in contradistinction to the claims of Ms Farley.  At at time when leadership should be exerted, Rell has chosen the easy way, politics as usual.  This incident could be overlooked, had it not been for the recent discovery that the governor has no clue as to how much the deficit beginning in the new fiscal year will be.  At first she had stated there would be a $8 billion dollar budget deficit.   However, in her annual budget proposal is for only a $6 billion dollar gap. The latest number is $8.6 billion according to the Office of Fiscal Analysis. To cover up her latest blunder the governor is now calling for budget summit with members her budget team and the Office of Fiscal Analysis.  This should have been done before the governor submitted her budget.

Now the story gets even more interesting as John Lender writes in the article noted above.  As recently as last December, the chief court administrator, Judge Barbara Quinn had personally called the Governor's top aid Lisa Moody to head off filling the proposed nominations.  The judicial branch simply did not need the judges.  However, this is contrary to the Governor's spokesman Rich Harris who questioned the validity of the claim of the Judicial Branch's aggressiveness in addressing the issue.  Harris stated that the Judicial Branch had not been aggressive enough in pursuing the non-appointment of judges.  What should the chief court administrator have done?  She called the top aid of the Governor.  Should Judge Quinn have gone to the Chief Justice of the Connecticut State Supreme Court and have her call the Governor?  Clearly, the Governor's office had every interest in naming appointees.  Forget saving the much needed money.

What one gets from this latest turn of political events is that the Governor's aids are not serving her well.  Clearly, they knew about the request of the judicial branch.  They have placed the Governor in a position that most aids try to avoid.  The question of leadership now arises among the public.  If the Governor did not know about the request of the Judicial Branch, why didn't she?  This makes one wonder who is in control in the governor's office.  If the governor's aids did not inform her they are guilty of malfeasance and a house cleaning should be in order.  Secondly, if the Rell did know of the request, she is now guilty of playing the old political game that she claims she is above.  Judicial positions remain prized plums for political favors.  In all likelihood,  she probably thought this would never see the light of day, big mistake.  Now, the governor's image as attempting to stay above politics is truly shattered.  At a time of huge budget deficits, this could have been a political point to make, especially given the recent budget she just submitted cutting the health programs of the very poor.  Instead, Connecticut will have 9 new judges that they don't need within the year. 

When one works in the political arena, the political game can be a closed system. The role of making deals and doing favors is nothing new.  Since 2004, Governor Rell has attempted to be above politics as usual.  A refreshing change from the corrupt politics of former Governor and inmate John Rowland.  This latest intrigue has caused more than one politico to pause for thought.  This will not go down well with a legislature that is being asked to cut most state social programs nor will it bode will for up and coming budget negotiations.      

Rell's New Fuzzy Math for the 21st Century

<a href="http://technorati.com/claim/83n7sq7k57" rel="me">Technorati Profile</a>

Well this is an interesting development. I find it interesting to listen to the demands for leadership when those in power should: 1. be leading in the first place and 2. can't seem to get their facts straight. So what is it $8 or $6 a billion here a billion there and we can balance the budget by 2010 or 2011??? The only problem with this guffaw is that it is important to know just how much in debt we are??? The governor demands that the legislature do something. Well, I am sorry it is hard to address the problem when the source of the problem can't add up the figures. Now it is understandable that an exact number may be difficult to achieve. But a gap of $2 billion is not just a mis adding of numbers. Well it is hard to accept leadership from someone who cant even come near to balancing the state's checkbook. You can't balance the budget if you don't know how deep in debt we are to begin with, consumer economics 101 and it appears that the Governor missed that class. If she can't add, then how can citizens expect to re-elect her?