A Promise of Austerity         

  

Harry T. Cook
By
Harry T. Cook
8/15/14

If you want your aging parents or grandparents to find themselves not so long from now at the short end of the stick economically, or your disadvantaged neighbors to be booted off Medicaid that -- thanks to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) they just recently gained -- vote for Republican nominees to the United States Senate.

 

Hungry to control Congress, Republican leaders are licking their chops over the prospect of forcing a balanced budget on the country, of repealing the ACA, of reducing Medicare and Social Security benefits earned by retirees and otherwise taking America back to the Gilded Age of lower taxes on sky-high income for the already rich -- a time in which a reincarnation of J.P. Morgan would be pleased to live and move and have his being.

 

The way the political calculus seems to be working out suggests pretty strongly that the Senate will slip into Republican control on January 1, 2015. Democratic incumbents and candidates for open seats appear more vulnerable than their GOP counterparts. The Tea Party caucus is doing its level best to force Republican hopefuls to the Right and promises to keep the pressure on if they are successful.

 

Should Kentucky's Mitch McConnell become the majority leader of the Senate with John Boehner ruling the House, President Obama could hardly be blamed if he called Joe Biden into the Oval Office and turned over the keys to him, packed up his wife and kids and went back to Chicago.

 

If, in such a case, Joe Biden were actually Jesus Christ, it would make no difference. For one thing, the Jesus Christ of the Christian gospels (is there another one?) would not even think of balancing a budget on the backs of the elderly and the poor. Quite the opposite.

 

What needs to happen before the November election is for that part of the media world not in thrall to Rupert Murdoch and his ilk to do some heavy reporting on what, say, Rand Paul or John Cornyn or -- God have mercy -- Ted Cruz would do with a senate majority.

 

The electorate ought to know what chaos a balanced budget would wreak upon the nation -- or that greater part of the nation, which lives from paycheck to paycheck if, indeed, there is a paycheck. Voters need to understand the disastrous economic reality of a balanced budget in an economy as complex as our own. Paul Krugman and other academic economists understand all that, and Krugman keeps trying to explain it in his New York Times columns.

 

Those who have bought into the Tea Party line must be shown how much ruin the promised austerity would bring upon millions of Americans -- including themselves.

 

I do not know what makes conservative Republicans and libertarians of whatever stripe want to dismantle the state of things that by its very nature allays the suffering of millions of people in this country. I do not understand the driving force in such a political philosophy. Is it a fear of socialism, which seized the nation by the neck at and after the close of the Second World War?

 

The push to nominate Dwight Eisenhower for president in 1952 proceeded from that very fear, as if Social Security and other government programs that provided minimal aid to the poor were somehow Communist-inspired. A military hero surely would help turn the country away from the dangerous socialistic course upon which Franklin D. Roosevelt and his successor, Harry Truman, had steered it.

 

How could anyone whose older family members or relatives whose well-being depends to one degree or another on Social Security and Medicare -- to the first of which they have contributed out of every paycheck and for the second of which a premium is deducted from each month's benefit payment -- be content with a diminution of either of those earned benefits? And certainly not just so the 1% can keep more of its billions. What's more, Social Security is not an "entitlement" but, in effect, deferred savings.

 

I do not know how to call attention to a looming disaster except by telling people not to vote for Republicans. It seems so terribly partisan to do so. Yet, it must be done. It would be different if the Party of No and of Trickle-Down Economics would use its hoped-for power to enact laws that would make all income, just not that reported on a W-2 or a Form 1099, and every dollar of all income -- including dividends and other high-life instruments -- subject to the Social Security FICA deductions.

 

That in itself would solve any future deficit in the famous Trust Fund -- a "deficit" that is regularly used as a scare tactic that ends up pitting the young against the elderly.

 

So forewarned, as the familiar saying goes, is forearmed. And I'm not talking about the Second Amendment.

 

 


Copyright 2014 Harry T. Cook. All rights reserved. This article may not be used or reproduced without proper credit.
 

Readers Write 
Essay 8/8/14: American Exceptionalism?

 

Nicholas S. Molinari, Brick, NJ:

Ihasten to endorse the recommendations of the writer of Thursday's Featured Letter about making Congress accountable to the public. I have little hope, however, that the noble principle of Public Service can ever be restored. Instead of public service, virtually all members of Congress exhibit total Self-Service. A Congressional seat is simply an easy road to great and/or greater wealth. Only wealthy individuals have enough resources to run for political office in the first place. How can ordinary citizens expect such legislators to represent them and to protect their legitimate interests? These happily ensconced millionaire-Congressmen/women engage in showmanship as they pretend to work for the good of the nation and of its people. They busy themselves with accumulating ever more cash and perks at the expense of ordinary citizens. WE THE PEOPLE? Forget it! They exempt themselves from the law that prohibits insider trading by the rest of us; they gerrymander shamelessly creating impregnable political dynasties by corralling favorite voters; they accept any and all "contributions" for their reelection campaigns, putting themselves at the service of lobbyists who serve corporations and organizations, like the NRA. They obey the highest bidders! Because they are on several payrolls, it is now time for ordinary citizens and media outlets to start calling these "contributions" by a more accurate name, "bribes." Maybe that will highlight and help to change the corrupted culture of Congress!

 

Steve Price, Antioch, CA:

Unfortunately, there is nothing exceptional about your story of the honors student who was despised in America because of his race. That has been the rule here, not the exception, since Europeans showed up here to begin building a grand new Civilization on lands taken by force with labor provided by slaves help by force. Like you, I must constantly fight to urge to get into loud public debates with some of my ignorant fellow citizens who take their white superiority as a bedrock "fact" of their existence and who resent any suggestion that injustice continues here in the land of the free. Like you I have learned to bang my head in private. I occasionally give in to the urge to send some article, like yours, to some of my friends who claim to be "conservative", but I invariably wish I had not do so, because the replies cause me so much anguish and despair for my country.

 

Richard Olson, Herington, KS:

While still a student in elementary school I determined that ubiquitous access to verifiable evidence abounds, and at some point in my lifetime humans would take advantage of this readily available knowledge and leave behind all ill-founded notions rooted in ignorance. I knew nothing then about the power of motivated reasoning and its corrupt spawn, willful ignorance. Unfortunately, the force that willful ignorance generates seems nearly the equal of gravity. I wonder if Homo sapiens will endure long enough to establish whether this deliberate self-inflicted blindness is an affliction that may be overcome by a sufficient majority of the species population to minimize its influence, or is instead systemically perpetual.   

Bethany Chamberlain, Harrisburg, PA:

Your point about how many white people came to America on slave ships is telling. Good point well made.

 

Harvey H. Guthrie, Fillmore, CA:

Again [the prophet] Amos would be proud of you.

 

William Forsythe, Brooklyn, NY:

You make a good case for affirmative action. You are also a voice in the wilderness. The country has turned the corner for good -- or bad -- on that. That train has left the station.

 

Caroline Waters, West Des Moines, IA:

Your essay "Amercian Exceptionalism?" helped me over the hump on affirmative action. Your point about how many white European immigrants came on slave boats did it for me. Thank you so much.

 

Tracey Martin, Southfield, MI:

America, during my lifetime, was once the greatest nation of this world. Especially when it embraced and finally celebrated "The Greatest." Now it is merely the most powerful. Power equals physical strength, not wisdom nor habit of being usually right. Once we were exceptional because "the common sense of it" persuaded us to forego rule by monarchs and trust We the People to exercise the commonweal judgments necessary to allow us to live free and prosper. Now we are succumbing to government of-by-for the corporation and most of the western world adheres to and espouses democratic values far superior to our lame practices in alleged self-rule. We're even beginning to convert America the Beautiful's splendid national parks into coal mines and stump riddled wastelands. (Couple of asides. I was not aware of any Africans indenturing themselves in exchange for passage to America. Lots of Caucasians, including many women, bound themselves to finite servitude of specified nature in order to live free here. And there was also apprenticeship, a form of bondage to a trade. Also: the needle-in-the-haystack more likely applies to finding constitutional logic or perspicuous reason in recent decisions by Kennedy and Alito, the latter of whom impressed me during his Senate hearing as possessive of an intelligence probably equaling that of a subordinate divorce lawyer.)

 

John Bennison, Walnut Creek, CA:

Stop beating your head against the wall by assuming we Americans will consistently do what we profess to believe. Contrary to popular assumption, America's "exceptionalism" lies not in its superiority, but the extreme to which we tend to do everything (hence a dysfunctional Congress with entirely opposing views at loggerheads, the blind denial of inherent racism, humanitarian aid in nearly every corner of the globe but own southern border, etc). Chief among our exceptional traits is the hypocrisy with which we so inconsistently honor the ideals we cherish, with extreme contempt and self-loathing.

 

Fred Fenton, Concord, CA:

My computer questions "exceptionalism" as a word. It is right to do so, at least with regard to the sad history and present reality of racism in America. Hamilton Fish has called race "the core narrative that tracks the American experience." I share your frustration over the Supreme Court's unconscionable rulings on affirmative action. The depth of racism in America is revealed in the failure of even the best minds and hearts to acknowledge the moral sense of it. In her biography of the Civil War hero and statesman Joshua Chamberlain, Alice Rains Trulock makes this devastating comment, "In some ways, his life paralleled the course of his beloved country: he rallied to save the Union, became a part of ending the slavery he abhorred, was nearly mortally wounded in the fight, and championed the equality of the freedmen. Then, sharing the moral blindness of other good men, he and they failed the former slaves utterly and allowed evil to fall upon them and prevail."

 

Albert Foster, Dearborn, MI:

I'm sure you are very passionate about what you wrote. LBJ signed the Civil Rights act in 1964 and now we have black billionaires and a black president. Fifty years later many black persons are doing very well and do not need government help. I think that the correct diagnosis of a problem is critical to finding the correct solution. In the case of "poor" black people, one-size-fits-all is not the answer. To begin with, using the Feds definitions of what is black and what is white, the following is true: about thirty million white people are below the poverty level. Approximately eleven million black and African persons are below the poverty level. The rest: Hispanic, Asian, Native people, etc., have almost six million below the poverty level. If we are bending over backwards to admit blacks to college, why not the others? Most black people's ancestors came here as slaves, but how many would want to go back to Africa? In other words, they know they are better off here than they would be in Africa. Personally, I think for all races, the having of children at an early age and the existence of so many single parent households dooms these families to poverty. Why not keep pounding home the importance of a family to the economic and social health of anyone?

What do you think?
I'd like to hear from you. E-mail your comments to me at revharrytcook@aol.com.