Tuesday the eternally bankrupt Oakland Tribune tried to school us on good economics and used as a foil healthcare reform being proposed in the California legislature. The Trib stated that in these hard economic times we cannot afford such expenses. The fact of the matter is that in the much better economic times of 2006 when both the Assembly and the Senate passed this bill the Trib was against it then just as it is today.

In the 1200 days since Governor Schwazenegger vetoed then SB840, 144,000 Americans have died because they lacked adequate access to healthcare. That translates into roughly 18,000 Californians. Americans now have the most expensive healthcare system on the face of the earth, nearly twice what other industrialized countries pay, and yet we allow members of our society to die preventable deaths for the profit of a few. These 18,000 deaths are on the hands of the Governor because he wanted to please the insurance industry profiteers.

I am not surprised that a failing business, one that has monopoly status, has got it all wrong. They are failing because what they pass off as information to the residences of Oakland and the broader Bay Area is so inaccurate. Newspapers are not failing because paper is expensive. They are failing because they have concentrated their ownership into the hands of a very few corporate giants that are not in the business of an informed population, and we just don’t want to read their lies anymore.

But let’s go back to the economic argument that the Trib brought up. There are only 34 countries in the world with more people than California but only seven with larger economies. California has lots of money. It is just not fairly taxed. SB810 the successor to the twice-passed SB840 would cut the total cost of healthcare for Californians dramatically. And while doing so it would allow everybody who lives here full and comprehensive care. It would do this at a tremendous savings to local governments and agencies, from cities to school and fire districts. These employers yearly savings would be about $2,000 per employee. For example the County of Marin has estimated that it would have saved $9 million each year if the Governor had signed the bill. The larger Sonoma County’s estimate was $37 million yearly. The medium size City of Rohnert Park’s estimate was about $1 million.

Private companies would also be big savers. Health insurance and the human resource expenses to manage it cost employers 20 percent of their payroll. SB810 would drop that to 8 percent with an employee contribution of 4 percent. But the legislature could decide that this tax on wage earners is unfair and spread the tax to all California income. Then the tax rate would drop dramatically.

The overall savings to the California economy both private and public is in the billions of dollars. Instead of attacking a creative plan to solve a crisis that is both killing Californians at a rate of 6,000 a year and bankrupting many tens of thousands more the Trib should be asking local governments just how much of their citizens tax dollars they would save if the Governor signs the SB810 this time. They might even want to ask their own accountant that question. Maybe they could forestall another bankruptcy, and we might start reading their paper again.

OK I forgot to address the Kaiser issue. Is this really an issue. All Kaiser healthcare providers including their hospitals will continue if they so choose. Their insurance business will not provide for coverage as it won’t be needed anymore. Single-payer means you get to keep your own doctors and nurses, just not the non-productive insurance plans.

Write the Oakland Tribune and tell them they are full of it.

"Editorial: California health care bill is not going anywhere"
[ http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_14264540?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com ]

Republican Economic Model

On Meet the Press today Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger outlined the flawed Republican economic model. Unfortunately that model has become accepted very broadly in American consciousness even among liberals and progressives. Basically the economy is in the doldrums so you can’t raise taxes because that will hurt business and in turn cause them to lay off workers. The Republican solution to a bad economy is to give tax breaks to businesses so that they will hire more workers. Giving tax breaks to businesses during a crisis is similar to giving money to thieves to police crime-ridden neighborhoods.

I heard a variant that economic policy recently from a Green-Democrat, can’t decide which to be. If we raise taxes in California businesses will move elsewhere. I have a very different view. My 30 years experience as a small business owner and employer tells me that I would make my hiring decisions based on my customers’ ability to pay for my service, and not ever because a tax break was available. Tax breaks were great and I used them when appropriate but mostly they just changed the way my books were organized.

Additionally this is a first year lesson in college level economic courses. Demand drives the business cycle plain and simple. Thom Hartman hammers this home often enough on his program. Wages are demand; when they go up folks have the ability to buy more and that causes the supply to increase. There are other means of getting money into the hands of consumers and that would be through social spending. But inflation and budget deficits are a real concerns that need to be addressed. If the social spending is based on borrowed money then deficits an inflationary cycle will occur. This applies in the same way to war funding, hence the 70’s economic crises.

Cycles naturally occur. Wages do not keep up with productivity, governments cut back on purchases and business inventory increases, production orders decrease and folks get laid off. The widening gap between earned wages and productivity of the workers is the driving force of economic doldrums-recession-depression or what ever you want to call it. The destruction of work related laws and the consequence of reduced labor union membership is the direct cause of this economic crisis; brought to us by the same folks all tax breaks are aimed towards. FDR broke the cycle in part by funding the creation of 4 million jobs in one month late in 1933.

It is very clear to me why Republicans want to defund public education, $9 billion in California’s 2009-2010 budget alone. They don’t want an educated work force that can understand the lies they spread. But why so many Democrats give up the fight and repeat those same lies is a mystery to me.

Dan Monte
http://busmansmuse.blogspot.com/
join me at facebook

inspired in part by: google these sites
[ Calitics:: Businesses Need Customers Not Tax Cuts ]
[ Daily Kos: Roosevelt created 4 million jobs in one month (updated) ]

What are reasonable expectations of the Democratic Party?

If I am to remain a political activist then it will be as a progressive, one who organizes society for the benefit of those that sustain it. But my power to act is drawn from an emotion. I found myself arguing for the virtue of anger the other day. The setting was a New Years Day celebration attended by Marin progressive activists. Folks were making statements regarding their hopes and wishes for the new year and one participant related a story of two wolves that reside in all of us, love and hate. The story goes that the wolf you feed is the wolf that will dominate you. Anger was attributed to the hate wolf. I guess that the struggle is not resolved inside me because I spoke up for the power of anger to overcome the most desperate feelings of powerlessness. I am fully aware of the karmic implications of living solely on anger. I do nurture my love wolf, but as any abused spouse will tell you, I also nurture the hate wolf by continuing to engage in a relationship that perpetually lets me down.

I am a Democrat, addicted to the party’s promises of change. Like all addictions an addict needs to hit bottom before making a successful effort at breaking the compulsion that underlies abuse. And clearly the progressive movement has been abused by the Democratic Party for many years now. The twofold source of our compulsion to continue this relationship is that it seems to be the only viable alternative to the Republican Party and the Democrats had been out of power for some time now. There are only two political slogans when it gets right down to the nitty-gritty of a campaign, ‘change’ or ‘stay the course.’ How will the Democratic Party run on ‘stay the course’ when it’s right-wing is destroying the coalition that brought it to power? Stay the course and escalate the wars of the Middle East? Stay the course and sell our population into slavery of the financial and insurance industries?

I was motivated to become politically active by a fear that was a mixture of both love and anger. I feared for the loss of those things I loved most about this country and I was angry that our institutions were not acting to protect us from horrible criminals. Progressives were promised that those who committed crimes would be held accountable if we worked hard enough to give the Democrats a majority. Then we were promised structural changes that would benefit the majority of the people and hold businesses to task for their predatory practices. The Democrats did win, historic victories, but their promises did not come to pass. Progressives were shut outside the gates of power. And now my anger is turned toward those who I allowed to abuse me.

I now must find an ally with the strength to overcome the false promises of those who have proven themselves unworthy of my trust. A coalition needs to form that will deny the Democratic Party any further victories unless progressives take positions of power. Proximity to power is a strong intoxicant and collective action is a sure means of attaining strength. I will stay in the game because there is a chance an effective coalition can be created. There are too many scenarios whereby interest groups will find the presence of mind to act in unison. I became active with the Democrats because at the time that party included more progressives than any other institution. And in California progressive democrats pose a formidable block.

The New Year’s Day gathering comprised mostly Green Party members. I am ideologically aligned very closely with that party’s tenets. I view the Greens as disaffected Democrats, the abused who have begun the healing process by leaving. I am a fellow traveler of the Progressive Democrats of America and their Sonoma and Marin chapters. I am working at building Progressive Democrats of Marin into a more active organization. PDA emphasizes working to effect change to national policy by their ‘Inside and Outside the Party’ strategy. These two organizations combine nationally about 500,000 members. I have also been associated with Democracy For America. This independent Democratic group holds great promise and they train progressive candidates, I have attended often, at all levels of government. DFA has nearly 500,000 members. These three organizations are dwarfed by the size of MoveOn. They boast a membership of nearly 5,000,000. These groups have a commonality in that their membership have joined them to effect progressive change in America. When talking of size of membership it is important to keep in mind that only 50 million Americans have elected 50 senators, 21 Republicans 27 Democratic, and 2 independents.

Progressives have many other potential allies. You will find in much of my writing rants against a certain type of union activity. Don’t confuse that with being anti-union. Unions function as industry lobbyists and they provide for their membership. In the 30’s and 40’s and into the 60’s unions had a third function, they struggled for democracy in the workplace for all workers. An example of a union that is still doing so is the California Nurses Association. They are a leading force for national healthcare reform. Another example of the third function was the United Farm Workers Union movement. They weren’t just bringing better wages but also civil rights to their workers communities. Our communities need to use unionization to retake our democracy. When the union movement focuses its efforts on the narrow economic interests of its membership it divides the working class. It does the work of the anti-democratic owner class. There are many single issue organizations that will join efforts because of the Democratic issues to protect the environment and civil and human rights, even though the Party often does not follow through on its commitments.

Somewhere amongst these many millions hides my ally, a coalition to change the Democratic Party.