Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans were once married to balanced budgets and conservative money management, but now they have run off with something new: the seduction of tax cuts and budget deficits. They try to cover up the truth about their new relationship by cooking the books. Kansas own Dwight D. Eisenhower would be appalled.

Eisenhower presided over the last period when the U.S. ran budget surpluses for several years in a row. To fund this, the top tax rate for some high-earning Americans exceeded 90 percent. When President John F. Kennedy backed legislation to drop that rate to around 70 percent, Eisenhower spoke against it, arguing that it would explode the deficit.

A few decades later, President Ronald Reagan commissioned the W.R. Grace Commission Report, the first of a long series of warnings, reminding Americans to prepare for the impending (now current) retirement of the Baby Boomer generation, which would create (is creating) a demographic bulge straining Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid particularly long-term care and the nations overall health care system.

Then, Republicans ditched predictable old deficit-reduction policies for the sexy appeal of tax cuts and deficits: the real priority of Reagan, the second President Bush, and many Congressional Republicans from the 1980s onward.

Since Sam Brownback was elected governor in 2010, they have brought their new love to Kansas. Once, moderate Republicans like Robert Bennett, Mike Hayden and Bill Graves proudly presided over conservatively managed, balanced budgets. Today, Kansas budget is balanced in name only: trust funds have been drained, future payments leveraged and highway bonds misused to create the illusion of a balanced budget that may technically pass legal muster, but will spell disaster down the road. Honestly, the thrill is gone.

Now President Donald Trump proposes massive public works projects (including the border wall), plus cuts to top-tax rates. Trumps signature phrase perfectly describes the accompanying deficit increase: it is going to be huge.

Some economists like Arthur Laffer argue that tax cuts stimulate enough economic growth to pay for themselves: lower rates on a broadening base produce more revenue than higher rates on a small base. Alas, this only works when taxes are particularly high beforehand, as with the Kennedy-era cut. When they are not, disaster ensues, as we have learned in Kansas.

Critics counter by stating, We have a spending problem, not a taxing problem. Granted, dollar-for-dollar, government spending keeps rising, but this is misleading. Most federal dollars are already committed to entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare or to interest on the national debt. At the state level resides another pernicious problem: the costs of providing government services increase each year.

Teachers and other government employees are not receiving more generous benefits. Rather, the cost of providing the same benefits goes up substantially each year, mainly due to those increasing health care and retirement costs. This has not been a problem until recently budget estimates factoring in these rising costs are readily available from the Legislatures own nonpartisan staff (but legislators may ignore them).

The anti-Brownback Republicans elected in 2016 are sounding some rather Eisenhower-like talk about a return to responsible budgeting. But, can they give up their partys love affair with deficit spending?

Michael A. Smith is a professor of political science at Emporia State University.

See the original post:
Will anti-Brownback republicans end their party's love affair with deficits? - Hastings Tribune

Tom Krattenmaker 12:06 a.m. ET Feb. 12, 2017

And a sequin-bedecked pop star will show them the way.

Not exactly holy writ. Yet in addition to a wildly entertaining performance at the Super Bowl, Lady Gaga has handed progressives the unifying principle theyve struggled to identify and articulate. As Gaga demonstrated in her uniquely fabulous way, its time for progressives to reclaim patriotism.

Speculation was rampant that Gaga might use her halftime spotlight to make a pointed political statement la Meryl Streep at the Golden Globes. What a surprise and head-scratcher, initially to find her starting the show with God Bless America.

Liberals would have rolled their eyes out of their sockets had it been a country star singing it. But Gaga being Gaga, they probably trusted she was up to something. When she segued into This Land is Your Land and then her catchy hits, including the anthem of acceptance Born This Way, it was obvious what she was doing: connecting progressives zeal for inclusion to the nations founding ideals.

Its a line that has been begging to be drawn for some time now, and an appeal to patriotism that has also been there for the taking. If accepted, Gagas gift can solidify resistance to the Trump administration and help shape a positive progressive identity for the long term ahead.

For me, the need for a progressive rallying cry and unifying message was never more apparent than during a recent edition of MSNBCs Hardball. Host Chris Matthews was interviewing a woman who helped organize the massive womens march that took place the day after the inauguration. Matthews ticked off some of the marchers issues reproductive rights, black lives, opposition to military aggression and asked Janaye Ingram what unites them and the people behind them.

You saw people of all different stripes, 5 million people globally, who came together on January 21st, marching for a variety of issues, Ingram responded. And yes, theyre interconnected. Why? Because we as women, we are inherently intersectional. We are born intersectional. Were not single-issue people.

Important concepts, but not whats needed to bring people to their feet. Much more could have been said. Like:

We are united by our caring for the dignity and fair treatment of people regardless of their sex, origins, or whatever else might mark them as different. And, We are united by our belief in the American ideal, by the story of a nation founded on the noble principle that all people are created equal and deserving of equal respect.

Its my observation that progressives have ceded patriotism to conservatives, much like the word moral, because conservative use and misuse of these concepts have made them radioactive to progressive sensibilities. Thats a shame, and a lost opportunity to win over wider swaths of the public. Although the m-word is seldom uttered, progressive values are shot through with moral commitments. And they are deeply resonant with important aspects of what it means to be an American.

Take gay rights. Progressives rally to this cause not because of a lack of morals, but because of the deep moral conviction that its wrong to mistreat people on the basis of sexual orientation. Analogous moral commitments undergird support for the rights of women, racial minorities and followers of non-majority religions.

At the several rallies Ive attended recently, Ive been struck by the number of non-Latino and non-Muslim people standing with those most directly under the gun of the new administration. Ive been impressed, too, by the explicit appeals to what our country is about to patriotism captured by the frequent assertion that the dark vision of Trump and adviser Steven Bannon is not the America I know.

The America we know and the American values we advance are the invisible glue that bind the disparate parts of the progressive movement. This is the progressive patriotism waiting for us to name, and claim.

As is the case with any movement, the progressive cause needs to be known for more than what its against. Resisting Trump is plenty for now, but the post-Trump day will come soon, we hope when the movement will need to articulate a positive vision and identity. What, in the long run, will progressives be known for, and what will attract more people to the cause?

Shutting down campus talks by people such as Breitbarts Milo Yiannopoulos? Better to let him speak and disgrace himself, I say. Violence in the streets and punches in the face for hateful provocateurs such as Richard Spencer? Better to go high road, which means fierce commitment but peaceful tactics and a benevolent spirit. This is not only right but also tactically smart. Nothing would delight the president more than a pretext for a clampdown on dissent, with a level of violence infinitely more potent than anything that black bloc protesters can muster.

Progressives, its OK to wave the flag. It belongs to us as much as the conservatives who have made it their brand. Well know it means something quite different, and more valid, at a pro-immigrants march than it means as a stage prop behind Trumps podium.

A member of USA TODAYs Board of Contributors, Tom Krattenmaker is a writer specializing in religion in public life and communications director at Yale Divinity School. His new book is titled Confessions of a Secular Jesus Follower.

Read or Share this story: http://dailyre.co/2l2kLOj

Follow this link:
OPINION: Lady Gaga showed progressives the way - Daily Record

In a dramatic outcome that could well change national politics, a Federal court last November found Wisconsins highly gerrymandered electoral districts to be unconstitutional, since they were clearly designed to deprive Democrats of the vote. As WaPo points out, if other states with extreme gerrymandering are also taken on by the courts, or if the Supreme Court weighs in for the whole country, then the artificial hold of Republicans on power in the House of Representatives and many state legislatures could come to an end.

In the 2016 election for the House, Republicans received 52% of the popular vote but seized control of 57% of the seats.

In states where the legislature draws the electoral districts, there is always a temptation to design them in such a way as to disadvantage the rival party. That is why non-partisan redistricting commissions ought to be the ones drawing these lines (as is now the case in California, e.g.).

But what had been an occasional problem became systemic starting in 2010, when Karl Rove, the Koch brothers and other Republican operatives began a drive to have Republican-dominated state legislatures gerrymander the districts in a way to ensure that they could not easily be unseated and that the Republicans would have an advantage on the Federal level in Congress. Typically these redistricting schemes disenfranchise people who live in cities. Thus, Austin, Texas, which reliably votes Democratic, was split into 8 districts, each of them attached to a big urban hinterland where the city folk could be over-ruled by Republican voters.

The Wisconsin decision was influenced in part by a new, statistical, way that academic political scientists came up with to measure unfairness in redistricting, which they call the efficiency gap. An efficiency gap of 7% or more means that the other party can never hope to get back into power. The efficiency gap for Wisconsins gerrymandered districts is 15, in favor of Republicans.

Unfair redistricting on racial grounds has long been disallowed by the courts (which is not to say the Republicans dont try to get away with it from time to time). But unfair redistricting on partisan lines has not typically been something the courts wanted to interfere in. Only because of the new efficiency gap measure were they persuaded to rule against extreme partisan gerrymandering.

In fact, the state of Wisconsin argued that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue over the discrepancy, since they werent proven to have been significantly harmed.

Because of the extent of gerrymandering already institutionalized, it is very unlikely that Democrats can improve their position dramatically in 2018, and, indeed, very likely the Republicans will make gains.

This rigidity is dangerous to our Republic. The House is supposed to be able to respond quickly to national threats. Because of extreme gerrymandering, the nimbleness of the system is gone.

Teabaggers back in 2010 and 2012 were always nattering on about getting their country back (by which they appear to have meant that they had a Black president.) Progressives need actually to get our country back, and gerrymander reform is one necessary step along that path.

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Go here to see the original:
Can Peak Gerrymandering by the GOP be Challenged by ... - Truthdig - Truthdig

Mike McHugh

Ever since President Donald J. Trump soundly defeated Hillary Clinton on Nov. 8, Ill bet many low-information voters and other empty-minded citizens have learned more about civics than they did in all their years inside public school classrooms. In the ensuing hours after the election, Trump critics were quick to lay the foundation to delegitimize his victory by pointing out that Clinton won the popular vote despite the fact that Trump far exceeded the required 270 Electoral College votes needed to win. Analogies were quickly proffered to debunk the ignorance and quell the sour grapes by illustrating this point at a level that most could understand. It was pointed out that in a football game when the number of total offensive yards gained by the losing team exceeds that of the winning team it has no bearing on the final score or who is the winner or loser of the contest. In presidential politics its all about Electoral College votes.

But that didnt stop the detractors.

The Trump detractors were given another civics lesson in December when it was learned that an effort was underway to derail the Electoral College vote. They soon learned what most of us already knew that the November election was merely a crucial but the final step in certifying who occupies the Oval Office. It is in December when the Electoral College delegates convene in their respective state capitols to cast their votes. In past conventions, the will of the people on Election Day is usually mirrored by the Electoral College delegates actions when it comes time to perform their duty. Trump prevailed and Clinton lost in this procedure.

But it didnt stop the detractors.

In many states where Trump triumphed, Electoral College delegates were lobbied, cajoled and in some cases threatened if they followed through and cast their vote for Trump. There were very few delegates who strayed from their duty and Donald Trump was certified the victor.

But the detractors remained unsatisfied.

Attempts were made by radical, anarchist organizers to disrupt the Jan. 20 Inauguration in Washington, D.C. Local colleges welcomed radical organizers to hold closed door meetings on their leafy Northwest campus the weekend before the week-long festivities began in the nations capital. On Friday morning, hours before Trump was sworn in, tiny mobs of rabble rousers assembled blocks away from the parade route. Some wearing masks searched for targets to attack while others stalked vulnerable objects to use as props and video footage to be used later on their social media sites to prove to their parents back home that their trip to D.C. was indeed productive. Few minds were changed and over 200 miscreants were arrested for their protests as innocent trash receptacles were set ablaze and defenseless shop windows were shattered by members of the masked mob.

Despite their Inaugural Day hissy fit, the resistors continue to foment vitriol toward the president and their countrymen, appearing daily to protest their cause du jour in the protective enclaves of those tiny blue islands on each coast that are holding back the enormous red ocean that covers the rest the lower 48 states.

President Trumps appears undeterred by the uncivil and sometimes criminal behaviors of these professional agitators drafted into action from the Idle-class, Hollywood liberal elite and Democrats on Capitol Hill who appear to have become delusional from their long-term bout of Potomac Fever. They seem to have been swept away on the river of denial, unable to come to grips with the fact that they lost to Donald Trump and their party is out of power and in the minority quite possibly for a very long time.

Still, so-called resistors remain unrelenting.

Heres what draining the swamp is beginning to reveal to those who havent already realized it: There is an elite class of media types, well-heeled entertainers along with a small band of idle-class Americans who act as mercenaries, filling the role of professional demonstrators who are marching and being paid by Trump detractors. These useful idiots and fellow travelers in the progressive movement are more than willing carry the progressive banners.

Democrats love a big, inefficient, slow-moving government. Their battle against Trumps cabinet pick Betsy DeVos to run the Department of Education is less out of their concern for the children than it is out their commitment to the teachers unions. The irony in Democrats disapproving of this candidate who was confirmed last week is rich. The debate over public versus private schools isnt hard to understand. Every parent wants what is best for their children and sadly in many communities, both urban and rural, the public schools are in deplorable condition. School choice in the form of vouchers giving parents the choice and means of where to school their children should be an option open to all, not just the wealthy. Where was the outcry from teachers unions when the Obamas avoided public schools and shuttled their daughters off to Sidwell Friends a private D.C. school with annual tuitions that rival major universities even as he was shutting down opportunity scholarships for the poor in Washington, D.C. By the way, this is the same Washington school where Chelsea Clinton matriculated before enrolling at Stanford University.

Note, too, radicals have their sights set on blocking Trumps Executive Order on temporarily blocking refugees from seven Middle Eastern countries that have a high propensity for terrorism. The order calls for extreme vetting. I applaud Trump for understanding that his duties as president include a duty to protect all Americans from enemies. So what if a few refugees were temporarily inconvenienced on their one-way flight to the United States or may have to wait a couple months before they can arrive.

Since 2001, many Americans have been and continue to be inconvenienced every time they take a commercial flight from the time they enter an airport, remove several articles of their clothing, submit to searches of their person and belongings and are X-rayed and sometimes interrogated. All this because fanatical extremists decided to wage war on the civilized world. Yes, we know all about being inconvenienced.

In 1992, Presidential candidate Ross Perot asked us to listen for a giant sucking sound in the debate over NAFTA. Today, it seems that there is a giant sucking sound that could be explained in one of two ways: Perhaps its the sound of a swamp starting to drain or it could be the sound of the progressives little red balloons being deflated.

Swansboro resident Mike McHugh is an advertising account executive with The Daily News. Readers can email him at: mike.mchugh@jdnews.com.

Link:
COLUMN: Democrat vanguard of the Progressives stuck in denial - Jacksonville Daily News

A number of comments in Sound Off have complained about liberal columnists or news stories about the activities of liberals in our community. They correctly note that the majority of residents are conservative.

So, why do we, a conservative newspaper, report on liberals activities in the news or publish their columns?

Because it is the mission of a newspaper to keep its readers informed. Conservatives are the main beneficiaries of news about the activities of liberals. After all, the liberal activists already know.

If we pretended that everyone in the community is a conservative and that there are no liberals at all, that would not only be inaccurate, but it would be punish conservatives who would find themselves surprised and outmaneuvered by their political opponents. As conservatives ourselves, that is not the outcome we want.

Instead, by striving to provide balanced and objective news coverage, we aim to equip readers of all philosophical orientations with the information they need and with a true picture of how diverse our community has become.

Naturally, it can be frustrating to read the statements of people we disagree with. It is much more satisfying to only read articles that affirm our own personal opinions. Thats human nature. But, is it wise to be deluded about the existence of contrary viewpoints?

So a story about John Lewis speaking nearby, local artists joining a protest in Atlanta or Coweta residents traveling to D.C. for a march is valuable intelligence for conservatives. It equips conservatives to counter the arguments and tactics of liberals, just as any smart football coach or military commander would study every available scrap of information about an adversary.

After all, it's not like liberals would disappear if the newspaper did not cover them. The liberals themselves don't need the newspaper to tell them what they are doing. And its not like conservatives could be brainwashed by reading something they disagree with. The only consequence of not reporting on liberals activities is that conservatives would be uninformed.

If you look at the unsigned editorials and the majority of columnists on the opinion page, you'll see how conservative the paper is. Only one liberal has been a regular columnist, selected by the previous publisher mainly because he provided some insights on state politics. The rest are very conservative, as are the majority of Sound Off comments published.

The paper hasn't shed its conservative orientation, just tried to give a truer picture of what is happening in this complex, growing community. It's the community that has changed, and it would be a disservice to our subscribers not to let them know.

See the rest here:
Here's why we report on liberals - Newnan Times-Herald