Cut This!

Here we go again. Our elected leaders are pushing yet more cuts: “unavoidable” cuts, cuts-that-no-one-wants, cuts-that-hurt-me-more-than-they-hurt-you, haircuts (as in “we all gotta take one”), and on and on. And, some of them say, if we don’t make the necessary cuts, our unborn children’s children will most certainly face a DEFICIT which will most certainly be a BURDEN SO HUGE that it will most certainly CRUSH THEM.

Here’s my translation:

These things are too expensive:

·         Clean air/water

·         Safe food/drugs/other

·         Literacy

·         Old people

·         Children

·         Sick people

·         Poor people

·         Etc.

Our nation has only so much money, and we can spend it on only our highest priorities:

·         War

·         The market’s mental health (The market doesn’t like “uncertainty.”)

·         Reduced tax rates for corporations and rich people

Really?


The United States now spends more money on war/defense than the rest of the world –combined.  But we are to believe that this nation is broke?
    

     We are supposed to believe that the federal budget proposal that passed the House  is “serious” when it: 

            1) would eliminate and/or reduce SNAP (food stamp) aid to millions,  

                and 

            2) is authored by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) of $350/bottle wine fame? 
       

        In a nation where 

• the 25 most successful hedge fund managers  earned an average annual salary of $883,000,000 in 2010 (about $440,000 per hour) ...
• members of the 1% buy 30,000 (or more) square foot homes, $800,000 watches, $18,000 purses, and $2500 pumps ...

... we are supposed to believe that there is no more money for shelters for the homeless or food for the hungry? 


Moreover, we are supposed to believe that we have to make cuts to programs like these - that we are spending too much money on the homeless and the hungry?

I have developed my own list of recommended cuts. I call it

“Cut:

• Tax breaks for billionaires, 
• Healthcare for hypocrites*, 
• Education aid for economic elites**, 

• Corporate welfare, 
• Retirement benefits for Congress***, 
• Aid to needy CEOs, and 
• Pentagon boondoggles” 

“Cut THE CRAP,” for short.

You might find the name of my proposal to be a bit crass. But there is no denying that “crap” is an apt description of the cuts proposed by Paul Ryan. If you agree, please make your perspective heard. Here are some ways to do it:

• Ask candidates for public office in your community if they will pledge to fight cuts to Social Security, Medicare,  Medicaid, and other assistance programs.     
• Send a letter to, visit, or call your elected representatives to ask if they will pledge to fight cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other assistance programs.     
• Send a letter to the editor. You know what to say. Or ask.
• Ask candidates who support cuts if they will pledge to renounce their pensions, perks, health care packages, etc. 
• Volunteer for candidates who pledge to oppose cuts, especially to support  Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
• Vote for these candidates.
• Know someone like minded who needs transportation in order to register to vote and/or getting to the polls? Offer to give her/him a ride.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Cut health insurance offered by the government to government officals opposed to health insurance offered by the government.

** Cut taxpayer-funded vouchers for children from wealthy families to attend private schools; those taxpayer dollars could fund public schools.

***Cut pensions for lawmakers who advocate cuts to pensions for public workers.

Fundraising Idea for the Times: If the 99% Had a Dime For Every Time …

This past summer, Congress and President Obama suddenly panicked about “our children” and “our children’s children.” This was their fear:

Maybe in 20 or 30 years, we will have failed to pay the same bills we have failed to pay for the last 10 years, and if we don’t drastically and immediately cut spending, we will “saddle” untold numbers of people not yet born with a terrible fate, and this fate will be worse than any spending cut consequences  endured by anybody already in existence.

During interviews and press conferences, members of Congress would respond to questions of all kinds by  invoking “our children’s children.” Had a reporter asked, “Senator, So-&-So, why did you vote against the resolution to designate a National Labradoodle Appreciation Day?” the answer likely would have been (through gritted teeth), “I cannot condone saddling our children’s children, with our national debt! What the American people want …”

To avoid possibly burdening “our children’s children” in 20 years or more, it was imperative to prioritize the elimination of our national debt and put aside lesser problems, like war and hunger, that exist in the here and now.

I started thinking about how the endless “children” references could be used to raise money for good causes – like organizations helping the one in four U.S. children currently suffering from hunger.

Hypothetical example: Organization Good Cause asks its constituents to commit to donating a set amount of money each time their U.S. representative says “our children’s children” at the upcoming town hall meeting. To publicize its fund drive and generate momentum, it recruits a rich, famous person to pledge $1000 for each “children” reference. Two-hundred people who read about the fund drive in the paper each pledge an average of $2 per “children” reference. At the town hall, the representative makes 10 such references. Good Cause generates $14,000.

But then, concern for “our children” abruptly disappeared, and with it, my fundraising idea … until Congress and President Obama discovered the job shortage in the U.S. and used it as an excuse to push deregulation, or free trade, or tax breaks, or a combination thereof (depending on who’s pushing).  (Exploiting a real policy problem to tout - ad nauseum - a corporate agenda is what I call “committing a nauseum”).

This is not only an opportunity to call out leaders for pushing fake solutions to a real problem; this is an opportunity for the right (small "r") organization to raise money. This is an opportunity for the Occupy groups.  Here’s a hypothetical example, using Occupy Seattle:

·    Occupy Seattle (OS) asks people to commit to making a set donation each time ­­- between 10/24 and 10/31 -  either President Obama or any of the seven Republican presidential candidates commits a nauseum in any of the daily updates on their campaign or government websites.

·    OS gets the word out about its fund drive and generates buzz: OS mentions the fund drive in interviews with media, finds a rich famous person to make the first pledge, uses social media, …

·    OS sets up its website so that a visitor to the site can:

1. Sign up to participate in the fund drive and electronically “send” donations;
2. Get daily updates on: number of fund drive participants, number of nauseums committed, and amount of money raised so far; and
3. Find out how OS will use (and has used) funds it raises.

Occupy-ers (wherever you are), if you have a website, a webmaster, and maybe a famous person among your supporters, you could be on your way to raising money for those tents, first-aid kits, umbrellas, tarps, sleeping bags, rain ponchos...