A deficit of sound judgment

Can anyone tell me what is wrong with the lede paragraph in this allegedly unbiased news story in The New York Times?

I'll give you a hint: The Times reporters apparently have made up their minds on the value of the Simpson-Bowles commission's suggestions, positioning "fiscal health" as a long-term good, while casting critics of both tax hikes and/or spending cuts as fearful of their short-term political health.

Here is the lede:

The chairmen of President Obama’s debt-reduction commission have been unable to win support from any of the panel’s elected officials for their proposed spending cuts and tax increases, underscoring the reluctance of both parties to risk short-term political backlash in pursuit of the nation’s long-term fiscal health.

The problem, however, is not the politics so much as the lack of consensus on addressing long-term budget deficits -- especially when the remedies being offered as skewed against the middle class and poor and favor those with the cash.

Mainstream Washington might be fixated on the deficit (at a time of high unemployment, a fact that boggles the mind), but there are economists willing to challenge the capital consensus. Dean Baker, at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a populist liberal economist, questions the basic assumptions on which the battle to beat the deficit is built:

The fundamental premise of the commission is that the country suffers from serious deficit problems that Congress is unable to address through its normal processes. This view does not correspond with the facts as can be easily shown.

There has been no explosion of spending whatsoever. This is entirely an invention of those with their own agenda. The Congressional Budget Office shows that non-interest spending was 19.8 percent of GDP in 1980. Its analysis of President Obama's 2011 budget projects that non-interest spending will be 21.1 percent of spending in 2020. This means that in 40 years, spending other than interest will have increased by just 1.3 percentage points of GDP.

Rather than being a cause for concern, the rise in the deficit in the downturn has been essential for sustaining demand in the economy. Annual demand in the private sector has fallen by more than $1.2 trillion as a result of the collapse of the bubbles in residential and non-residential real estate. This led to a plunge in construction and also consumption that was driven by housing bubble wealth. Remarkably, the co-chairs of the commission never seemed to have considered a tax on the financial sector as a source of revenue (a policy that is even recommended by the IMF), in spite of the fact that it was largely responsible for the current crisis.

The projections of longer-term budget problems are almost entirely due to a projected explosion in health care costs. The United States already pays more than twice as much per person for its health care as other wealthy countries with the same or longer life expectancies. This ratio is projected to rise to three and four to one in the decades ahead.

However, rather than honestly discuss the problems of the U.S. health care system, Simpson and Bowles have used the projections of exploding health care costs as an argument for gutting Medicare and Medicaid, leaving tens of millions at risk of not being able to afford health care.

And then there is Robert Reich, a former Clinton labor secretary, who included the anticipated release of the deficit commission report tomorrow in a post called "National Fiscal Hypocrisy Week":

Finally, on Wednesday, the President’s deficit commission will issue a report on how to reduce the nation’s long-term deficit. The initial draft was regressive — cutting $3 of spending for every $1 of tax increase, and decimating the Earned Income Tax Credit, among other things.

The best outcome would be a unanimous report that focused on taming rising health-care costs (see first item above), rejected Republican calls to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (see second item above), and supported extending unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and a new WPA (third item). Ideally, the report would also call for new investments in infrastructure and education that would grow the economy and thereby shrink the deficit as a share of GDP.

Likelihood, zero.

And that pretty much sums up the likelihood of this plan making a difference in the deficit.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

The dysfunction continues

The state has managed to mess up another federal education grant.

While I disagree that the grants -- a Race to the Top grant and a charter school grant -- have much merit, I think the failure to fill follow simple rules and follow through on grant applications does not bode well for the state.

It is easy to blame Gov. Chris Christie for this -- and he deserves significant blame -- but his predecessor and the entire bureaucracy at the Department of Education shouldn't get off scott-free.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Can state income tax shoulder more of revenue load?

New Jersey's top earners are not exactly hurting.

While many are paying a lot in property taxes, the reality is that their income tax load is not nearly as great as that paid by their neighbors.

New Jersey Policy Perspective, the liberal research and advocacy group, issued a report today that "is countering the claims that the state has abnormally high levy rates" for high-earners.

While the more than 10 percent tax rate for top earners seems high, the graduated system creates a lower actual tax burden, the report found.

The report used Gov. Chris Christie's most recent tax returns -- which he made public in October -- to demonstrate that high-earners pay far less than one might expect given the 10.25 percent top rate.

The report, released today, demonstrates how Christie and his wife Mary Pat paid a total 6.2 percent tax rate on their combined income because of the state's graduated tax rate. While the top brackets levy a more than 10 percent tax, only the portion of income that falls into that margin is taxed at that rate.

"In New Jersey, opponents of progressive taxation like Governor Christie argue that rates are too high," the report states. "But a full understanding of the state's tax structure shows that New Jersey is actually quite competitive."

This raises a simple question: Why not use the income tax to help offset the state's reliance on property and sales taxes, which hit middle-income folks hardest? Gov. Christie, when he vetoes a surcharge on incomes over $1 million earlier this year, said it would make the state less competitive.

But, as NJPP points out, the Christies pay less in income taxes than they would in New York or Philadelphia.

In 2009, the Christies reported $540,792 in taxable income and paid $33,619 in taxes.
"To most, that sounds like a lot of money but to them that's 6.2 percent of their New Jersey taxable income, considerably less than one would expect them to pay given their 10.25 percent tax bracket," the report stated.

That is because only the $40,792 over $500,00 was taxed at a 10.25 percent rate. The rest of their income was taxed at a lower rate.

When comparing the overall rate, with surround states, NJPP found the Christies are paying less than some of their neighbors.

"The 6.2 percent effective income tax the Christie's paid to New Jersey is less than they would have paid to New York State if Mrs. Christie's job were there; less than they would have paid if she had worked in Philadelphia; and about what they would have paid if they had lived in Georgia," the report found.

A bigger bite might not make Christie happy -- or others in his tax bracket -- but it seems unlikely that it would force high earners out of the state, making Christie's lone argument against higher income taxes collapse of its own weight.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

South Brunswick Patch launches Wednesday

Three days and counting. Look for South Brunswick Patch to launch Wednesday. Local Editor Davy James will be your guide -- and I'll be around as regional editor to help out.

Check out southbrunswick.patch.com.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Imposing democracy on a shadow government: Shining a light on the foreign policy establishment

More document leaks, courtesy of WikiLeaks -- a new defender of democracy.

The response from official Washington? Typical McCarthyite drivel. Sen. Claire McCaskill, the Missouri Democrat, offered this -- which is typical of the comments offered by the people who run our foreign policy.

The people who are leaking these documents need to do a gut check about their patriotism. And I think they're enjoying the attention they're getting. But frankly, it's coming at a very high price in terms of protecting our men and women in uniform.

Of course the people in Washington don't like Wikileaks. It damages their monopoly on information and their ability to perpetuate their own little worlds.

(Read Andrew Bacevich's book, The Limits of Power, to get a better handle on the issue.)

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Sorry for the light week

It's been a light posting week, but you can blame the holiday, the triptophane, galley corrections for the book and the impending launch of South Brunswick Patch. It's been busy.

But I'll try to get some blogging in over the weekend.

Happy Thanksgiving and condolences to those of you bold enough -- or stupid enough -- to venture into the maw of Black Friday.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Battling over bad reforms

I've written about this often, so I'll just say that the battle between the governor and the state Legislature over the proposed tool kits -- "I say, 'pass mine,' one says; 'no, pass mine,' the other chimes in" -- is pretty meaningless. Real reforms will do more than nibble around the edges of the problem and scapegoat public workers.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

I knew they couldn't be that bad

The Knicks are proving that this is going to be a long and eventful season. Following up an awful six-game losing streak that dropped them to 3-8, the team ran off three wins on the West Coast -- an almost unheard of feat in recent Knicks' years.

Good things abounded -- including the play of point guard Ray Felton and forward Danilo Galinari and the emergence of Ronny Turiaf as a defensive stabilizer.

So, it seems pretty clear that this team is not going to be quite as bad as it looked a week ago, though I'm not sure we are looking at a team that will win much more than 40 games. Given the last half-dozen years or so, I'll take it.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Finally, a uniter

OK, I'm sure this is not what Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have meant by uniting left and right, but the Transportation Security Administration's attack on the Bill of Rights is bridging the gap in a way that no one could have intended.

Gov. Chris Christie is just the latest high-profile politician to climb on board, joining a bipartisan group along with civil libertarians on the left and libertarian right to call on the TSA to find another way to screen passengers instead of subjecting them to an invasive and potentially embarrassing full-body scan or pat down.

Maybe, just maybe, the TSA will listen.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Another anti-imperial voice lost

Chalmers Johnson, the historian and political scientist/economist, died Saturday. His death, an obvious personal loss for his family and friends, is also a blow to what is left of the American anti-imperial cause.

Johnson, in his most recent work, has demonstrated the designs on international power that drive our foreign policy. Basically, his work -- along with books by historians like Andrew Bacevich -- make it clear that we no longer rely on our military for defense, but use it offensively to project power and impose our will on distant nations and have been for decades.

It already has resulted in blowback (the title of one of his books) and will again. And when that blowback occurs, it will give the national security state all the justification it needs to shred the Bill of Rights.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Drink coffee? Buy local

I dislike Dunkin' Donuts' coffee. I know that, for many, I'm speaking a slur against the coffee gods. But I find it to have a burnt taste and to be very bitter.

It is OK in a pinch, but not for real coffee drinking.

Starbucks is good, but there is better. I'll drink Starbucks without complaint _- I think it's probably the best of the national coffee chains -- but give me a local coffee shop every time and I'm a happy guy.

Today, I met with my Patch staff at Grover's Mill Coffee Roasting Co., in the Southfield Shopping Center in West Windsor. The coffee was quite good -- strong with the proper bite -- and the chicken salad sandwich was fabulous. So, add Grover's Mill to the list of good local shops in the Central Jersey area.

My incomplete list:

1. Small World Coffee, Witherspoon Street, Princeton
2. Rockn' Joe, Route 27, Kendall Park (small franchise)
3. It's a Grind, Schalks Crossing Road, Plainsboro (small franchise)
4. Grover's Mill, Princeton Hightstown Road, West Windsor

There are plenty more, of course, so add your two cents. What do you think the best independent coffee shops are in Mercer and Middlesex counties?

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Terry Collins, the new man in charge

According to an NY Times report, Terry Collins will be named the new manager of the New York Mets. He is fiery, for sure, but this lifetime .500 manager is not exactly the guy I expect to drag the organization out of the dumps.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

The wrong debate

The debate over yesterday's verdict in the terrorism trial of Ahmed Ghailani, which resulted in the Guantanamo detainee being convicted on only one of nearly 300 charges, is ignoring a basic precept of American democracy. The conviction on a charge related to a 1998 bombing of the American embassy in Africa -- a conviction that has Ghailani facing between 20 years and life in prison -- has conservatives renewing their call for those facing terror charges to be tried by a military tribunal and not in civilian criminal courts.

The verdict has been discussed within a context of effectiveness, using the assumption that failure to convict is a conviction of the system itself, one that requires us to suspend the basic rule of law and to move to an extra-judiciary measure.

"This is a tragic wake-up call to the Obama Administration to immediately abandon its ill-advised plan to try Guantánamo terrorists” in federal civilian courts, said Representative Peter King, Republican of New York. “We must treat them as wartime enemies and try them in military commissions at Guantánamo.”

No one, however, is asking the question that needs to be asked. Were the acquittals due to the system itself, which is designed to defend the rights of the accused (a goal at which the system too often fails, but that is a topic for another post), an indictment of the system or did they occur because of a failure to collect the necessary evidence?

There is something more than a little disturbing about a mindset that demands we change the rules for a subset of people because we did not get the result we want, a mindset that endangers all of us because it chips away at the rights not only of Guantanamo detainees, but of everyone accused of a crime. It flips the basic premise of American justice -- everyone is presumed not guilty until proven otherwise -- and allows the presumption of guilt to become the standard.

This is far more of a threat to our country than anything threat we face from terrorism.

Knicks should not be this bad

The Knicks should not be 3-8. There is a better balance of talent than in recent years, though not enough to offset those nights when the shots do not fall. They need to play better defense and go hard to the hoop.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Tax cuts for the rich or food for the poor

Washington debates tax cuts for people making more than $250,000 a year, while far too many struggle at the other end of the economic spectrum. Can you say skewed priorities?

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Rangel verdict and the House's empty ethics rules

Charles Rangel was found guilty by his colleagues in the House of Repesentatives of violating ethics rules -- which would be huge news if it wasn't likely to result in just a slap on the wrist.

Rangel was found guilty Tuesday "of 11 counts of ethical violations," The New York Times said. The House committee ruled "that his failure to pay taxes, improper solicitation of fund-raising donations and failure to accurately report his personal income had brought dishonor on the House."

House Ethics Committee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat from California, said the investigation was “difficult and time consuming” and that a punishment was likely to be announced this week. That punishment, however, is likely not to be very satisfying. Expulsion, one of the possible punishments, is unlikely, the Times reports, and Rangel "is more likely to face a letter of reprimand or a formal censure."

I'm not advocating for expulsion, necessarily, but the fact that it is off the table -- or appears to be off the table -- is an indictment of a system that protects incumbency. And while the GOP has tried to make hay out of this, it is pretty clear from their own actions while in the majority that they would act no differently (the list of Republican miscreants is pretty long).

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Partial reforms on the table

It's convention time for the state's municipal officials, and they plan to focus their attention on Gov. Chris Christie's so-called tax reform "tool kit."

The convention — the League’s 95th — comes as Republican Gov. Chris Christie and Democratic leaders of the Legislature fight over how towns can meet the cap.

Christie has been pressuring the Legislature to pass his "tool kit" bills, the most important of which would allow towns to opt out of civil service rules and put a cap on arbitration awards. Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) said he’ll get to that before the end of the year, but that the governor has not proposed legislation that would push towns to share more services.

Elizabeth Mayor J. Christian Bollwage said he and other mayors will use the convention to tell lawmakers and members of the Christie administration to stop fighting and get to work on property tax solutions. He said more drastic steps are needed than what’s included in the "tool kit."

"The rhetoric, the chess playing has to stop and there needs to be some bills passed that will get us to meet this two percent cap," he said. 

The problem, however, is the cap itself. The cap is nothing more than an arbitrary imposition, one that bears no relation to the reality of running local government. The cap, like so many of the other reform proposals on the table will only go so far and fail to address the real issues facing local government.

We need to stop making distinctions among different types of government spending and different taxes and start thinking about the role of government in the state in a more unified way. That will mean consolidation of some communities and school districts, elimination of fire districts (fire and first-aid spending should be a municipal or county-level responsibility) and other special taxing districts. This will allow streamlining -- fewer police chiefs, fewer school superintendents, etc. -- which should save money on the spending side.

Plus, we need to alter our thinking on taxes, begin to think of the tax pool as a larger single entity made up of smaller components -- income, corporate, sales, property, gas, etc. We can then assess their fairness and make the most efficient use of them for collecting revenue and distributing funding according to need.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

The perils of unreasonable reasonableness

There is something strange about watching Jon Stewart, a deft political satirist, fall prey to the false god of reasonableness.

Paul Rosenberg explains the danger of Stewart's stance, reminding us that it lets the bad guys off the hook. As Rosenberg says, Stewart's objection to calling Bush a war criminal or pointing out the racism in the Tea Party movement (which in no way undercuts the movement's legitimate rage at our national decay) is logically flawed. Calling Bush a war criminal makes him seem like Pol Pot, Stewart says, which seems extreme. But

If we want our presidents to not be war criminals, we need to make it sound like a bad thing. No, make that a really bad thing.


It's a conversation-stopper, not a conversation-starter, Stewart explained. Not a problem, I say. Arrest first, then converse. You see, Jon, It really wasn't cable news that started the Iraq War. It was George Bush & the neocons. They're the ones we should take of first. There are laws you know?

Just as importantly, Stewart's argument is based on the notion of motive. If Bush believed his approval of torture, rendition and a misguided and unnecessary war was in the best interest of the country, was done to protect Americans, then he was not a bad guy. Remember, Pol Pot thought he was right, too. It is not about the motivation, but about the action. Bush and his cronies shredded the Constitution in numerous ways and lied us into war -- there is no doubt about that, though Stewart suddenly refuses to see that. The former president should be held accountable for this.

If this makes me seem unreasonable, then so be it.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Bad medicine for a bad economy

The New York Times buys into the nonsense being peddled by the president's Fiscal Commission, calling their proposal a dose of fiscal reality and shared pain -- though sharing the pain is far from what this plan would do.

The plan, the Times says,

frankly acknowledges what most politicians are too cowardly to admit — that deficit reduction will require shared sacrifice.

It lays out sensible principles, prominent among them that deficit reduction should start gradually, beginning in 2012, to avoid disrupting the fragile economic recovery. It also affirms the need to protect the most vulnerable Americans and to invest in education, infrastructure and research and development.

Then it does what any successful deficit reduction plan must do: It puts everything on the table, including tax reform to raise revenue and cuts in spending on health care and defense. It even dares to mention the need to find significant savings in Social Security, Medicare and other mandatory programs.

But Social Security is not the problem (minor fixes will address a potential problem in the retirement program that has been blown out of proportion) and the kind of tax reform being proposed is the kind that the people who run our corporate state will appreciate, but that those of us in the middle class will be none too happy about.

The focus should be on addressing healthcare costs -- which the Obama health-care plan is supposed to do, but won't because it left the contours of the for-profit corporate system in place. A single-payer system is what is needed, with less of a focus on high-end technology and more on preventative medicine. But that is another debate.

The issue here is the plan on the table, which is a right-wing economist's dream come true. As Jeff Madrick, a senior fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, writes on Huffington Post, the radical reduction in the federal income tax rate (the bulk of which would go to top earners) "is simply right wing ideology at work, and has nothing to do with deficit issues."

To the contrary, the authors are using deficit alarms to present a new tax agenda. Is Obama really going to stand behind it? There is no commonly accepted evidence that current marginal tax rates, or even higher ones, suppress economic growth.

He also is critical of the arbitrary slashing of federal outlays -- to 21 percent from an expected 24 percent (and the current 22 percent) and what he calls Draconian (and unnecessary) cuts in debt levels.

Why the reduction? There is no reason at all to do so, except an ideological one: less government is always better. Again, there is no absolutely commonly accepted evidence that higher levels of government suppress growth. Yet the proposal is willing to make painful cuts in programs to meet this spurious goal. And it will leave no room for more public investment.

Third, the proposal's goal is to reduce debt levels to 60 percent of GDP and eventually 40 percent. To do so requires a deficit on average of 2.2 percent of GDP. Again, there is no evidence that debt levels of 60 percent are better than levels of 70 percent, for example. Reducing the debt levels to 40 percent is simply Draconian. One argument is to keep them low to be able to respond to emergencies, as the nation just did. It would be far better to devote attention to avoiding the extreme emergencies.

The spending cuts, as Madrick points out, will be counterproductive in this broken economy, making it more difficult to address stagnant employment or help those dislocated by the damage done by the very economic elites likely to benefit from its medicine.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Slashing and burning blues

Jane Hamsher of FiredogLake calls it the cat food commission and, given its focus on cutting Social Security benefits, it is easy to see why.

The commission's chairmen -- a conservative Democrat tied to the Democratic Leadership Council (otherwise known as Republicans in sheep's clothing) and a conservative, anti-Social Security Republican -- unveiled the broad outlines of a plan they say will slash $4 billion from projected deficits over the next two years.

The plan has its moments -- military spending is on the table -- but it is unlikely to pass. And it shouldn't. It represents an assault on the nation's middle class and seniors, focusing most of the pain on those who need help right now.

According to an initial report in The New York Times, Social Security benefits would be cut for "most future retirees," though "low-income people would get a higher benefit," and the plan "would subject higher levels of income to payroll taxes to ensure Social Security’s solvency for at least the next 75 years."

None of the "savings," the Times reports, would be used for deficit reduction "reflecting the chairmen’s sensitivity to liberal critics who have complained that Social Security should be fixed only for its own sake, not to balance the nation’s books." That's a gross distortion of the liberal position, of course, which is that Social Security is solvent and that minor tweaks are all that are necessary (such as the expanded payroll tax).

Nevertheless, the commission and the Times continue to run the Social Security con, making it a prime target for budget cutters and privatizers. The chances that enough politicians would get behind changes like this and risk the ire of seniors remain thankfully slim, though I wouldn't put anything past the corporate lackeys who run things.

More significant in today's presentation, therefore, is the tax code rewrite being proposed. As described by the Times:

The proposed simplification of the tax code would repeal or modify a number of popular tax breaks — including the deductibility of mortgage interest payments — so that income tax rates could be reduced across the board. Under the plan, individual income tax rates would decline to as low as 8 percent on the lowest income bracket (now 10 percent) and to 23 percent on the highest bracket (now 35 percent). The corporate tax rate, now 35 percent, would also be reduced, to as low as 26 percent.

Even after reducing the rates, the overhaul of the tax code would still yield additional revenue to reduce annual deficits — a projected $80 billion in 2015.

Anyone catch that? Lower-income taxpayers will see their rate fall from 10 to 8 percent, but upper-income taxpayers get a much larger break -- from 35 to 23 percent. These cuts would be offset by elimination of tax breaks -- notably the mortgage tax deduction -- that help cut the tax burden of middle class taxpayers.

Without more specifics, it is difficult to see how something like this would benefit the middle class, let alone the poor, though it seems a pretty big win for corporate and high-end taxpayers.

The three-decade framing of this issue as a spending problem has allowed the corporation and their elected lackeys to target so-called entitlement programs and discretionary spending while keeping the need for more revenue off the table.

Paul Krugman sums up the problem with the commission and its report in a blog post here, call it "unserious":

If you’re sincerely worried about the US fiscal future — and there’s good reason to be — you don’t propose a plan that involves large cuts in income taxes. Even if those cuts are offset by supposed elimination of tax breaks elsewhere, balancing the budget is hard enough without giving out a lot of goodies — goodies that fairly obviously, even without having the details, would go largely to the very affluent.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Shot glasses, poetry reviews and self-promotion

In today's edition of "Blowing my own horn," I offer a review of Shot Glass Journal from August -- a review I only found last night.

In the review posted to Sabatage, my poem "Jazz" is mentioned as a highlight.

Here is the review:

Sometimes you’re not in the mood for a three-course meal, sometimes you just want a shot of something invigorating, if so, Shot Glass Journal might just hit the spot. Shot Glass Journal is a new online literary magazine specializing in short poetry (16 lines or less). Edited by Mary-Jane Grandinetti, the idea for the journal came from the many short poetry workshops she has led.

I often think of first issues as similar to TV show pilots: not always indicative of the quality of the following episodes but at their best emitting a promising flavour. Shot Glass Journal is no different with a mixture of hard-hitting and more disappointing poems.

Shot Glass Journal features several excellent poems that make over-used poetry genres seem fresh. There is Austin Alexis’ ‘Merce Cunningham Event’ who manages the feat of avoiding the usual dance clichés (if I read one more mention of ‘pirouettes’ and ‘jetés’…) and to capture what I’ve always found to be a particularly difficult experience to relate. Likewise Hank Kalet’s poem ‘Jazz’ manages an original take on the well-worn genre of love poetry:

‘Love is the lasting
resonating note
the high E picked and
held and
bent higher and
higher still’

On the other hand,  Steadman Kondor’s ‘For she is Paris’ fails to dwell further than the postcard picture of Paris:

‘She might toss you a Niçoise salad or seduce you with pâté de foie gras.’

Several poems in Shot Glass Journal delight in exploring the darker side of human nature. Gil Fagiani in ‘Dopefiend Hustle # 132: Playing The Christers’ reminds us that poetry doesn’t always have to be about the good guys with this amusing tale of exploited credulity.  Ruth Holzer‘s ‘Elderly Couple On Park Bench, N.Y.C’ (based on a Diane Arbus photograph) recreates the spiteful interior monologue of a clashing elderly couple. Meanwhile Rachel Green plays with death in ‘The Musician at the End of the Cemetery’, a deliciously macabre sensory experience:

‘she tunes the dead:
cadaver skin stretched taut
in chromatic scales of putrefaction’

Shot Glass Journal features an abundant array of forms including a triolet, a sonnet, a rondolet and some tankas, but my favourite of these form-players is Sir John Lambremont’s ‘Locked Lavatory’. Lambremont’s doesn’t adhere to a strict form but he masters rhymes (both internal and external) dexterously and unleashes them to accentuate the distress of being locked in a lavatory.

Shot Glass Journal is easy to circulate through but would benefit, in my opinion, from having a different table of content format than an alphabetical list that privileges the authors closer to the top of the list (or those well-known). A different format would be more democratic.

Overall, this is a journal that shows potential and is worth keeping an eye on as it develops in the coming years.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Christie doubts the science of global warming (But he's not running for president)

Chris Christie was considered a green-friendly Republican when he ran for governor, winning the NJ Environmental Federation's endorsement in 2009 and praise from other groups that remained neutral in the governor's race.

A year later and it is clear that Christie is not only not green, but he is downright dismissive of the environmentalists who helped him win the Statehouse by giving him credibility on green issues last year.

He has done some positive things -- signing wind farm legislation, for instance -- but on the whole he has been a disaster for the environment, gutting funding for alternative energy programs, reorganizing the state Department of Environmental Protection while making it more business-friendly and so on.

And now, with rumors flying that he will be on the national ticket in 2012 -- rumors he denies, sort of, maybe, sort of -- he is moving to ensure that his green credentials are in keeping with the wacko fringe of the Republican base that he will need on is side in a primary.

Here is a brief report issued by the Associated Press and posted on NJ.com:

Gov. Chris Christie says he's skeptical that humans are responsible for global warming.
The governor, a new darling of the Republican Party, made the remark at a town hall meeting he hosted in Toms River Tuesday afternoon.

Asked by a man attending the event whether he thought mankind was responsible for global warming, Christie says he's seen evidence on both sides of the argument but thinks it hasn't been proven one way or another.

Christie says "more science" is needed to convince him.

More science? Really? Despite the consensus that exists within the scientific community on the issue, he wants more -- which should make the fringe happy, but will leave us here in New Jersey dealing with the fallout.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Smoke it if you need it

When the state passed its medical marijuana law, the intent was simple: Let those suffering from specific ailments benefit from the properties -- its ability to calm nerves, increase appetite -- of the drug.

The law, signed by then-Gov. Jon Corzine, was opposed by then-candidate Chris Christie. But it passed with bipartisan support and became law.

Then Corzine lost to Christie, who instead of trying to repeal the law, made it his mission to limit its usefulness by drafting rules making access difficult.

The state Legislature is pushing back -- at least so far. A resolution overturning Christie's rules has passed the Assembly Regulatory Oversight and Gaming Committee and the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee and now goes to the full Assembly and Senate for votes.

I'm hoping the resolution is approved, and the intent of the original legislation is restored. But it is clear that the battle over how the medical marijuana system will be handled in the state will go on -- and on and on.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Carrots and sticks and the high cost of going green

The nation's energy debate is a nonstarter.

While most people, according to the polls, believe we need to do something to slow global warming, there is no agreement on how. And, just as importantly, our reliance on the market is making it impossible to address the problem. As The New York Times makes clear, the high upfront costs of renewables places them at a disadvantage in the marketplace.

Even as many politicians, environmentalists and consumers want renewable energy and reduced dependence on fossil fuels, a growing number of projects are being canceled or delayed because governments are unwilling to add even small amounts to consumers’ electricity bills.

Deals to buy renewable power have been scuttled or slowed in states including Florida, Idaho and Kentucky as well as Virginia. By the end of the third quarter, year-to-date installations of new wind power dropped 72 percent from 2009 levels, according to the American Wind Energy Association, a trade group.

The Times explains that

Electricity generated from wind or sun still generally costs more — and sometimes a lot more — than the power squeezed from coal or natural gas. Prices for fossil fuels have dropped in part because the recession has reduced demand. In the case of natural gas, newer drilling techniques have opened the possibility of vast new supplies for years to come. 

Left undiscussed is the infrastructure of incentives that supports the oil and natural gas businesses, with government subsidies for exploration and drilling dwarfing the small change provided to the green energy sector.

Government policy can address this -- first, by ending the tax breaks given to gas and oil companies, plugging loopholes and then by shifting the money to green programs in the form of consumer credits and development subsidies for green companies.
 The cost to society of burning one gallon of fossil fuel needs to be reflected in the price we pay at the pump, which is not happening now. An increase in the national gas tax, with the proceeds going to green investment (along with state level taxes that would pay for roads and mass transit) is good public policy that will save us money in the long run by preventing the costly impacts of climate change and other pollution-related problems.

Basically, we must use energy tax policy as a carrot and stick to alter the competitive field in the energy business.

Grassroots: Fight the power

My Progressive Populist column is on the Web site. It is on the false sense that elections make a democracy and the need to emulate the French protesters.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Sad, but not surprising UPDATED

AP file photo from MSNBC

(Update below)

MSNBC has suspended host Keith Olbermann indefinitely because he apparently made political donations to three Democratic candidates.

Perhaps, we shouldn't be surprisd -- Olbermann has been pushing a highly partisan brand of commentary for some time. This wouldn't be a problem except it is more than just a philosophical or ideological  bent. It literally has been pro-Democrat/ant-GOP, which oversteps the boundaries.

Some on the left -- or the partisan left, meaning Democrats -- will point to Fox's partisan faux news and say Olbermann offered a counterweight. And I can understand the argument. But my question is this: Since when do we lower our ethical expectations to the level of Rupert Murdoch and the GOP chain gang?

I listen to both Olbermann and Rachel Maddow on podcast most days, and often to The Young Turks and I'd been growing dissolutioned with Keith and Rachel's creeping partisanship, especially when compared with Cenk Uygar's unapologetically progressive, but nonpartisan commentary.

The contributions were the final straw in a growing push not to the left but toward the Democrats.

I assume Olbermann will return, but it is unclear when. For now, expect substitutes to babysit the chair (Chris Hayes from The Nation will sub tonight).

***

Hayes apparently is not hosting the show tonight, but more significantly The Nation reports that Olbermann was just one of many political hosts on cable who have made contributions. This doesn't change my criticism of Keith -- he had grown too partisan (and apparently had one of the candidates he gave money to on just before his donation was made, as per The Nation).

It only expands my criticism of a news industry that is built on personalities and not journalists. The fact that Sean Hannity gave money to Republicans does not excuse Olbermann's political contributions. Neither should be giving money if they want to pretend to host news and commentary shows.

Scheer's clear take

Robert Scheer, in a column that I should have linked to yesterday, offers probably the clearest takeaway from Tuesday's election results. "Hey, stupid," to paraphrase the 1992 Clinton campaign, "it's the economy!'

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Not quite a manifesto for political poetry, but close enough for me

This interview with Martin Espada is worth reading for a lot of reasons -- for its exploration of political commitment, discussion of Latino America and its politics and the need for grassroots mobilization -- but this quotation from the poet would have been enough on its own:

I believe there has to be an aesthetic; that we have to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I believe that political poetry should be grounded in the image, in the five senses, in the concrete, and that serves as a barricade against the rhetorical, because political rhetoric is often too abstract.

It is something all of us who try to merge the political with our poetry.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

A popular governor without a mandate?

There are a lot of things one could say about Tuesday's win by Linda Greenstein in the race to finish the final year of the 14th District state Senate seat, which had been held by Republicans for 19 years.

First, Greenstein had much better name recognition -- she had been in the Assembly for about 10 years, while her opponent -- Tom Goodwin -- was a Hamilton councilman who lost an Assembly race for the same seat in 2007.

Second, we could make the argument made by Senate President Stephen Sweeney, who claims that the win is an indication that voters want the governor and Legislature to make nice (they might, but I'm not sure how the Greenstein win demonstrates this, given

Or, you could argue something I've been saying about Christie since he was sworn in: He may be governor, but he does not have a mandate. Remember, he won with less than 50 percent of the vote and had no coattails in 2009. And, while he may be popular in the polls, he had little impact on the races in New Jersey on Tuesday. In fact, the Greenstein win means a larger Democratic majority than Christie faced just a week ago -- not exactly a glowing endorsement of his approach to fixing the state's problems.

And the Democrats won all four special elections on the ballot Tuesday -- two Assembly seats (5th and 31st) and two Senate seats (Greenstein and Donald Norcross in the 5th) -- while the GOP captured county government in Bergen County and regained the third district Congressional seat won by Democrat Jon Adler two years.

If anything, New Jersey politics has grown even more muddled than before.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

And this surprises us because?

We are facing high unemployment, which has sapped public budgets and led to major public-sector layoffs -- and we are surprised when the thousands of public workers now out of work are slowing the economic recovery.

Economists at Rutgers University say losses in public jobs are, in part, slowing the Garden State's economic comeback.


The findings will be released today during the Rutgers Economic Advisory Service forecast and conference in New Brunswick.

The study finds New Jersey has lost 269,000 jobs since January 2008. About 45,000 alone disappeared from May through September.

Economics Advisory Service director Nancy Mantell says New Jersey has lost 42,400 public sector jobs since May. More than half came from local governments.

It's simple math: If you add more unemployed people to the mass of those already unemployed, you have more unemployed people -- and that means there are fewer people who can buy houses, cars and other goods, making it less likely that businesses will be able to hire and so on. It is why many economists have pushed public spending -- direct aid to workers, infrastructure projects, etc. -- as the best approach to getting the economy moving in the right direction.

It appears, of course, that we are going to continue trying this other tack for a while, which means we shouldn't expect an economic rebirth any time soon.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Don't feel sad, get mad

The Republican Party has taken back the House of Representatives in a nasty push back against the president's party.

There is nothing surprising here, when you consider history (the president's party generally loses seats in a midterm) and the mix of politics (gridlock in Washington), economics (a jobless faux recovery) and culture (race and class bias, generalized fear).

The argument we are likely to hear as the days go forward is that the Democrats must move right and that liberals must trim their sales and lower their expectations. I'm not buying it.

The bulk of yesterday's losses came from swing districts and featured Blue Dog Dems who generally sided with the GOP on the most important issues.

According to an analysis by The Huffington Post, 23 of the 46 Blue Dogs up for re-election went down on Tuesday. Notable losses included Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (D-S.D.), the coalition's co-chair for administration, and Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.), the co-chair for policy. Two members were running for higher office (both lost), three were retiring and three races were still too close to call.

The Blue Dogs, a coalition of moderate to conservative Democrats in the House, have consistently frustrated their more progressive colleagues and activists within the party, especially during the health care debate. Blue Dog members pushed to limit the scope and the cost of the legislation and resisted some of the mandates of the bill. Last summer, seven of the eight Blue Dogs on the House Energy and Commerce Committee even threatened to block health care reform unless it met their cost requirements.

So, from a progressive point of view, there is no real loss here. (More on Russ Feingols later.)

And in real terms, this changes Washington only minimally. Let's face it, it's not like the Democrats were pushing real progressive change or had the guts to challenge the GOP's obstructionism. How a Republican House will shift the balance is beyond me.

But I write this from my perch as an editor of local news, far from the maddening nonsense inside the Beltway. I am not a perfectly coiffed TV personality who must impose a narrative on results to make it conform with my own preconceptions.

There are a handful of things we know for sure:

1. The Democrats control the White House and the Senate; the Republicans control the House and a majority of statehouses.
2. The polls show significant dissatisfaction with the direction in which the country is moving -- on both sides of the political divide.
3. And progressives allowed themselves to become dejected, watching as their political messiah failed to be sufficiently messiah-like to remake the political world.

And this last one is key. We have to stop waiting for some white knight to arrive and fix things. We have to take control ourselves, impose a narrative and program that has nothing to do with the accepted wisdom in Washington, that by-passes the liberal elite and the Democratic Party. Waiting for a savior leaves us -- and by us I mean everyone, not just lefties or even Americans, but everyone -- paralyzed in fear and at the mercy of the folks who control the levers of power.

It was depressing to watch the results roll in, but we cannot allow the depression to paralyze us. The left must get mad and it must get active, must ensure that an alternative set of policies and programs are on the table and that conservatives and corporatists do not have an open field on which to maneuver.

A failure of false equivalence

Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear
Jon Stewart - Moment of Sincerity
www.comedycentral.com
Rally to Restore Sainty and/or Fear The Daily Show The Colbert Report

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert hosted a comedy outing on the Mall in Washington the other day, one that could easily have been mistaken for a political rally.

There were plenty of laughs and too many speeches -- and a plea for sanity and reasonableness that, on the surface, may seem, well, reasonable.

But, as Matt Rothschold pointed out in a sharp podcast critique, Stewart's speech was an abject failure, a call for compromise and bi-partisanship that pays no heed to philosophy or ideology, that equates strong feeling with insanity and raises compromise to the level of belief.

Stewart, in essentially paraphrasing Rodney King and calling for us to "just get along," ignores the real danger we face. Our problem is not a lack of cooperation, though cooperation has been in short supply in Washington. Our problem is the weakness of liberals, personified by a president who clearly privileges bipartisanship over ideology, who has been willing to bend over backward and gut even modest liberal reforms to gain one or two Republican votes -- and this was before Scott Brown won a Senate seat and ended the mythic Democratic veto-proof majority.

The problem is not a lack of cooperation but a lack of cujones on the left.



Keith Olbermann last night bemoaned the false equivalence created by Stewart et al -- Olbermann/Maddow equals Beck/O'Reilly -- but failed to address the real issues raised by the Stewart rally and the rise of the Tea Party movement and the growing hegemony of the corporate state.

Chris Hedges, in his new book The Death of the Liberal Class, describes a liberal class or mainstream that acts as a bulwark against real and radical change. As Hedges points out, mainstream liberals' focus on incremental reform and the rivalry between the political parties consigns real structural economic change to the margins. The basic contours of corporate capitalism are never questioned.

Whether we are talking about so-called Obamacare, financial reform, the bailouts of the banks and auto industry, the seemingly endless wars we are waging and continued outsourcing of government services (including warkmaking and intelligence) or the much-to-small Obama stimulus, it is corporate capitalism that was the big winner. This becomes clearer when you place these efforts, which has or will transfer wealth from the middle class upward, beside the rather meager aid offered to the unemployed, underemployed and foreclosed upon and the failure of the liberal majority in the federal legislature to re-empower American workers (anyone remember card check?).

The false equivalence pushed by Stewart -- and endorsers of the rally like Arianna Huffington and Oprah Winfrey -- obscures the very real anger and fear driving the Tea Party movement, an anger and fear that need an outlet.

If we had a vibrant left in the United States, rather than an accommodationist one, the working class would not have to turn to the Tea Party (not have to, though many still might do so). Instead, as Hedges wrote yesterday,

The liberal class wants to inhabit a political center to remain morally and politically disengaged.

Were the left to realize its impotence, Hedges says, it might "be forced, if it wants to act, to build movements outside the political system." Rather than mock the Tea Party, which I admit is emminently mockable, liberals and progressives should be emulating it, co-opting and immitating its energy and organizing skills to force weak, centrist Democrats (this would be most of them) out of Congress.

This would require the liberal class to demand acts of resistance, including civil disobedience, to attempt to salvage what is left of our anemic democratic state. But this type of political activity, as costly as it is difficult, is too unpalatable to a bankrupt liberal establishment that has sold its soul to corporate interests.

What this means, unfortunately, is that incremental reforms are the best we can hope for, that the corporate greed heads will continue to control our economy and politics and the liberty the Tea Partiers claim to be defending will continue to erode and decay.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. it can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

Robo calls make my skin crawl

The robo-call phenomena baffles me. Over the last few days, I have received robo calls from President Barack Obama, former Sen. Bill Bradley and a variety of local and regional folks. And it's not over, at least for another 30 hours.

The notion that a recorded phone call from some famous person is considered a good use of a campaign's resources just doesn't seem logical, given how distasteful most people find telemarketers -- and politicians.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. it can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.

The final day

We have finally hit the end of this dismal election cycle, with the Democrats -- deservedly -- facing dim prospects and a wave of lunatics on the precipice of gaining entry to the nation's statehouses and national legislature.

It is a sad state of affairs, but one that serves the corporate world well, because it keeps the rightwing strong and sends liberals chasing their tales until they collapse from exhaustion.

That said, I will hit the voting booth tomorrow to cast my ballot. Look, I have no illusions that either party has much in common with my belief system -- I am, as I have taken to describing myself, an Anarchist radical populist progressive socialist, meaning I hate large concetrations of power, in particular corporate power, but view the existence of democratic government (when it functions as an extension of the people) as a bulkwark against corporate power. But I can see some candidates -- U.S. Rep. Rush Holt, for instance -- as having a lot to recommend themselves.

But this is not the post I intended to write. My focus was to be on the anti-politician meme that has controlled this year's election. Consider Scott Sipprelle, who is running against Rush Holt. His campaign is predicated on painting Holt as a career politician, while painting himself as outside of politics.



A businessman, not a politician -- but then, the act of running for office makes one a politican. That's just the way the language works.

A sign on Kendall Park in Kendall Park.

And it happens at the local level, as well. Mike Kushwarra and Steven Walrond, the Republicans running for mayor and Township Council in South Brunswick, are calling themselves "public servants not politicans," a claim that automatically paints the opposition as politicians. Both were township police officers and still live in town -- the public service part of the claim -- but aren't they, by virtue of the campaign, politicians, as well? Walrond, of course, ran for council two years ago -- which makes it pretty clear that he is a politician just like everyone else. And Kushwarra has run for school board, so I leave it to readers to make up their minds.

None of this should surprise anyone, given the anti-incumbency tenor of the election season. Politicians are running against themselves, which cannot be good for anyone, especially voters.

• Send me an e-mail.
• Read poetry at The Subterranean.
• Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. it can be ordered here.
• Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.