The Golden State's empty purse

Man am I glad I'm not in charge of dealing with California's current budget deficit. The state's roughly $24 billion in the hole. I tinkered around with the LA Times' budget balancing tool, and while I was able to slash the deficit to a mere fraction of the original, that involved throwing in some tax increases (high income, oil, alcohol, tobacco).

I hope the politicians don't dig a deeper economic hole for themselves by cutting funding for education, a proposal other lawmakers have made. At a time in American history when the country is loosing it's advantage in the collective mind-power category, it's hard to think of something stupider than cutting aid for students, school funding, etc. In addition, since the national economy is shifting from mixed-services and manufacturing based more towards a services economy — thus relying on an educated workforce — I'd be appalled, though not altogether surprised, by a lawmaker who favored demolishing public education instead of taxing the wealthy a bit more, or cutting down on senseless bureaucratic spending.

Well the June 15 deadline has already passed, California has a wonderful social model in some respects — decent government funding for education, medical and welfare, medical marijuana (I wonder why taxing cannabis hasn't come up as a budget-saving option...). It'd be a shame to see the all state's governmental services collapse. Republicans, including the state's body-builder governor, equate raising any taxes with shaking hands with the devil; and yet no truly viable alternative has been proposed.

This is all-the-more interesting when you consider that if California were an interdependent country, it would be the sixth largest global economy, which makes the prospect of economic failure and the collapse of the state-wide welfare system have even wider national implications. Well, the folks in Sacramento have until July 1 to settle all this...

Welcome President Obama

President Obama. Gonna have to get used to writing that.

A bitter farewell to one of the most destructive presidents in American history, and a warm hello to the new commander-in-chief, Barack Obama. I watched much of the inauguration today; Obama's inaugural address (transcript here) was the first presidental speech I have ever witnessed that did not leave me feeling like my president was not only competent, but surrounded by radical ideologues. (Keep in mind I wasn't old enough to analyze Clinton's speeches during his time in office.)

That being said, it was a very fine speech, covering everything from climate change issues to the flawed economic system to keeping the nation safe to helping those in need abroad. For once in my politically-active life I feel confident in the executive office, and this brings me a feeling of great satisfaction. At last, a man who works for the people instead of representing the interests of those on top. After eight long years, at last a president who can do some good for this fine country.

When the clock struck 12 today, my heart leapt with excitement. Let us see if President Obama can or will bring us the new era he's promised. Even if things fall though, it would be very difficult for Obama to perform worse than his predecessor. I wish the new 'leader of the free world' good luck.

Ready for a new president?

Tomorrow Barack Obama will be sworn in as the 44th president of the United States. CBS News' political blog has all the day-before details...

Obama has been pushing for the release of the second half of the $700bn bailout, and this time he promises oversight — a new concept, it seems, for today's federal bureaucracy. Not even the feds know where the first (roughly) $350bn truly went. Another reassuring Obama move is the promise to close Guantanamo Bay as soon as possible.

Meanwhile, Bush is expected to pardon Republican cronies, corrupt businessmen, etc. (the usual Bush supporters) at the last minute. Politico lists 10 potential pardons here. Political pardons like these are yet another reason the American justice system lacks fairness, especially if a super-corrupt felon like Ted Stevens gets off... (Remember what happened with Scooter Libby?)

I'm looking very much forward to a new political era, though certainly not one without challenges like the current economic downturn and the state of the environment.

Bush reverses 35 years of endangered species protection...

...in order to help his bigwig pals — concerned only with their money — who have gained from the past eight years of environmental injustice. Pulling America backwards, thanks George W!

AP:

Just six weeks before President-elect Barack Obama takes office, the Bush administration issued revised endangered species regulations Thursday to reduce the input of federal scientists and to block the law from being used to fight global warming.

The changes, which will go into effect in about 30 days, were completed in just four months. But they could take Obama much longer to reverse.

They will eliminate some of the mandatory, independent reviews that government scientists have performed for 35 years on dams, power plants, timber sales and other projects, a step that developers and other federal agencies have blamed for delays and cost increases.

The rules also prohibit federal agencies from evaluating the effect on endangered species and the places they live from a project's contribution to increased global warming.

Bush is trying to maximize the damage he does to America during his last days in office (mostly to the environment, but also abortion/employment rights).

From a must read Rolling Stone article:

"It's what we've seen for Bush's whole tenure, only accelerated," says Gary Bass, executive director of the nonpartisan group OMB Watch. "They're using regulation to cement their deregulatory mind-set, which puts corporate interests above public interests."

While every modern president has implemented last-minute regulations, Bush is rolling them out at a record pace — nearly twice as many as Clinton, and five times more than Reagan. "The administration is handing out final favors to its friends," says Véronique de Rugy, a scholar at George Mason University who has tracked six decades of midnight regulations. "They couldn't do it earlier — there would have been too many political repercussions. But with the Republicans having lost seats in Congress and the presidency changing parties, Bush has nothing left to lose."

Easily the worst president in the past 100 years — yes, it's my personal opinion that Bush has had a more destructive reign than recent blunders like Reagan and Nixon. One hopes there will be no worse leaders in this century.

Just imagine folks — in less than a month and a half we'll have a new president with a reasonably level head! It's going to feel good.

I expect President-elect Obama not only to reverse these horrendous last-minute executive actions by Bush, but also to move America forward in terms of environmental regulation. Hopefully the government will begin to protect what needs protecting (the poor, the environment) instead of powerful business interests who already hold far too much sway. Hopefully the value of what can not be replaced (including human lives) will overtake the value of a dollar. One can only hope.

Bush's pushes through last-minute anti-abortion plan

A friend pointed this out to me today:

A last-minute Bush administration plan to grant sweeping new protections to health care providers who oppose abortion and other procedures on religious or moral grounds has provoked a torrent of objections, including a strenuous protest from the government agency that enforces job discrimination laws.

The proposed rule would prohibit recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or to assist in the performance of abortions or sterilization procedures because of their “religious beliefs or moral convictions.”

It would also prevent hospitals, clinics, doctors’ offices and drugstores from requiring employees with religious or moral objections to “assist in the performance of any part of a health service program or research activity” financed by the Department of Health and Human Services.

But three officials from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, including its legal counsel, whom President Bush appointed, said the proposal would overturn 40 years of civil rights law prohibiting job discrimination based on religion.

There are so many things wrong with this, as is common with orders coming out of the Oval Office in these Bush years. Often things like this go unnoticed; there really isn't much in the media on this abortion ruling.

Religion should not get in the way of healthcare, and of the patient's personal choice. In addition, last time I checked the government's role didn't include endorsing job discrimination. In effect the administration is trying to withhold funds from health institutions who don't let their employees' views on abortion get in the way of them doing their jobs. Another step backwards for a woman's right over her body fueled by the Catholic church and an ultra-conservative executive.

America votes 2008: election update 6

The big picture: what we have seen so far

The GOP has lost its reign over America's suburbs.

The youth vote had quite an effect on this election, with wide support of Obama.

Everyone seems to have forgotten about the war in Iraq. Newsflash: it's still going on.

We'll still have to wait and see about the Democratic balance in the Senate.

Not that everyone doesn't already know this, but Americans have now voted in the first non-white president. Obama will be sworn in as the 44th president on 20 January 2009.

Democratic prospects for the election

Thanks to the financial crisis over the past month and a half, the Democrats now have a chance to get a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, so initiatives from the House can finally be passed and progressive objectives have a chance of being accomplished. To grab this 60th Senate seat, the Dems need to pull it through in a red state like Kentucky, Georgia, or Mississippi.

Meanwhile, the Republicans re-toning message to convince voters that there needs to be a "break" against the Democratic influx in Washington, but its the GOP's own fault. There are plenty of examples, even in the south, of congressional seats to be won from conservatives by Democrats thanks to Obama's popularity. As a result of this election, the GOP may be thrown back to pre-1994 days. The good: more can be done in Congress. The bad: less checks within the government (assuming Obama wins).

The many attacks of the McCain campaign

"If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters." From Sen. Barack Obama's DNC speech.

McCain is the attack candidate. His whole message is based upon attacking his opponent, namely the fact he'll raise your taxes! (His plan may not be working so well, however. Republicans finally losing tax policy debate? Is the era of cut! cut! cut! finally over?)

According to the McCain campaign small towns = real America. Lately, Palin has dished out plenty of veiled insults on basically everyone in urban areas. Oddly enough, hmm, only about 15% of Americans live in these idyllic "small towns". We're going through another spell of questioning patriotism and how "American" one is (even as 9/11 and national security, as well as immigration, which also brought up the "American" question, are put on the back burner because of the financial crisis).

McCain's ads focus on Palin almost as much as the actual candidate for the presidency, and the GOP is giving her a prime spotlight. Meanwhile, Palin has even attacked Obama's volunteering work as a community organizer and such trivial things as his loose connection to a Palestinian scholar and a '60s extremist (Ayers). And what has she accomplished? Even the current mayor of Wasilla herself said the city provides essentially no resources for its residents (most things being taken care of by the state government).

Ironic that the Republican whose pockets are lined with money from the oil lobby accuses his opponent in an attack advertisement of not supporting alternative energy. Is McCain delusional enough to seriously think he's the green candidate?

Paul Krugman wrote an excellent op-ed piece on campaign dishonesty back in September.

McCain: For voters who think real change is just too darn risky!

Electoral excitement!

In just a few days (can't wait until Tuesday!), Barack Obama should win the race for the American presidency. National polls show him comfortably ahead his rival, who grows increasingly desperate — and right-wing. That's not to say this election is won, of course. Anything can happen. But if one just tinkers with the electoral map one finds a McCain victory at this point is incredibly unlikely. McCain asserts he can win, however, even if he carries Ohio (there's a chance) and Pennsylvania (Obama's looking fairly strong there), as well as most all of the toss-ups, including Florida, Obama still wins by over 30 electoral votes! Even if we then give McCain North Carolina Obama carries the election. To win, McCain would not only have to pick up every toss-up state, but grab some of those big states leaning towards Obama. It's possible, but certainly not as likely as the McCain campaign would like people to think

How a 'plumber' named 'Joe' shook up the election

His first name isn't actually Joe. He isn't a valid plumber. And he still has back-taxes to pay.

And yet, he has become the recent hero of the McCain campaign (frighteningly backwards economic plan and all) since his name came up in last weeks debate. Not only that, he has helped bolster his ratings in major swing states like Ohio. The media is all over him, even though he's effectively a non-story.
Joe the plumber: one of the most appalling political ploys of this election season (up there with the Obama-Ayers connection).

If there's one thing Americans can't stand, it's taxes. Americans have some of the lowest income taxes in the developed world, and yet, even when we've got a burgeoning deficit and a war to pay for, the thought of raising taxes if only for a few is painful, and, for some, unpatriotic. Because it's unpatriotic to give a slice of your — to be fair — well-earned income to your government.

Heaven forbid the developed country with the greatest income inequality — that's America, folks — tries to bridge the gap with a more fair, graduated tax system that doesn't benefit the wealthy, using the bogus 'trickle-down' claim as an excuse for unfair taxes.

So let's all feel sympathy for a man in the top 4% income bracket ($250,000 per year) who will feel a slight pinch in taxes, in fact, since were fighting one of the most expensive wars in modern history and facing a massive recession, lets give him a tax BREAK. That makes economic sense. Not like he hasn't already gotten a massive one under the Bush administration.

The news media deserves some blame too. Although there has been some skepticism, the outrageous amount of coverage is unwarranted and largely spreads the propaganda the McCain campaign itself is sending out into the mainstream.

Oh, and, for the record Obama was correct in his statement about small business taxes that started this mess. As 'Joe' plans to campaign across America with McCain, warning the masses about the 'socialist' radicalism a fairer tax system would bring more and more ACTUAL "average Joes" are feeling the pinch of the current economic crisis. If only people like Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher and Sarah Palin could be less greedy and actually give a damn about their own country's economic health instead of accusing their fellow Americans of being unpatriotic.

If American politics has been reduced to feeling sympathy for a man — an invention of the McCain campaign — who has already received more tax breaks than is healthy for this country's economy, then this really isn't the America I want to live in.

Going door-to-door for Obama

I canvassed for the first time today. Though it was just a few hours of my day, canvassing gave me a sense of fulfillment. When I got back home and looked at the polls, there was good news. Obama's pushing on as strong as ever now that the nation can fully see Palin for who she is. Hopefully Obama can maintain this lead when election day comes, and we can finally have a competent person in the Oval Office. And, for what it's worth, I plan on canvassing more next weekend and making calls during the week.

If you're looking to volunteer for the Obama/Biden campaign, get involved in more ways than one by checking out the campaign website.

Meanwhile, I must get back to these college applications.

A look back on China and the Olympics

August was China's great coming-out party
As summer ended, China was put in the global limelight. It had been chosen to host the 2008 Summer Olympics years ago, but this was it's time to shine. Expectations were built up; some dashed (political), some realized (Olympic).

Here are three political thoughts on the PRC that I jotted down as I enjoyed the splendor of the Olympic games:
The future
Perhaps even in 30 years China may drift away from one-party rule. China's economic change is moving at a rapid rate, prompting political change (moving much more slowly). China has been opening up over the past few decades, and one imagines this process will accelerate. On the flip side I cannot see the full transition to a multiparty state happening in less than 25 years.

Freedom
Since when were the opinions of people protesting for basic freedom irrelevant? The Tiananmen Square massacre gave us a chance to observe the total wrath of the Communist Party in China. Since when were the rights of any person outside of the central party in China respected? In a nation where tens of thousands are employed to control what information one can access on the Internet, freedom is obviously something in short supply.

Actions abroad
The Chinese government brought the criticism it has received lately for its foreign policy upon itself. In subverting the rights of its people, causing cultural genocide in Tibet and other areas, degrading the environment to a remarkable extent, and supporting genocidal regimes such as the one in Sudan, and propping up the Burmese junta, the PRC presents itself as one of the most negative actors in the world.

"Palin is the world’s worst sestina"

I'd like to refer readers to some poetic fun from The New York Times' book blog.

So what verse form suits the various candidates best? David Orr, author of the Book Review’s “On Poetry” column, offered this analysis: “Barack Obama is pretty clearly a haiku — quiet, unassuming, easy to underestimate. McCain is probably some species of ballad, especially considering his military background and fondness for ‘Invictus.’ Biden just keeps talking and talking, so he’s a rhopalic poem (each line is one syllable longer than the preceding line). Palin is the world’s worst sestina.”

Orr gamely attempted an anti-Biden haiku (“Barack Obama/ Such an articulate guy./ Clean, too, am I right?”), but his heart just wasn’t in it. “I think Palin is just inherently funnier than Biden,” he said, before letting it rip with this rather artful three-liner:

So jobs, they … you know,
Health care’s really …. it’s — Katie,
That bridge? I said no.

How much longer can the US remain a superpower?

Article worth taking a lot at. Takes into account the opinion of many international relations heavyweights.

American international prestige and internal prosperity has been severely damaged by these past roughly eight years of George Bush as president. This upcoming election is huge. There'll be posts covering the presidential and vice-presidential debates as well as the current financial situation soon.

Palin: What does the VP do exactly?

So besides her ludicrous views on a number of issues — from abortion to gays to energy security (Sarah Palin is THE darling of the right right now, hand-pushed by James Dobson to be the VP candidate) — is Palin really up to the job of veep?

"As for that VP talk all the time, I can't answer until someone answers me. What is it exactly that a VP does every day?" she said just a month ago on CNBC when asked about her chances of being on the ticket.
...
"We want to make sure that this VP slot would be fruitful type of position especially for Alaskans and for the kind of things we are trying to accomplish here for the rest of the US."

(emphasis added)
So, if she and McCain won, Palin would work for Alaska, but not America, which would be her job? Hmm...

Palin is also using the fact that she's the governor of one of America's remotest states to say she has foreign policy experience. Now, if one were to say John McCain has foreign policy experience, I'd agree, Joe Biden even more so. But Palin? Really?

Palin mania!

Palin was a key figure in 60% of campaign stories in the American news media this past week.

With the other ticket making most of the news, Obama was a focus in 22% of the stories last week, by far his lowest week of coverage in the general election season. His running mate Joe Biden registered at 2%.

The extent to which Palin commanded the spotlight last week is clear from the campaign storylines. Together, media narratives about McCain and the convention—including the proceedings themselves, Hurricane Gustav’s impact, McCain’s speech, and George Bush’s role—accounted for 43% of the campaign newshole. Palin themes, including reaction to her selection, her public record, her personal and family life, and the question of sexism—accounted for 45%.

I guess the McCain-Palin camp can no longer complain (repeatedly) about how the media is against them. Seems everyone is trying to paint themselves as a victim.

News coverage isn't the only thing McCain has taken from Obama. More and more McCain is pushing himself as the "reform" candidate. Because someone who's voted with the incumbent president 90-some percent of the time is obviously a Washington outsider. Oddly enough — considering he's pushing for "change" and all that — McCain has become even more conservative and like the president as the campaign rages on, changing his position and tone on a number of issues. He is less of a maverick now than he was making the president's war speeches for him.

The DNC

Obama just made an incredible speech at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. I'm glad he chose the experienced Joe Biden as his vice presidential candidate.

More posts soon, I promise. I have been very busy lately.

Pakistan takes a turn -- in the right direction?

A little while ago Pakistani dictator Musharraf was forced to step down. Now the party formerly led by Benazir Bhutto looks set to instal the next leader of the unstable South ASian nation. Remember this is a country with nuclear weapons. Pakistan probably harbos more members of international terroist groups than any other nation, the northern region bordering Afghanistan is the biggest trouble spot. Will Pakistan fall into disarray or will a new democratic government bring peace and stability to this country?

Hey, at least old Hosni is out of the building!

Early flip-flops in '08 election campaign

It's no secret that during the primary season, candidates pander towards the more extreme ends of their parties. However, as the campaign progresses, they focus on the center and swing votes, having already courted their own unique party factions. Obama is even trying to steal the religious vote by proposing new faith-based initiatives — an appalling move in my view, counter-intuitive even. While it's good he isn't trying to isolate religious voters, especially in swing-states like my (current) home state of Ohio, I'm worried enough about separation of church and state after this Bible-thumping Bush administration.

I'm sure you all have also heard about Obama's shunning of public financing for his campaign, going back on an earlier statement. Will this hurt his image as a government reformer? Read more here.

Lack of confidence in world leaders (but is there hope?)

Who's the best world leader?
Well, if UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is counted, then he's the world leader with the highest confidence rating — 35% — according to a new study in conjunction with the University of Maryland. As Newsweek reports,

On average, only 23 percent of foreign respondents express "a lot of " or "some" confidence in Bush, and only Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does worse (at 22). ... Then comes [Russian President[ Putin at 32 percent, [UK Prime Minister] Brown at 30, [Chinese President] Hu Jintao at 28 and France's Nicolas Sarkozy at 26. The results aren't much different if you tally them country by country: in only two states (Nigeria and India) do a majority of people express at least some confidence in Bush. Putin and Hu each come out ahead in just five nations, and Brown in just six.

Meanwhile, respondents from most countries in a separate Pew study seem to adore US presidential candidate Barack Obama. Let's hope that, come November, most of America will think the same of him.