| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
13 Dec 2004 08:22:59 PM |
| Object: |
Shafting Kansas |
Shafting Kansas
Robert L. Borosage
12/13/2004 | Source: TomPaine.com
In his best-selling What's the Matter with Kansas, Thomas Frank argues
that conservatives have perfected the trick of selling a "social
backlash" to voters while trampling their economic interests: "Vote to
stop abortion, receive a rollback in capital gains taxes."
Playing to form, the Republican-led Congress convened in Washington
immediately after the election in which they benefited from peddling
guns and gays, flag and family. Immediately, they voted down the
constitutional amendment on gay marriage, happily dispatching it without
much fuss. Then they rolled 13 appropriations bills that they had failed
to pass before the election into one large omnibus $388 billion
bill—numbering more than 1,000 pages and weighing 14 pounds—which no one
had time to read.
Buried in the midst of that monstrosity was a provision that gives the
education secretary the authority to cut Pell grants, the government's
leading scholarship program for deserving sons and daughters of
America's middle- and low-income families. The education department
plans to change the expected financial contribution formula for
families, with 90,000 students likely to lose grants completely aid and
another 1.2 million suffering cuts.
Those endangered are children of families that make less than $50,000 a
year and sacrifice to be able to send their children to college. These
families tighten their belts, and their children scrape together loans,
grants and part- time work to pay their way through college. Pell grants
have failed to keep up with soaring college tuitions, but they are often
vital to give students a chance to stay in school. Frank had it right:
Republicans seduced "Kansas" with the faux populism on guns and shafted
them with cuts in the Pell grants that their kids depend on.
In an economy that depends on an ever more educated populace, this
poison pill makes no sense from policy grounds. It saves about $300
million—even as the Republican majority is intent on extending tax
breaks that put about $30 billion a year into the pockets of
millionaires. It forces kids to leave college, even as the president
plans to ask for another $70 billion for Iraq. (Perhaps this is one way
the Pentagon expects to solve its recruiting problems). And, with White
House insisting on the measure, it mocks the president's campaign
promise to raise the level of Pell grants.
The congressional action has received almost no attention in the press.
Republicans have perfected the ways to shaft Kansas without anyone
noticing. Pass the bill on Friday afternoon. Bury the provision in a
1,000-page bill that no one reads. Don't make the cuts directly, just
delegate the authority to the education secretary. When the cuts come,
Republican legislators will line up to express their shock to outraged
constituents.
But we're about to test just how long they can continue this scam. Next
spring, the president's budget will call for cuts in education and
health care across the boards—even while seeking a supplemental of about
$70 billion more for Iraq, and demanding that the top end tax cuts be
made permanent.
The voters who elected Mr. Bush and expanded the Republican majorities
in the House and Senate didn't vote for these priorities. In an election
day poll undertaken by Stan Greenberg for the Institute for America's
Future, voters by 54 to 40 said investing in education and health care
and energy independence takes priority over deficit reduction.
When asked how to cut the deficit, closing corporate tax havens was the
top choice, followed closely by rolling back tax cuts for the top 1
percent. "Scaling back further spending" on education and health care
was the least popular choice.
Of course, without a loud, extended battle—with extensive press
coverage—most people won't hear about the choices being made. Here,
Democrats too often aren't much help. Democrats in the House are
aroused, but they are literally locked out of legislating by House Boss
Tom DeLay. Amendments aren't allowed; drafting sessions are closed;
debate is limited; alternatives aren't allowed to come to a vote.
In the Senate, the Democratic minority has greater power, but the Senate
Democratic barons are scattered and scared. Tom Daschle's defeat has
many scurrying to find common ground with conservatives.
This time, however, conservative bait-and-switch won't go unnoticed. As
the election showed, progressives are building an independent capacity
to inform and mobilize people. Last fall, for example, a coalition led
by the Campaign for America's Future, the National Education
Association, Moveon.org and others organized over 4,000 house parties on
education in every state of the union. That was just a warm-up for
what's likely to take place in the coming months.
No doubt, Republicans will continue to posture on guns and gays. They'll
keep wrapping themselves in the flag and peddling piety, even as they
lard benefits on the wealthy and cater to their corporate cronies. But
this time, Kansas may just hear about the gulf between rhetoric and
reality, and begin to get a sense of how the shift gives them the shaft.
http://www.ourfuture.org/onmessage/borosage/20041213_kansas.cfm
.
|
|
| User: "Reasoned Insanity" |
|
| Title: Re: Shafting Kansas |
15 Dec 2004 07:31:51 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95BED983F8F1Akeegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
Shafting Kansas
Robert L. Borosage
12/13/2004 | Source: TomPaine.com
In his best-selling What's the Matter with Kansas, Thomas Frank argues
that conservatives have perfected the trick of selling a "social
backlash" to voters while trampling their economic interests: "Vote to
stop abortion, receive a rollback in capital gains taxes."
Playing to form, the Republican-led Congress convened in Washington
immediately after the election in which they benefited from peddling
guns and gays, flag and family. Immediately, they voted down the
constitutional amendment on gay marriage, happily dispatching it without
much fuss. Then they rolled 13 appropriations bills that they had failed
to pass before the election into one large omnibus $388 billion
bill-numbering more than 1,000 pages and weighing 14 pounds-which no one
had time to read.
Buried in the midst of that monstrosity was a provision that gives the
education secretary the authority to cut Pell grants, the government's
leading scholarship program for deserving sons and daughters of
America's middle- and low-income families. The education department
plans to change the expected financial contribution formula for
families, with 90,000 students likely to lose grants completely aid and
another 1.2 million suffering cuts.
Those endangered are children of families that make less than $50,000 a
year and sacrifice to be able to send their children to college. These
families tighten their belts, and their children scrape together loans,
grants and part- time work to pay their way through college. Pell grants
have failed to keep up with soaring college tuitions, but they are often
vital to give students a chance to stay in school. Frank had it right:
Republicans seduced "Kansas" with the faux populism on guns and shafted
them with cuts in the Pell grants that their kids depend on.
In an economy that depends on an ever more educated populace, this
poison pill makes no sense from policy grounds. It saves about $300
million-even as the Republican majority is intent on extending tax
breaks that put about $30 billion a year into the pockets of
millionaires. It forces kids to leave college, even as the president
plans to ask for another $70 billion for Iraq. (Perhaps this is one way
the Pentagon expects to solve its recruiting problems). And, with White
House insisting on the measure, it mocks the president's campaign
promise to raise the level of Pell grants.
The congressional action has received almost no attention in the press.
Republicans have perfected the ways to shaft Kansas without anyone
noticing. Pass the bill on Friday afternoon. Bury the provision in a
1,000-page bill that no one reads. Don't make the cuts directly, just
delegate the authority to the education secretary. When the cuts come,
Republican legislators will line up to express their shock to outraged
constituents.
But we're about to test just how long they can continue this scam. Next
spring, the president's budget will call for cuts in education and
health care across the boards-even while seeking a supplemental of about
$70 billion more for Iraq, and demanding that the top end tax cuts be
made permanent.
The voters who elected Mr. Bush and expanded the Republican majorities
in the House and Senate didn't vote for these priorities. In an election
day poll undertaken by Stan Greenberg for the Institute for America's
Future, voters by 54 to 40 said investing in education and health care
and energy independence takes priority over deficit reduction.
When asked how to cut the deficit, closing corporate tax havens was the
top choice, followed closely by rolling back tax cuts for the top 1
percent. "Scaling back further spending" on education and health care
was the least popular choice.
Of course, without a loud, extended battle-with extensive press
coverage-most people won't hear about the choices being made. Here,
Democrats too often aren't much help. Democrats in the House are
aroused, but they are literally locked out of legislating by House Boss
Tom DeLay. Amendments aren't allowed; drafting sessions are closed;
debate is limited; alternatives aren't allowed to come to a vote.
In the Senate, the Democratic minority has greater power, but the Senate
Democratic barons are scattered and scared. Tom Daschle's defeat has
many scurrying to find common ground with conservatives.
This time, however, conservative bait-and-switch won't go unnoticed. As
the election showed, progressives are building an independent capacity
to inform and mobilize people. Last fall, for example, a coalition led
by the Campaign for America's Future, the National Education
Association, Moveon.org and others organized over 4,000 house parties on
education in every state of the union. That was just a warm-up for
what's likely to take place in the coming months.
No doubt, Republicans will continue to posture on guns and gays. They'll
keep wrapping themselves in the flag and peddling piety, even as they
lard benefits on the wealthy and cater to their corporate cronies. But
this time, Kansas may just hear about the gulf between rhetoric and
reality, and begin to get a sense of how the shift gives them the shaft.
http://www.ourfuture.org/onmessage/borosage/20041213_kansas.cfm
While lots of people love his book, those of us who live in Kansas, where
Mr. Frank is from find it amazing that the story Thomas tells bears no
resemblence to the facts.
Kansas's economy has actually outpaced the nation's for years. Throughout
the 1990s and the first part of this new decade, Kansas had a lower
unemployment rate than the U.S. as a whole. In fact, when the country's
unemployment rate dipped below 5% from 1997 to 2001, Kansas's fell under
4%--a level so low that economists basically consider it full employment.
Overall, the state's economy added 256,000 new jobs during the 1990s, a 24%
growth rate, compared with a 20% national gain in the same period. Even when
the economic slowdown set in and the recession finally hit in 2002 and 2003,
Kansas lost jobs at a slower rate than the national economy did.
It's the same story in the state's agricultural sector, which Mr. Frank
claims the free market has driven "to a near state of collapse." Yes, Kansas
farm jobs shrank by about 9% in the 1990s, a result of farms becoming larger
and more efficient (and producing more), but the state's total agricultural
economy grew by 10%, some 30,000 jobs, as areas like food processing and
agricultural wholesaling expanded.
The objects of Mr. Frank's particular concern, his hometown of Shawnee and
the rest of Johnson County, have done especially well. For three years in
the 1990s, the Shawnee area's unemployment rate actually dipped below 3%,
making it one of the tightest labor markets anywhere.
When the recession hit, Shawnee's unemployment rate did rise, but it still
stayed below the nation's. And though Mr. Frank describes the place as
practically desolate, Shawnee's population grew by a robust 27% during the
1990s. Even more astonishing, today, only 3.3% of its citizens live below
the poverty level, compared with about 12.5% nationally. "It's possible his
view of us is outdated," says Jim Martin, executive director of the Shawnee
Economic Development Council, in classic Midwestern understatement.
Regardless of Kansas' economic performance, Mr. Frank's main thesis--that
people who are struggling economically should be voting as liberals, not
conservatives--is dubious. As an editorial in the Wichita Eagle observed:
"There's nothing wrong with many Kansans wanting to hold onto a little more
of their paychecks . . . or preferring that when they need help it comes
from their family, their church, their community--not an intrusive federal
government." But what's really astounding is that Mr. Frank, who offers
little in the way of economic data, would base his argument on such blatant
falsehoods. To Mr. Frank's liberal prejudices, something may be the matter
with Kansas, but it sure isn't its economy.
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|