GAZETTE COLUMN: FOUL WEATHER ENEMIES – CANTOR, BACHMAN, PAUL, & BECK by John P. Flannery

Hurricane Irene

I had a long conversation with a state trooper who was summoned down to the Virginia Beach area to help deal with the consequences of Hurricane Irene. 

“You should have seen the pictures I took of the devastation in Virginia,” he said, “but then I saw those other reports and pictures coming in from other officers up and down the coast, and finally those in New York, New Jersey, and Vermont on the air.  I only hope what I did helped.”

Virginia’s Republican Governor Bob McDonnell is of the same mind – we must help everyone we can. 

Speaking from the flooded town of Lincoln Park, New Jersey, Republican Governor Chris Christie said, “Our people are suffering now, and they need support now.”

Hurricane Irene overran entire communities, washed away homes, cars, road ways, leaving in their place, mud, debris, lakes of water, power out for millions, two score or more people dead and others injured.

You might think getting the federal government to grant aid was a no-brainer. 

But we saw an unbelievably harsh reaction from some Republican leaders.

Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor from Virginia opposes any disaster aid unless funds are cut first from other federal programs.  At least he’s consistent, even if not sensible.  Cantor opposed aid to his own congressional district, at the epicenter of the recent earthquake.  He didn’t want money spent to help the citizens respond to the tornadoes that slammed Joplin, Missouri.  Nor does he want federal aid to Virginia for Hurricane Irene.

Governor McDonnell rightly said “deficit reduction should take a back seat to disaster relief.” 

Governor Christie attacked Cantor “for playing games at a time when people need government assistance most.”

Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul said, “This idea that the world comes to an end if you don’t have somebody at the federal level taking care of you, I mean, it’s a natural problem.  It’s wind.  It’s a storm.” Now is the time, Paul believes, for our nation to “transition out of the dependency on the federal government.”

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann thought this was a laughing matter; she said Irene was a sign from God that federal spending was out of control.  “Washington, DC,” she said, “you’d think by now, they’d get the message: an earthquake, a hurricane.  Are you listening?”

In this competition for the most careless indifference by any person to a massive natural disaster, we can’t leave out Glenn Beck, the self-anointed T-party poster boy, who said that Hurricane Irene was “a blessing from God.”  Incidentally, the reason this is a “blessing,” according to Beck, is it reminds us all that we should stock pile food.  Beck did not explain where you store food when a hurricane washes away your car, your house and your entire home town.

For those of you who depended upon the National Weather Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to take precautions against Irene, be advised that the Republicans in Congress sought to cut funds drastically to these services, eliminating our ability to know about hurricanes five or ten days in advance.

We must thank every public leader, without regard to party or ideology, who has tried to help the victims of Irene.

As for the others, we should demand that they publicly disclose their SAT scores.

# # #

GAZETTE COLUMN: IS THE NATION WORTH SAVING? by John P. Flannery

I believe the nation is worth saving.

We don’t, however, all act like we believe that simple truth.

Too many pretend it’s the fault of the middle class that our nation is at risk. 

That’s ironic because that’s most of us.

We really can’t blame the middle class for not earning a fair wage or salary for their work.

They didn’t make the decision to take home a smaller share of the nation’s income.

In 2007 the median income for a man, half above him earning more, and half below him earning less, was $45,000; that was less than the median income in 1970 even  though the economy was much bigger in 2007 and, by right and expectation, he should have earned more -- if he had gotten his fair share.

The wealthy took more than their fair share.  Michael G. Morris, the CEO of American Electric (AEP), one of the principals who tried to run that toxic coal-fired power line through Loudoun County, earned $3.2 million in compensation only a few years ago.  That’s 71 times the $45,000 median income in 2007. If Morris spent it all in a single year, he would have to spend $8,767.12 a day.  Kenneth Lewis, the CEO of Bank America, was paid $100 million in 2007, the year before the bailout.  Richard Fuld, the CEO of Lehman Brothers was paid $500 million in salary and shares of stock before Lehman collapsed.  

Our elected representatives have deferred to their wealthy patrons when saving the wealthy from taxes, from bargaining with their workers, from “pesky” safety regulations, and they privatized public services to give them a profit with our tax dollars, then allowed our jobs to go overseas, and that’s all meant that the wealthy have realized greater profits, while refusing to share that increase with the middle class in the form of higher wages.

In the late 1970’s, the upper richest 1 % of the nation controlled less than 9% of the total income; in 2007 (when the top 1% earned $398,900 a year and more), it was 23.5 percent of all income. 

The middle class tried to keep up their standard of living, on a stagnant wage rate or salary, with extra jobs, by depleting savings, using credit cards, and borrowing against the equity they had in their homes.

When the credit market collapsed, because of all that Wall Street chicanery, the chief asset of the middle class family, the home, sprung a leak and went underwater.

Middle class consumption dropped like a stone.  But we were still producing.  This led to unemployment as we were over-producing. And it won’t get better until the middle class is working and secure.

Republican Representatives Eric Cantor (VA) and Paul Ryan (WI) want to cut Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid to the middle and lower economic classes and refuse to raise taxes on the wealthy; they appear intent on punishing the middle class for having the temerity to demand a square deal. 

Their biggest miscalculation is that the wealthy intend to take their money and hire anyone.  The wealthy have alternative and less risky investments for their funds. 

The other thing they’ve got dead wrong is that taxing cripples economic expansion.  If that was so, then why did President Eisenhower set the tax rate at 91 percent?

Our economic engine will not turn over again unless we redistribute the wealth fairly.  The wealthy can’t make profits if the middle class isn’t employed and buying.  It’s about increasing the taxes for the wealthiest – and certainly not at the Eisenhower level.  Our government is also going to have to create WPA projects that pay people to work.  Nor can we be shredding the safety net while the middle class struggles to find its financial footing.

This nation is worth saving and the time to start is now.

# # #