Living Wage

I keep insisting that without living wages, the economy cannot recover, and today I am glad to announce former N.Y. governor Elliot Spitzer agrees with me. Of course, so do Professor Wombat and Dr. Krugman, but this one published yesterday in Slate.

While I am glad to see E.J. Dionne join me in deploring the media's insistence on giving their major attention to the blithering idjuts of the right, I also must admit that, as Dionne says, when they get the attention, they win.

With public attention, we can win. If we win, the U.S. recovers. That's an equation that has its perils, but is something to work with. Spitzer adds another link in the chain that will pull our economy out of its catastrophe with this point, that without income for individuals our economy is not working for us.

Long term, nothing is more fundamental than good jobs to creating the middle-class wealth that must drive the economy....The argument until now has been that the virtually unlimited appetite for American T-bills would permit us to issue this increasing debt without interest rates accelerating and the dollar suffering. Recent events have cast serious doubt on this assumption. The spread between two-year Treasury notes and 10-year notes is wider than it's ever been. And the Chinese government seems less and less enthusiastic about purchasing an unlimited supply of T-bills. (Has anyone wondered why we have said not a word about Chinese human rights abuses during this economic crisis and why Treasury Secretary Geithner has withdrawn the well-founded assertion that the Chinese have been manipulating the value of their currency?)

Now all of this might have been acceptable had we seen a remarkable increase in per capita income. We have not. Indeed, we have seen just the opposite: stagnation.
(snip)
What would be a better approach? A policy to support those sectors that actually create goods and value. ...why not take an amount equal to the AIG bailout (more than $180 billion) and invest in a product that would be truly worthwhile: high-speed rail along our major economic corridors? If we transform the L.A.-San Francisco corridor with high-speed rail, and D.C.-Boston similarly, the savings and technological advances would be enormous.

(Yes, I had to throw in the proposition about Supertrain because Atrios loves it, but it is absolutely right.)

New technologies, new sectors, new attention to the source of U.S. wealth, the worker. Without that vision, our efforts are spinning old, tired wheels.

The financial sector has been propped up and hand-pulled through its threatened demise. If nothing is created to bring new money into what's left of our consumer economy, however, that's just not enough. Printing all the money we can doesn't give it value.

When the power of the government is used on behalf of our workers, then the economy will be lifted as it should be, by the individuals that make it up.

A Legacy Worth Having

It's terrible times like these that gave rise to some very good works we have all over the country, put in by the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) and WPA (Work Progress Administration). In San Antonio,TX, it's the river walk. In Providence, RI, it's the zoo. My parents worked in CCC camps in Mississippi, my father teaching the art of farming and my mother teaching home arts like cooking. The unemployed people they taught mostly came from cities, and didn't have agricultural or sometimes even living skills. The programs took them off the streets, gave them a roof and enough to eat, and put them back to work.

Today the Dallas Morning News has coverage of some of the works in Dallas that resulted from the programs of the New Deal. It's encouraging that once before the country had a bad time like the one so many of us are having, and that this country worked its way out of it.

Take a stroll through a Dallas park, study in a public school or visit the grassy knoll where JFK was shot – they were likely built, beautified or enhanced by unemployed workers during the Depression.

The white pergolas that flank Dealey Plaza were constructed as part of a WPA project in the 1930s. Some are proposing a modern version of Depression-era programs to put Americans back to work and rebuild infrastructure.

We may not know it, but everywhere we go in Dallas, we're surrounded by places that were touched in some way by these workers, who got a paycheck and some hope through the national Works Progress Administration.

Their work – along with that of other Depression-era programs, such as the Public Works Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps – helped transform the face of the city and others across the country, scholars say. The WPA employed 8.5 million people and spent $11 billion on public projects nationwide.

"They did make lasting contributions to Dallas," said Darwin Payne, a Dallas author and historian. "It's so surprising that so many of us don't realize that."

As many call today's economy the worst since the Depression, the WPA is again making headlines. Scholars and pundits propose a modern version of the agency to put Americans back to work and rebuild the country's infrastructure.

President Barack Obama has said he wants to create 3 million jobs and launch the biggest public-works program since construction of the interstate highway system.

To pump up the economy, the House last week approved an $819 billion stimulus plan, some of which would be spent on infrastructure improvements. The Senate will now take up the matter. Obama wants a package approved by mid-February.

Some say the stimulus package is reminiscent of parts of the WPA launched by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1935. Across the country, WPA workers built or improved roads, bridges, dams, schools, airports and courthouses.

But they didn't just build stuff. In Dallas, they wrote books, performed concerts and even sewed clothes.

My mother taught cooking, canning and sewing to ladies who didn't always appreciate the program, Mississippi, or having to sew, but they learned and they had new talents. She was for a time paid in IOU's, like CA has taken up, and never got the full value for them, in her opinion. She traded them for a set of tires, at least as she remembers it. Of course, my parents also didn't starve, and had jobs, courtesy of the New Deal.

In case you listened to the new RNC Chair Steele, claiming that the government never made a job, we know better.

A program for giving jobs and renovating infrastructure is very much a benefit this country badly needs. The progressives in our Congress are working on such programs, and obstruction to that work is detrimental to the country.

As I posted previously, it's time for the public servants to walk right over that obstruction. They are sworn to work for, not against, this country's interest.

If you haven't told your senators what you want, please do it now. All of us need working people making living wages to get the economy operational again.

Getting off the Blocks

Good for you, Dems. Seems that instead of hunkering down and making cuts to the stimulus/recovery funds, Democrats are reacting to winger negativism by adding real benefits to the public. It was evident over eight years of carrying out right wing economics that they don't work. The mogul hordes took the money and ran. We have a mess to clean up, and the retards on the right want to make more messes.

I was just listening to Rep. Jim McGovern on Washington Journal, pointing out that while they can't guarantee all the projects will work, sitting on our rear ends in the face of economic meltdown certainly won't work. Jobs will be created, and with jobs we create consumers, for this consumer economy.

Top Democrats plan to add a big increase in highway and mass transit funding to President Barack Obama's economic recovery program Tuesday, even as others in the president's party hope to rein in the plan's almost $1 trillion cost to taxpayers.

A move by Patty Murray, D-Wash., to add $25 billion in infrastructure projects is first in line as the Senate begins thrashing through dozens of proposed changes to the sprawling $885 billion measure.

Murray's plan would increase the money in the bill for highway projects by almost 50 percent, to $40 billion, reflecting complaints from lawmakers in both parties that Obama's plan doesn't do enough to relieve a backlog of unfinished projects. Mass transit programs would get a $5 billion boost, while water projects would get $7 billion more.

Republicans, for their part, readied a plan to lower mortgage costs to try to jolt the housing market out of its slump.
(snip)
Nineteen Democratic and Republican governors, meanwhile, cited frozen credit markets and rising unemployment in urging lawmakers to resolve their differences and asking Obama to sign the bill as soon as it reaches his desk. The governors said the money it provides for public education, health care and rebuilding the nation's infrastructure will create and preserve jobs while making a sound investment in the country's long-term economic interests.

"While we all believe in the importance of free markets, we believe that the markets today need stimulating," the governors told Obama in a letter dated Monday. Among the signers are Democrats Deval Patrick of Massachusetts and Tim Kaine of Virginia, and Republicans Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Charlie Crist of Florida.

It makes no sense to continue blocking economic recovery, a prospect that has become clear after the retards on the right voted against it in the House. The party of nope has a lot to apologize for, though in reality we don't expect it ever will. In the meantime, the Democrats are right to walk right over them. The country is in great need of activism, now. It's time to lead, follow or get out of the way. Exactly that is happening. Public representatives with any smarts are putting their backs into the recovery, not turning those backs.

The difference between the two parties has never been so clear. One works for the country, the other works against it.

**************************************************

Just sent an email to Senators Cornyn and Hutchison, hoping you all will join in and contact your senators, and mine are worse than yours.

The email;

Please support the public interest by voting for the recovery package with emphasis on public works. My parent both worked in a CCC camp after graduating from LSU with masters' degrees, and you will note in today's Dallas Morning News an excellent article on the WPA program benefits to that city.

The financial industries that destroyed the economy cannot be given the job of building it back up.

Eight years of cutting taxes hasn't worked. We need to put jobs and salaries back into U.S. workers' hands so that they can be the solid base the economy needs.

Thank you.

from Ruth

Supertrain Lives!

Admittedly, I love trains. I have ridden in private berths and in standard passenger cars, taken a fall colors route, and an overnight ride from Providence, RI to D.C. with the kids so they could have the experience. When I worked in Dallas I took DART rail into the city almost daily. When I travel, I want to see the country and clear the highways.

When I was in the Big Bend area, seeing an actual passenger train arrive and let off passengers in Alpine, TX, was a thrill. What good sense it makes, to arrive at a gorgeous natural area without having to drive through the congestion in cities, and not polluting our air any further.

There is no hell like trying to drive from North Texas through Dallas or Fort Worth to reach the areas south of here. We really need to take a look at alternate transportation just for travel around the state.

Hearing talk about returning Texas to rail service makes me just deliriously happy.

Could high-speed trains be back in Texas' future?

Visions of bullet trains – like the ones that danced in the heads of Dallas City Council members who toured China earlier this year – may seem a bit dreamy for the Lone Star State.

But as 2009 nears, this much is true: Talk of such passenger rail service, once thought of as forever dead in Texas, is back in vogue, both in Washington and Austin.

A number of signs point to possible success for rail advocates, who for years have been talking up the merits of so-called multimodal transportation planning, but to a mostly unreceptive audience among Texas transportation policymakers.

This month, the U.S. Department of Transportation called for proposals from states and businesses to develop any of 11 federally designated high-speed rail corridors. Proposals are expected across the country, and two of the specified routes run through Texas. One, the Gulf Coast Corridor, enters the state from the southeast and finds its terminus in Houston.

The other route comes in from the north, and runs through Dallas, Austin, San Antonio and more.

No proposals have been made to develop those corridors yet, but U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters was in New York City in recent weeks to urge investors to consider doing just that. The government's vision is to have private firms partner with state and federal governments to jointly develop the rail lines. Proposals are due by September 2009.

Texas ought to start moving if it wants to take advantage of the federal funds, said Peter LeCody of Texas Rail Advocates, a passenger-rail lobbying group. The federal government is promising an 80-20 match with local or state funds – a nearly unprecedented move for rail, which usually requires a 50 percent contribution from local sources.

"Texas is not on the horizon to take advantage of the recently authorized Railway Safety Act," he said, noting the law that has prompted the federal call for programs. "Other states are already planning for high-speed passenger rail corridors, and some have timetables in place to have intercity passenger rail service as early as 2012. Texas does not."
(snip)
The Texas Department of Transportation's executive director, Amadeo Saenz, disputed Mr. LeCody's assertions. He said the department is aware of the call for proposals and is working on a plan.

"If any of the other states are out ahead of us, I'd like to know about it," Mr. Saenz said.

If the department has a weak focus on rail, however, it may have good cause. It has never been allowed to spend money it collects from gasoline sales on rail programs. The Texas Constitution forbids it, though lawmakers have managed to find ways to divert about a half-billion dollars of the funds each year to other uses.

Mr. Saenz said he'd like to see that changed.

I heartily agree. Having a source from gas tax would be particularly rational in view of the congestion it could reduce. The Texas legislature isn't much known for its rational behavior, but when it comes to saving taxpayer money it does come under increasing pressures. We can't build enough roads for the traffic in our urban areas. We can reduce traffic, though, by spending on railroad development.

Besides, it would make Atrios so happy.

Reality Based Stimulus

What a treat to get a sound projection for what works this morning from New Jersey Governor Corzine. With a solid grip on the realities of the situation, he does a down and dirty job of making a plan that can work, and putting it on paper. The states have for the most part had the full weight of support for social services over the past eight years, and the situation is desperate on that level. Many are out of funds for education, infrastructure, and unemployment.

Warning: this is not light reading.

The stimulus should be roughly divided into five categories: infrastructure, countercyclical programs, housing, education block grants and middle-class tax cuts.

· For every billion dollars we spend on infrastructure, we can put upwards of 20,000 people back to work. On one hand, we've learned painful lessons about the need to modernize our bridges and levees. On the other hand, we must think broadly about the idea of infrastructure: How many hours do people waste circling airports because our air-traffic control systems are outdated? We must commit to improving our transportation system, energy grid, Internet technology, ports, public housing and school facilities.

· Unless we also help states shore up their safety-net social programs, the economic impact of the federal stimulus will be negated.

Most states are constitutionally required to balance their budgets. Given the sharp decline in state revenue, we are not able to support, let alone increase, spending to meet growing demands for basic needs such as unemployment insurance, food assistance programs and health care -- including mental-health services to those with developmental disabilities.

Most states are facing cuts to these essential services, reductions that will exact an enormous toll on our most vulnerable citizens and remove money and jobs from the economy just when we need to promote growth. Put another way, even if the federal government dedicates a large sum to infrastructure, cutbacks in state and local safety-net programs would cancel out much of the effect of the stimulus.

Over two years, the federal government should boost its countercyclical spending by at least $250 billion. It can do so by increasing the Federal Medical Assistance Percentages; the federal share of Medicaid costs; and other health-care-related programs such as reimbursement to hospitals for treating the uninsured, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and child-care grants.

Many state unemployment trust funds are already depleted. Rising unemployment rates and reduced revenue over the next few months are likely to trigger major payroll tax increases in 2009. This harm could be partly mitigated by doubling proposed federal funding for state unemployment trust funds under the Unemployment Insurance Modernization Act, which would provide incentives to cover vulnerable low-wage and part-time workers who are often denied benefits.

· Unless we strike at the cause of the meltdown -- the collapse of the housing market -- our economy will continue spiraling downward. The federal recovery package should include funding for state housing mortgage authorities and for programs that help people restructure their mortgages, stay in their homes and find new shelter if evicted.

· If we are to pursue relief and recovery, it's essential that we continue developing a workforce that is able to meet the demands of the 21st-century economy. At least $250 billion in preschool-through-college education block grants would help states meet their school budget obligations; more important, such grants would enable greater strides toward universal early childhood education and fully funded programs for special-needs students -- improving the situation today and laying the foundation for a better tomorrow.

· A sizable middle-class tax cut is key. Over the past decade, median family income has failed to keep pace with inflation, especially given the sharply rising costs of health care and education. Most Americans have lost ground. Relief for the middle class would help our families weather the storm and also boost economic demand.

In 1932, Roosevelt warned against being of "faint heart, fearful of change, sitting tightly on the rooftops in the flood." His words are still prescient today. We must be bold -- $1 trillion bold. America has abundant resources and a generous, ambitious spirit. If we work together, we'll emerge stronger and more prosperous than ever.

That we have to tighten our belts as a society, and get to work, is not a surprise. Eight year of right wing dominance has strained all systems to the breaking point, and economic sphere beyond that point. The diversion of all our national resources into corporate welfare has been a huge theft from the public.

The strictures we are all facing will not be painless. They will be a solid reminder that allowing wingers to ignore and trample on our laws does not make anyone better off. Even business suffers from 'business side' economics as practiced by the crooks who took over the White House in 2001.

That reality-based public servants are here to step in for the real work is heartening. We have many good people stepping up to the plate, and thanks are due to them for taking hold.

For shame, Republican Party for destroying the economy.

Superficial, But A Start

Today's Los Angeles Times contains an editorial that took up a serious subject, described it rationally, but then fell down at the last, most critical step. The subject? Our crumbling infrastructure.

When the World Trade Center went down in 2001, it led to two wars, hundreds of billions in expenditures and the creation of a Homeland Security bureaucracy. When the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis went down last year, it led to a $1-billion House bill to mandate repair of federal bridges, which will probably be vetoed by President Bush if it gets past the Senate.

Obviously, neither the scale nor the causes of these two American tragedies are comparable, but the vastly different responses do say something about political will. The 9/11 attacks struck an emotional chord that infrastructure failures such as the I-35W bridge collapse or the ruined levees of New Orleans do not. Yet the consequences of our apathy about public infrastructure could be just as dire and deadly as our pre-9/11 apathy about Islamic extremism.

More than a quarter of the nation's bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete, and it would take $65 billion to fix them all. In 2006, almost 43,000 people died on U.S. roads and nearly 2.6 million were injured -- casualties that could have been reduced if more had been invested in safety improvements. Traffic congestion in big cities such as Los Angeles is choking off economic growth, and under-investment in public transit contributes to high gasoline prices and air pollution. And the federal fund that is devoted to solving many of these problems has run out of money. ...

Bush and Republican presidential candidate John McCain tend to blame earmarks for all the country's infrastructure woes, but it isn't that simple. Earmarks accounted for about $24 billion of the $286-billion transportation bill in 2005, or roughly 8% of the money. Yet a landmark report from the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission estimates that it would take $225 billion a year for the next 50 years to sufficiently upgrade the nation's crumbling infrastructure. Just cutting out pork won't come close to covering that.

While noting the different responses to 9/11 and the collapse of Minnesota's I-35 bridge was actually more apropos than the editorialist realized, the writer failed to see the connection between the two. Perhaps if we hadn't been spending billions of dollars a day on those two wars, one of which had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, more money would have been available to do things that need doing in this country. Yes, the war appropriations have all been "off-budget," but the interest payments on all that borrowed money still have to be found and budgeted. Pulling troops out of Iraq (something this administration has made clear will not happen on the Bush watch) and forcing Iraq to start spending some of the billions of dollars it has from oil revenues on its own security would ease some of the financial strain the US is facing.

The Times writer also suggests some possible solutions to find the money necessary to fix our roads and bridges, but merely raising the gas tax and ending ear marks or inventing new taxes (mileage based taxes) or privatizing our freeways with toll roads in and of themselves may not be enough under the limited analysis the writer has chosen. The editorial seems to be locked into a zero sum game which does not take into consideration the benefit of putting a sizable segment of our population back to work at good paying jobs. The results of more workers actually working, receiving paychecks, paying taxes, buying food and clothing and all the other necessities and goods would more than offset the initial appropriation.

Having said all that, I still have to admit that the Times editorial board did the right thing by raising the issue, even if I disagreed with some of its conclusions. At least we can start talking seriously about it.