Congress is grilling the Big Three Automakers on what they will do with bailout billions if they get it.
That makes sense.
I believe that New York City's Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) should also be grilled on price increases and tolls on the East River Bridges.
Not too long ago politicians were extolling the virtues of the MTA as being reasonable and an alternative to driving that would make congestion pricing in Manhattan feasible.
Obviously they were wrong.
I have not used the East River Bridges in over ten years, but believe the new plan is a stupid approach to what we are led to believe is a temporary condition. If we spend money now to convert the bridges to toll roads they will remain toll roads forever and be subject to continual increases. They will further make New York a divided city.
To turn the bridges over to the MTA is asinine.
They must put their own house in order first.
They should give up their pool of limousines and chauffeurs. Give up their free EZ passes and learn their own public transit system. Stop spending money on fancy offices. Stop adding high paid executives. Stop paying for cost overruns on construction projects. In short stop wasting money before they are entitled to a raise in fares.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Local political clubs are about control, not reform
The political club, in theory, is where democracy begins. It is the grass roots of politics. In practice it is also the graveyard of democracy at times.
It started out as a forum where like-minded individuals went to discuss issues so that their elected officials could represent them on these very issues. It evolved into an organization whose sole function is to elect incumbent officials. It does not matter whether the club is Democratic, Republican, Independent, Conservative, Liberal, or somewhere in-between.
It is run by the President and the Board of Directors who make up the agenda.The Board of Directors usually is made up of
the elected official's employees and dedicated people who are generally good petitioners. Generally they are there to protect the officials and put forward their agenda.
That is why you rarely see people who challenge the incumbents in a club have much success. The only time you see any new people running for office from a club is when the present official does not run. Most of the time the club assumes the name of the elected official and loses its own identity. It becomes Jose's club, or Marie's club, etc. Incumbency is the name of the game. The endorsement feature usually locks out challengers. The incumbent generally has an advantage over any challenger, because he/she can point to his ability to bring home money to his constituency.
The word "Reform" is a misnomer once the elected officials are elected more than once. It becomes just like a "Regular" club.
Issues become less important than campaigning and keeping power.
It started out as a forum where like-minded individuals went to discuss issues so that their elected officials could represent them on these very issues. It evolved into an organization whose sole function is to elect incumbent officials. It does not matter whether the club is Democratic, Republican, Independent, Conservative, Liberal, or somewhere in-between.
It is run by the President and the Board of Directors who make up the agenda.The Board of Directors usually is made up of
the elected official's employees and dedicated people who are generally good petitioners. Generally they are there to protect the officials and put forward their agenda.
That is why you rarely see people who challenge the incumbents in a club have much success. The only time you see any new people running for office from a club is when the present official does not run. Most of the time the club assumes the name of the elected official and loses its own identity. It becomes Jose's club, or Marie's club, etc. Incumbency is the name of the game. The endorsement feature usually locks out challengers. The incumbent generally has an advantage over any challenger, because he/she can point to his ability to bring home money to his constituency.
The word "Reform" is a misnomer once the elected officials are elected more than once. It becomes just like a "Regular" club.
Issues become less important than campaigning and keeping power.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
'Indispensable Mayor' or Grim Fairy Tale
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has decided that he is indispensable and must run for a third term to save the City from economic disaster.
That is a fairy tale.
Let me give you some reasons why.
In the first place his term does not come up until next year, by which time he may not be needed to save us. In the second place, the buddies he pals around with and usually hand picks for appointments come from Real estate, Banking, and Wall Street. These are the very people who got us into this mess with the help of our Congress.
They decided at the behest of President Bush and the Republican party and some Democrats that there was no need for a watchdog in the economy, that the Real Estate , Banking and Wall Street people were of such a high caliber that they could and would police the industry.
What they did with this trust is have a party at our expense. Enormous bonuses were paid to undeserving Executives. Then they gave tremendous golden parachutes to departing Executives. If a golden parachute was not enough they bribed the executive with a platinum one.
All this was done on Mayor Bloomberg's watch. His office is not too far from Wall Street, and his company's ticker tape showed the market trends, yet he could not see what was coming. So how can he help us.
Think about it. Would you keep a shortstop on your team who kept making errors, simply because he had experience.
If Mayor Bloomberg really wants to prove his value, he should convene an expert group of economists - people like Paul Krugman, Tom Friedman, Robert Rubin and even Alan Greenspan to work on the problem with him. If they are successful, then he could retire as the Statesman he deserves to be.
That is a fairy tale.
Let me give you some reasons why.
In the first place his term does not come up until next year, by which time he may not be needed to save us. In the second place, the buddies he pals around with and usually hand picks for appointments come from Real estate, Banking, and Wall Street. These are the very people who got us into this mess with the help of our Congress.
They decided at the behest of President Bush and the Republican party and some Democrats that there was no need for a watchdog in the economy, that the Real Estate , Banking and Wall Street people were of such a high caliber that they could and would police the industry.
What they did with this trust is have a party at our expense. Enormous bonuses were paid to undeserving Executives. Then they gave tremendous golden parachutes to departing Executives. If a golden parachute was not enough they bribed the executive with a platinum one.
All this was done on Mayor Bloomberg's watch. His office is not too far from Wall Street, and his company's ticker tape showed the market trends, yet he could not see what was coming. So how can he help us.
Think about it. Would you keep a shortstop on your team who kept making errors, simply because he had experience.
If Mayor Bloomberg really wants to prove his value, he should convene an expert group of economists - people like Paul Krugman, Tom Friedman, Robert Rubin and even Alan Greenspan to work on the problem with him. If they are successful, then he could retire as the Statesman he deserves to be.
Monday, October 6, 2008
A Bronx Cheer for a Cheerleader
I watched the vice president's debate the other night and came away with this thought: I do not know which debate the Conservatives who gave Sarah Palin rave reviews were watching. After all she was debating to prove that she and John McCain could do the job of making our economy stronger and changing the Washington work ethic. She did nothing to allay my fears about either, because she never explained what her plans to do so were. I could definitely agree with her about changing the tone in Washington. We need to get rid of some Democrats along with some Republicans. I would also have liked to hear an explanation about how we get rid of the Lobbyist power structure. At least Joe Biden gave some figures about the votes of John McCain that can be fact-checked. Palin said little "wrong" because she said so little.
What I finally decided is that Sarah wins hand down on perkiness? Which reminds me of the famous line in "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," when Lou Grant says to Mary, "You are perky. But I don't like perky."
The economy is more important than perkiness.
Sarah's smiling and winking led me to the conclusion that if we need a cheerleader for our country, I would
definitely hire her. She should apply for the job of National Cheerleader.
What I finally decided is that Sarah wins hand down on perkiness? Which reminds me of the famous line in "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," when Lou Grant says to Mary, "You are perky. But I don't like perky."
The economy is more important than perkiness.
Sarah's smiling and winking led me to the conclusion that if we need a cheerleader for our country, I would
definitely hire her. She should apply for the job of National Cheerleader.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Hypocrisy: The Republican Credo
If I had to pick the biggest difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, I think it would be that the Republicans believe they can live by different rules.
When Pres. Clinton had troops in Kosovo the Republicans not only criticized him (although it's now unpatriotic to criticize Pres. Bush's war and the conduct of it), but tried to impeach Clinton on a private matter. They also used the private matters of Elliot Spitzer, Jim McGreevey and John Edwards to bring them down.
But when Neil Bush, got mixed up in the Silverado Bank scandal they swept it under the rug. When Pres. Bush used the power of eminent domain to take property away from small businesses to build the Texas Rangers Stadium, that too was swept under the rug. When Newt Gingrich had marital problems,the broom came out again. You also do not hear too much of the Giuliani marital problems nor John McCain's.
When Geraldine Ferraro was running for Vice-President her husband was fair game even though it was a private matter.
So how come the Republicans are screaming that Vice President candidate Sarah Palin's unmarried pregnant daughter's problem should be off the table because it is a private matter.
Now Obama can be magnanimous and say it should not be used as campaign fodder, but I don't have to.
The Republicans keep screaming that the Democrats are appeasers. I agree. Under Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi they have done a tremendous job of appeasing the Republicans.
When Pres. Clinton had troops in Kosovo the Republicans not only criticized him (although it's now unpatriotic to criticize Pres. Bush's war and the conduct of it), but tried to impeach Clinton on a private matter. They also used the private matters of Elliot Spitzer, Jim McGreevey and John Edwards to bring them down.
But when Neil Bush, got mixed up in the Silverado Bank scandal they swept it under the rug. When Pres. Bush used the power of eminent domain to take property away from small businesses to build the Texas Rangers Stadium, that too was swept under the rug. When Newt Gingrich had marital problems,the broom came out again. You also do not hear too much of the Giuliani marital problems nor John McCain's.
When Geraldine Ferraro was running for Vice-President her husband was fair game even though it was a private matter.
So how come the Republicans are screaming that Vice President candidate Sarah Palin's unmarried pregnant daughter's problem should be off the table because it is a private matter.
Now Obama can be magnanimous and say it should not be used as campaign fodder, but I don't have to.
The Republicans keep screaming that the Democrats are appeasers. I agree. Under Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi they have done a tremendous job of appeasing the Republicans.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
The 'Surge' a Pyrrhic victory
I won't bore you with the fact that I predicted going to war with Iraq would achieve nothing in making us safer - I'm still trying to figure out what it hoped to accomplish.
If the goal was to get rid of Saddam we won the war a long time ago. If the idea was to get rid of the nuclear threat of Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, then the war was unwinnable from its wrongly-conceived start. If the idea was to get oil from Iraq at a cheap price we may never know the outcome, but so far it's not working out to well. I do know a lot of lives were lost and an enormous amount of money that could have made life easier for many Americans was wasted.
Now let us look at the "Surge." If we give those in favor of this surge credit for for what the surge has accomplished, Iraq is now safer for American soldiers who did not have to be there. As recent suicide bomb blasts show it's still not too safe to be an Iraqi and it's difficult to see Iraq becoming a tourist destination any time soon. At the same time have we not made it more difficult for our troops in Afghanistan by having so many surge troops occupied in Iraq? Assuming the surge has made Iraq safer, did it not do so at the cost of worsened problems in Afghanistan? That;s of course assuming we really accomplished anything in Iraq and not merely put off the problem until we leave.
If the goal was to get rid of Saddam we won the war a long time ago. If the idea was to get rid of the nuclear threat of Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, then the war was unwinnable from its wrongly-conceived start. If the idea was to get oil from Iraq at a cheap price we may never know the outcome, but so far it's not working out to well. I do know a lot of lives were lost and an enormous amount of money that could have made life easier for many Americans was wasted.
Now let us look at the "Surge." If we give those in favor of this surge credit for for what the surge has accomplished, Iraq is now safer for American soldiers who did not have to be there. As recent suicide bomb blasts show it's still not too safe to be an Iraqi and it's difficult to see Iraq becoming a tourist destination any time soon. At the same time have we not made it more difficult for our troops in Afghanistan by having so many surge troops occupied in Iraq? Assuming the surge has made Iraq safer, did it not do so at the cost of worsened problems in Afghanistan? That;s of course assuming we really accomplished anything in Iraq and not merely put off the problem until we leave.
Monday, June 30, 2008
How the rich get richer
Yesterday I finished a book called "Free Lunch" by David Cay Johnston. It should be a must read for Republicans, Democrats, Independents, voters and non-voters. It details how government decides that the middle class is not entitled to a free lunch, but forces the middle class to pay for banquets for the very wealthy.
I have always maintained that voters who care more about the money brought home to their district than the overall votes cast by their representatives are allowing the wealthy to get wealthier at their expense.
The lobbyists and the people they work for:The utilities, the banks, the cable companies, the trucking industry, the construction industry, the oil industry, the credit card companies, Wall Street, the real estate industry, the defense industry, and even some Unions, all gorge themselves with the help of your votes.
Representatives bring money home to their districts by voting against your interest on bills that eventually cost you money.
"Free Lunch" shows you how this is happening. It shows how our representatives - even before they leave office - are setting up jobs for themselves in the industries they help with their votes.
It is not an easy read but it is well worth it. Take "Free Lunch" a chapter at a time and devour it.
I have always maintained that voters who care more about the money brought home to their district than the overall votes cast by their representatives are allowing the wealthy to get wealthier at their expense.
The lobbyists and the people they work for:The utilities, the banks, the cable companies, the trucking industry, the construction industry, the oil industry, the credit card companies, Wall Street, the real estate industry, the defense industry, and even some Unions, all gorge themselves with the help of your votes.
Representatives bring money home to their districts by voting against your interest on bills that eventually cost you money.
"Free Lunch" shows you how this is happening. It shows how our representatives - even before they leave office - are setting up jobs for themselves in the industries they help with their votes.
It is not an easy read but it is well worth it. Take "Free Lunch" a chapter at a time and devour it.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Whose special interest? Not mine
If you have been watching the debates and listening to the language something should be clear. Except for John Edwards and Ron Paul the candidates never explain who the Special Interests are that they will fight for you.
I will give you a small list of some of them. They are in no special order.
The Cable industry. They give you one year leases and with almost every renewal they raise the prices.
The internet providers. Almost the same tactic.
The phone providers. Hey they learned also.
The credit card companies. They have the right to change terms at their discretion.
The banks. They also can change terms at their discretion and make arbitrary charges.
The HMOS. After the first year they also can change terms.
The Utilities. They can tear up your streets for their convenience, take forever to make the necessary improvements and inconvenience the public with no oversight.
The Transportation industry. Whenever they have to give one of their retiring executives a "Golden Parachute" they can get the money from the public by raising the fares.
The Bridge and turnpike authorities. They too can raise the tolls whenever they feel they need to.
Disagree with their policies and they answer that they can do what they want because the law says so .The Public Commissions
that are supposed to oversee the industries are rubber stamps.
These are only a few. Sometimes I feel that the only Special Interests they will fight against are mine.
I will give you a small list of some of them. They are in no special order.
The Cable industry. They give you one year leases and with almost every renewal they raise the prices.
The internet providers. Almost the same tactic.
The phone providers. Hey they learned also.
The credit card companies. They have the right to change terms at their discretion.
The banks. They also can change terms at their discretion and make arbitrary charges.
The HMOS. After the first year they also can change terms.
The Utilities. They can tear up your streets for their convenience, take forever to make the necessary improvements and inconvenience the public with no oversight.
The Transportation industry. Whenever they have to give one of their retiring executives a "Golden Parachute" they can get the money from the public by raising the fares.
The Bridge and turnpike authorities. They too can raise the tolls whenever they feel they need to.
Disagree with their policies and they answer that they can do what they want because the law says so .The Public Commissions
that are supposed to oversee the industries are rubber stamps.
These are only a few. Sometimes I feel that the only Special Interests they will fight against are mine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
