It's Time for A Change

"When the president and vice president rashly shook off our allies and our respect for international law to pursue a war built on lies, when they sanctioned torture, they shook the faith of the world in American ideals.

When they were deaf for so long to the horrific misery and cries for help of the victims in New Orleans - most of them poor and black, like those stuck at the back of the evacuation line yesterday while 700 guests and employees of the Hyatt Hotel were bused out first - they shook the faith of all Americans in American ideals. And made us ashamed."

--Maureen Dowd--3 September 2005 NY Times


As the news on the national/international front turns from bad to worse, so does the President's ability to provide the nation with focus and direction. We are paying dearly for a right-wing Republican Congress that persists in cutting vital programs from the budget as they continue to serve the selfish interests of the wealthy. The current disaster in the gulf coast region serves to highlight our misplaced priorities. The New York Times correctly noted this morning that, “Publications from the local newspaper to National Geographic have fulminated about the bad state of flood protection in this beloved city, which is below sea level. Why were developers permitted to destroy wetlands and barrier islands that could have held back the hurricane's surge? Why was Congress, before it wandered off to vacation, engaged in slashing the budget for correcting some of the gaping holes in the area's flood protection?”

Current Congressional priorities are not consonant with middle American’s best interests. This month Congress will return from the summer vacation and make a concerted effort to eliminate the Estate Tax being paid by the wealthiest Americans. It is important to realize that, under current laws, anybody can pass up to about three million dollars on to heirs with little to no tax. If Congress does manage to pass legislation eliminating the estate tax, “millionaires will save close to $1 trillion dollars in the first ten years--that tax burden will shift to us and future generations.” Some of America’s wealthiest people oppose eliminating the estate tax because it is not in the national interest. For example, Bill Gates’ father heads a lobbying effort opposed to eliminating the inheritance tax. This may seem anomalous, since Gates, one of the world’s wealthiest men, would personally derive a tremendous benefit from such a change in the tax law; however, Gates and others like him, Warren Buffet for example, oppose the change.

Why do some of these altruistic billionaires oppose eliminating a tax that would so clearly favor their personal finances? In a nutshell, they realize that the long term best interests of this democracy do not lie in the direction of creating a landed, monied aristocracy. One only has to look to our south to see the implications of tax policies that concentrate national wealth in the hands of a tiny fraction of the total population. Most people, for instance, don’t realize that poor Mexico has more than its share of the world’s billionaires. It’s not hard to find countries to our south where 5 to 10 percent of the population controls or owns 95 percent of the wealth.

It is estimated that, “Eliminating the Estate Tax will personally benefit President Bush, VicebPresident Cheney and 11 other cabinet members up to $344 million - and we'll haveto pick up that tab!”

Beyond question the course set for the ship of state by the Bush Administration is headed into more turbulence. With the Iraqi situation bad beyond description, the President continues to grin and tell us how hard it is to make a democratic country, and he cites our national experience to prove his point. "They did write a constitution," he tells us; "things are looking up!" Then comes that stupid grin!

Nine hundred and fifty people dead yesterday in Bagdad! Hundreds wounded! When will the President’s Orwellian tale and our national nightmare end?

During times of crises a leader must lead, providing focus and direction, but as the NY Times wrote today, “George W. Bush gave one of the worst speeches of his life yesterday, especially given the level of national distress and the need for words of consolation and wisdom. In what seems to be a ritual in this administration, the president appeared a day later than he was needed. He then read an address of a quality more appropriate for an Arbor Day celebration: a long laundry list of pounds of ice, generators and blankets delivered to the stricken Gulf Coast. He advised the public that anybody who wanted to help should send cash, grinned, and promised that everything would work out in the end.”


Does the President ask us to make a sacrifice; does he inspire us to reach deep down within and find the courage needed to keep struggling? No! We get that damned, disturbing stupid grin, a trademark he uses to punctuate the inane pronouncements he persists in making.

In sum, in the words of Conservative columnist David Brooks, "On Sept. 11, Rudy Giuliani took control. The government response was quick and decisive. The rich and poor suffered alike. Americans had been hit, but felt united and strong. Public confidence in institutions surged.

Last week in New Orleans, by contrast, nobody took control. Authority was diffuse and action was ineffective. The rich escaped while the poor were abandoned. Leaders spun while looters rampaged. Partisans squabbled while the nation was ashamed" (New York Times 4 September 2005).

Let’s not stay the course. . .we need to be thinking about the next Congressional elections; we need to throw the bastards out.

Davy Crockett