Universal Health Care

May 24, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Health Care is not an individual matter. It’s a national crisis as clearly expressed in President Barack Obama’s message.

“American families are watching their premiums rise four times faster than their wages. Spiraling health care costs are shackling America’s businesses, curtailing job growth and slowing the economy at the worst possible time. This has got to change.”

President Obama’s Health Care Policy aimed at three core principles — "it must reduce costs, guarantee choice, and ensure quality care for every American.”

The combined forces of the Health Care industry represented by the Insurance, Pharmaceuticals, Biotech, Academic institutions (e.g. University of Chicago), Hospitals, Medical Centers and Private Medical facilities not barring Wall Streets’… dominance in the highly commercialized and profit driven enterprise has led to the status quo of the most important economic structure in the society.

Industrialized nations have experimented with both socialized and privatized medicine. Some commonwealth nations viz. United Kingdom, Canada and Australia have blended the national health care with private and taxpayers’ funded policy. In the exclusively privatized medicine, the privileged segment of the society thrives while leaving the remaining population at the mercy of their faith and own ability to bear the financial burden in medical costs. Such situation has forced families to deal with unparallel traumatic and tragic ends.

Meanwhile, socialized medicine despite criticisms benefits most if not all. President Obama’s strategy directed towards the universal concept of sharing the costs and benefits to insure every individual. The proposal is flexible with choices between the government plan and the private sector offer. Also guaranteed in the plan is affordable and quality care, an ideal and a rare combination.

Evidently, the health care costs rising disproportionately to the benefits have contributed to an alarming proportion of the population uninsured and in most cases underinsured, thereby worsening the crisis. Sadly, in both scenarios the patient deprived of longevity in life due to the lack of national health care. Life being uncertain, a private citizen without health insurance is like a fish out of water. It is particularly harsh on the patients who are unwell and more so with the chronically ill struggling between life and death. The impact is even greater among the socially and economically disadvantaged class.

The suffering exists across the board with hospitals and community health centers/services shutting down as the primary targets of state and national fiscal crisis.

The Insurance industry thus far the most influential entity dictating terms and conditions entirely in their favor from eligibility by eliminating patients with ‘pre-existing illness,’ to co-payments, deductibles and access to health care providers and services. Further, the industry’s excessive intervention in patient care proved intrusive and fatal in many circumstances with lawsuit settlements in millions of dollars.

It doesn’t fall short of forging alliance with drug companies and some health care providers instructing patients to limited care and bypassing vital preliminary tests in the protocol with the substitution of medications overriding the preventive care of early diagnosis, the desirable and sensible approach to saving lives and costs.

Again, the flip side has a potential ethical issue with the health care providers stretching the limit on rigorous testing as an insurance against malpractice lawsuits aside from recovering investment costs on expensive medical diagnostic equipments. Either way, the patient/consumer is the victim of flawed system.

Pharmaceutical and biotech industries exploiting the uninsured and underinsured dying patients in their overzealous marketing and promotion of new drugs developed through volunteer participation in clinical trials have risen lately.

The industries seek immunity in the clinical trial patients’ written consent assuming responsibility to the calculated risks notwithstanding loss of life. The argument may rest on justification to find cure and aid humanity, however it’s not equivalent to actions governed by ethics.

Ironically, the recent medical news reports claimed the terminally ill without insurance mostly volunteered with the hope of getting new life in the unmitigated experimental cure.

There are more compelling facts regarding uninsured pregnant mothers foregoing antenatal and postnatal care, including the newborns from the neonatal attention subsequently leading to serious complications costing the tax payers horrendously in the county hospitals.

In a similar context, the ailing and wounded war veterans returning from war zones for treatment in the state-of-the-art medical center recently stranded by the closure of Walter Reed Memorial Hospital and other V.A medical centers.

The veterans’ post combat care and facilities have deteriorated to an appalling condition in the past years and the veteran affairs legislation initiated by President Obama enacted the medical provision for armed forces personnel.

Youth population has been worst hit in the health care crisis. Teenage pregnancies on the rise along with an epidemic level obesity due to unhealthy food choices surging in the market combined with limited sports activities from the lack of educational funding.

Senior citizens aren’t any better in the health care gamut. The geriatric population is marginalized with skyrocketing drug costs, forcing them to other avenues like Canada to purchase relatively cheaper medications and others travelling to South Asia for surgeries and treatments requiring hospitalization.

In a nutshell, the health care in the United States is in shambles. Policy embracing the health coverage for all Americans in an efficient system that delivers cost effective, valuable care without compromising patient’s health and life in exchange for profits is in order.

Further, the overhauling of the system is imperative with technology-oriented operation in the multifaceted management. Cost saving strategy should focus on the appropriate use of human expertise with complete utilization of qualified health care professionals in the hierarchy such as nurses, nurse practitioners, dieticians/nutritionists, counselors, therapists, technicians and everyone engaged in the wellness program.

Both private individuals and the employers would benefit from the platter with free market competing against the government plans. This would not only promote checks and balances in the highly disorganized and profit motivated sector but also remain competitive in keeping the costs down for the providers and the consumers.

Research and development instrumental for advanced care and United States has been in the forefront in that aspect. Funding stem cell research, regenerative medicine and the promising personalized medicine -‘Genomics’ is the direction for United States to lead the rest of the world.

According to the biotech industry –

“Genomics – Personalized medicine is a movement to use advancing knowledge of an individual’s molecular makeup to provide better preventive care, as well as better diagnosis and treatment.”

Genomics, apart from being revolutionary in the preventive care field, appears far more cost effective as well.

Keeping NIH well funded is representative of commitment towards general well being of the society. Also equally important is the easing of immigration laws for scholars, scientists and students to visit U.S. universities and research centers for scientific exchange programs.

United States isolated as an industrialized nation in the failure to meet the highest challenge with health care. The partisan politics and special interests holding almost every crisis hostage for profits and political agenda is detrimental for their own and the country’s future.

Approval of President Barack Obama’s comprehensive health care including the above recommendations would help the United States earn due recognition on the topic avoided for fear of political backlash.

It’s no longer possible to procrastinate having lost precious time, as too many lives are at stake. The lawmakers taken to the daunting task of doing it right with the issue literally matter to life and death.

The critics, attack the proposal with nick names ‘Robin Hood’ principle of socialized medicine. Nonetheless, the lack of action in health care compares with the paradoxical “DR. Jack Kevorkian” in the society-assisted euthanasia.

Finally, Health Care is a necessity not a choice.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

.

.

International Politics – India’s General Elections

May 7, 2009

The world’s largest democracy goes to the polls to elect a Parliamentary government that would govern the nation regarded as the other emerging economic power in Asia.  India being the multilingual, multi-ethnic and diverse society is complex in political nature because of the multi-political factions representing a wide range of social, economic, political and environmental issues.

Further, such complexity diminishes the prospects for any major party to form a government.  In the absence of absolute majority, the winning party often forced to forge alliance with their enemy’s enemy and earn the title Coalition government resembling the democratic outcome in Israel, Germany and Australia to name a few around the world.

Indian election like any other electoral process is not devoid of controversies and the highly decorated stage performances by political figures.  In addition, the involvement of celebrities as surrogates is all too familiar for political enthusiasts.  The interesting feature of the Indian election is the massive participation of the rural and the impoverished segment of the population prominently left behind in the rising economic prosperity prevalent among the society’s middle class.  Obviously, the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots is the topic for many contenders to deal with during any political debates and public appearances.

Do the electorate buy what the political candidates and the representatives offer while seeking their votes?

Even though, the literacy rate among the rural and the poor electorate may not meet the international standard, one should never underestimate the political knowledge of the struggling class in the society.  Unfortunately, the plight of this populace also exploited for political reasons by many aspiring rookie and experienced political rivals alike, in concurrence with the regular politics found anywhere.

India has come a long way and dealt with great many challenges since independence.  In the past decade, the tremendous economic and social progress is transparent in the lower income and middle class population. The achievements in science and technology has been instrumental in the impressive economic growth despite the politics related to outsourcing and the growing , well educated youth population form a valuable asset in strengthening the present and future economic security.

The country is experiencing revolutionary demographic shifts among the rural and urban population creating opportunities for continuous productivity.  Nevertheless, prosperity accompanied by problems is a common phenomenon for developing nations in a competitive global economy.   With the steady economic growth, the inflationary rate requires constant monitoring in correlation with the free market demand and supply factor.  Besides, the sustainable population growth strategy would ease the burden on urban development, industrial expansion and ultimately the environmental goals.

The rural population has been disadvantaged in the globalization trend directly affecting the farming community and served a platform for the ruling party to win the previous election.  Most states prioritized commercial sector over agriculture and abandoned the farmers forcing many to commit suicide, while others moved to industrial towns and urban areas in search of jobs.

Meanwhile, the aggressive promotion of chemical fertilizers and pesticides by the multinational corporations proved harmful to the crops apart from being an environmental hazard.  Organic food producers are in strife due to produce grown with chemical fertilizers arriving from the Chinese border and sold in the Indian fruit and vegetable markets at an unbeatable price.  Above that, the global warming has taken toll with extreme weather conditions varying from severe drought to flooding caused by monsoon rain damaging the crops and vegetation.

Social and economic disparities are visibly widespread among the poorest in both rural and urban parts of the country.  It is important for the new government to address abject poverty, disease, lack of education, medical facilities and provide better living conditions starting with the supply of pure drinking water and decent dwellings.

There is an urgent requirement for investments in infrastructure and environmental friendly energy programs that would minimize oil dependency while promoting efficient transportation. It would be beneficial to the overall economy.

In the geopolitical sphere, India is grappling with tensions all around the borders particularly with the nuclear neighbor Pakistan and the rising instability within that nation from Taliban insurgency and other terror networks.  The Indian side of Kashmir is relatively calm and reflected in the recent democratic state election.

On the northern side, the political turmoil in Nepal is a matter of concern due to the successful influence of China on the existing power, The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). Moreover, China’s illegal invasion and occupation of Tibet has led to the fleeing of Tibetan refugees to India.   India has responded well to the humanitarian call in accepting and providing asylum to the Tibetan population.

Across the Indian Ocean, the escalating ethnic cleansing by Sri Lankan government is a contentious issue for the people in TamilNadu, South India.

Amidst the election excitement, the political candidates capitalized on the Mumbai terror attack and were extravagant in the divisive politics with some of them exclusively targeting the Muslim population in the society, regardless of India being the second largest Muslim nation in the world.

If the fundamentalists in BJP and other political parties indulge in polarization, it would be detrimental for national security upon their election.  Likewise, the incumbent Congress Party must refrain from aiding Sri Lankan government in their hostility and persecution of the ethnic Tamil population to settle past political scores.  Such action could similarly lead to the disintegration of the society with a significant representation of Tamils in the southern Indian state of Tamilnadu.

Indian politics deserve a breath of fresh air with young intellectuals in leadership role to guide the nation utilizing modern and innovative concepts in all aspects.  Perhaps, it’s time for the Indian society to renounce dynasty, nepotism and seniority based politics.

India sought freedom on the premise of non-violence and relentless peace process initiated by the founding father and leader Mahatma Gandhi. Any effort by the political factions to dismantle the unity and peace foundation would be disastrous for the country with enormous potential.  India is a secular nation and remains so now and in the future.

Every vote counts and matter in a democracy.  The citizens of democratic nations privileged with the power to elect a government of the people, for the people and by the people should never discard the exclusive right.

On that note, I wish the world’s largest democracy everlasting peace, progress and prosperity.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

National Security Act – Torture

May 6, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Torture

The nation riddled with recent events pertaining to national security.  In the past few weeks, there have been vigorous debates and discussions on the release of the torture memos describing the torture tactics applied on the speculative terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay and those held in Bagram Prison, Afghanistan.

There are polarizing views regarding the release of these materials claiming the potential threat to national security including the CIA and FBI operatives’ difficulty in performing their duties to keep the country safe.  Those in favor of transparency welcome the Obama administration’s gesture subject to further course of action. Merely releasing the materials will not suffice considering the misuse of power and gross violation of humanitarian laws.

In addition, the subsequent argument on the possible prosecution of the individuals responsible for torture against the Geneva Convention contributing yet another dilemma in the definition of torture and accountability factor.  Obviously, the predecessors’ supporters vehemently oppose the entire action thus far – from revealing the information to investigation.

The Obama administration‘s ambiguity on the humanitarian issue perceived as the White House conspicuously avoiding ‘retribution’ smear and possible distraction from the legislative matters like the universal health care.   Meanwhile, concerned citizens intrigued by the extreme strategy implemented to justify the imminent danger hypothesis, a constant practice by the previous administration notably the successful fear-mongering tactic during and after the Iraq invasion and occupation.

A full disclosure of the interrogation techniques particularly the notorious water boarding , ill-treatment and the indefinite imprisonment of the ‘so-called suspects’ in these captive centers confirm the serious violation of International Code namely the rejection of GCIII and Habeas Corpus.

It is important to examine the exact interpretation of the International laws set up for guidance and ethical purpose.  Further, the enforcement of these laws is to ensure precisely the state/the authorities remain confined to the jurisdiction of power against unarmed human beings in detention.

Source: The Wikipedia.org (The Free encyclopedia) – Thanks

The Third Geneva Convention of 1949 (abbreviated GCIII or GPW) , one of the Geneva Conventions, is a treaty agreement that primarily concerns the treatment of prisoners of war (POWs), and also touched on other topics. It replaced the Geneva Convention (1929).

According to Article 3, Part 1, General Provisions referred to as ‘Convention in miniature,’

“Noncombatants, combatants who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, including prohibition of outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

The passing of sentences must also be pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees, which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.  Article 3’s protections exist even if one is not classified as a prisoner of war.”

Habeas corpus (IPA: /ˌheɪbiːæsˈkɔːpəs/) (Latin: You (shall) have the body[1]) is a legal action, or writ, through which a person can seek relief from the unlawful detention of him or herself, or of another person.  It protects the individual from harming him or herself, or from being harmed by the judicial system.  The writ of habeas corpus has historically been an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action.

Simply put,

Habeas corpus, a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention.

The due process for such petitions is not simply civil or criminal, because they incorporate the presumption of nonauthority.  The official who is the respondent has the burden to prove his authority to do or not do something.  Failing this, the court must decide for the petitioner, who may be any person, not just an interested party.  This differs from a motion in a civil process in which the movant must have standing, and bears the burden of proof.”

Here are some news articles detailing the torture on presumed ‘suspects’ held in captivity by the U.S authorities.

Warning: The following articles are graphic and may not be suitable for all.

“I Could Not Stop Screaming”

“The British newspaper Guardian (2/18/2005) reported that one Bagram prisoner, a Palestinian named Mustafa, was blindfolded, handcuffed, gagged, and forced to bend down over a table by three American soldiers.  He said, “They forcibly rammed a stick up my rectum… I could not stop screaming when this happened.”

In another case reported by the Guardian, a Jordanian prisoner, Wesam Abdulrahman Ahmed Al Deemawi, said that during a 40-day period at Bagram he was threatened with dogs, stripped and photographed “in shameful and obscene positions” and placed in a cage with a hook and a hanging rope.  He says he was hung from this hook, blindfolded, for two days.

Both men were freed from U.S. detention last year after being held at Bagram and Guantánamo.  Neither has been charged with anything by any government.

Dilawar, a 22-year-old Afghan taxi driver and farmer, was killed by U.S. torturers at Bagram in December 2002.  He had been beaten and chained by his wrists for four days. After his last torture session, Dilawar was chained back to the ceiling.  Several hours passed before a doctor saw him—by which time he was dead and already beginning to stiffen.

“An official of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission questioned –

“Are They Going to Vanish Forever?”

“The Americans are detaining people without any legal procedure. Prisoners do not have the opportunity to demonstrate their innocence.”

Despite the unprecedented human rights violations… translated barbaric in modern times, the defense for the authorities authorizing and executing the medieval customs against unarmed detainees charged guilty without due process is astonishing.  The world witnessed the pervasive prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib, Iraq, Bagram, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay through explosive visuals, editorials, columns and interviews predominantly from the international sources and on-line mass media.

Incidentally, the torturers’ loyalists cry ‘foul’ against the latest revelation.  Even though, the international news organizations and human rights groups have been reporting these incidents all along per above articles.  Contrasting the detainees position, all those responsible for the unconscionable crime against humanity involving innocent victims in the witch-hunt for terror suspects, are also exempt from due process however, with the distinction of them proclaimed “Patriotic” in their utter disregard for International laws and human rights.

Clearly, the abuse of power in this context from the pyramid‘s apex to the base is symbolic in the embarrassing chapter of American history.  Ironically, the explanation for torture attributed to national defense while ignoring the brutality against other nationals and their families’ ordeal.

One might argue if it’s worth treading the retribution path rather than moving forward.  It’s possible to move forward if the past had no remnants of violation of the laws involving global citizens in prolonged detention specifically in the absence of any evidence or trials.  Similar treatment of American nationals would have created pandemonium at all levels.

Besides, such practices open the floodgates for misuse of power by future administrations notwithstanding other nations…currently witnessed in the treatment of American journalists imprisoned on allegedly espionage charges by Iran and North Korea.

Whenever there is excessive abuse of power, unequivocally democracy threatened aside from the Constitution made irrelevant.  Therefore, it’s incumbent on the people in a democracy to ensure that neither the state nor any authority is above the law in the land of justice.

Please stand by for more information and analysis on related topics.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Environmental Policy

April 19, 2009

The recent developments to combat climate change in the State of California and nationwide is commendable. The Supreme Court granting authority to EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions under the Clean Air Act eliminates obstacles on the path to a clean environment. It is significant since according to the reports the projected levels of greenhouse gases “endanger the public health and welfare of current and future generations.”

With the time lapse of inaction on this important matter threatening the mere existence of life on the planet, the new administration under President Obama is seeking the right course of action by having the choice to either legislate or regulate carbon dioxide and other harmful greenhouse gases resisted in the past on the notion of negative economic impact.

Further, EPA consideration to reduce emissions including rigorous tailpipe emissions standard also previously blocked in the past eight years is a step in the right direction. This particular issue like others has been subject to criticism and opposition from sectors focused on personal short term gains over long-term future of humanity. Again, the Obama administration’s gesture to proceed toward a national standard on vehicle emissions that will be as strong as California’s is right on target.

It would be appropriate to embrace California’s standard as the national requirement, rather than maintaining individual regional measure and finalize the pending EPA decision over the controversial tailpipe carbon emissions by the automobile industry. The national standard would be beneficial to the struggling auto industry in marketing their fleet in other parts of the country without the burden of meeting the regional expectations.

In a democracy, active participation in public discourse and dissent whenever justified is honorable. However, protest against progress and life sustenance is detrimental to the source contributing to such disruptions. The opposing legislators’ argument on any environmental regulation is weak for it dismissed global warming as a ‘myth’ up until now. Their defense of businesses potentially affected by stringent measures is hypothetical. It fails to recognize that the planet in peril is a hard-core fact with abundance evidence in rising temperatures and several disasters no longer natural because of the none other than greenhouse gases causing ozone depletion in the earth’s atmosphere.

According to the recent article on this topic – Industry representatives voiced a variety of concerns over the prospect of mandatory emissions controls. The National Association of Manufacturers warned that the Clean Air Act was designed to focus on local and regional pollution, and that greenhouse gases “are global in nature and require a new framework.”

The industry demand to distinguish the Clean Air Act to curtail domestic pollution from greenhouse gases produced globally is worth clarification. In the latest G-20 summit, it is not clear if the United States sought any guarantee from the participants with respect to individual and consolidated global effort in greenhouse gases reduction. Even though the G-20 gathering predominantly focused on global economic rescue plan, the equally challenging environmental issue deserves universal commitment in achieving the desired goals.

It is imperative for the inhabitants of planet earth to pay serious attention to the environmental degradation arising from industrial pollution, population explosion, poor waste management and revolutionary demographic shifts among the population of the emerging economic powers in the world.

In the United States, the bipartisan consensus is paramount if legislation required to promote healthy and safe environment for the well-being of the present and future generations of the nation. To reiterate any partisanship during legislation combined with industry objection in compliance of regulation would lead to dire consequences and irreversible state of earth’s natural resources due to ecological imbalance.

Mankind best interest lies in the protection and preservation of the habitat, the planet earth.

Save the planet and secure the future for all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Bailout Débācle

March 22, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The past two weeks dominated with AIG and oligarchs debating over the controversial $165 million and now increased to $218 million bonuses to executives instrumental in driving the insurance giant to the brink of collapse along with the financial markets of the world.

As usual, Washington vs. Wall Street dispute contributed to media frenzy and aptly reflected in the roller coaster performance of the stock market. The interesting factor in the blame game is those pointing fingers at others fail to acknowledge that remaining fingers are pointing towards them as they are equal partners in this charade.

By now, well-educated American taxpayers upon the quest to secure their future convinced that both Wall Street and Washington have serious credibility issues in wealth management and nation governance.

The back and forth allegations in the political crossfire reveals the true sense of Washington politics and Wall Street free market systemic corporate management failure. Again, the beneficiaries in this deal are the legislators responsible for the bailout approval and the corporations rewarded with taxpayer’s funds for unprecedented incompetence in modern economic times.

They are the beneficiaries because the legislators secured their emoluments by rushing the operating budget $410 billion omnibus bill ladened with pork projects to the tune of $8 billion to curb ‘government shut down’ rather than passing the required operating budget and isolating the earmarks spending for individual scrutiny through separate legislation.

The Corporate executives in due diligence spared no opportunities to collect remuneration, bonuses retrospectively and in the foreseeable future to maintain their status among the top 10% wealthiest hierarchy.

Let’s not forget in the Darwinian "Survival of the fittest contest" the weak, fragile and frail average taxpayer doesn’t stand a chance against the ferocious Corporate executives (compared to sharks) and Capitol Hill crusaders.

Events unfolding in the entire scenario deserves attention from every citizen involuntarily pledged to carry the burden of national debt currently projected at $9.3 trillion i.e. $1 trillion budget deficits every year for a decade, 2010-2019.

It is worth examining the role of legislators, corporations and lobbyists in securing taxpayer bailouts more prevalent in the past year 2008 and continuation of it in 2009. Prior to the diagnostic procedure, it is essential to shed light on the alliances forged by the key cabinet members and Wall Street merchants.

According to http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/paul-s23.shtml – Thank you.

Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)

Who is Henry Paulson?

By Tom Eley, 23 September 2008

Henry Paulson rose through the ranks of Goldman Sachs, becoming a partner in 1982, co-head of investment banking in 1990, chief operating officer in 1994. In 1998, he forced out his co-chairman Jon Corzine “in what amounted to a coup,” according to New York Times economics correspondent Floyd Norris, and took over the post of CEO.

Goldman Sachs is perhaps the single best-connected Wall Street firm. Its executives routinely go in and out of top government posts. Corzine went on to become US senator from New Jersey and is now the state’s governor. Corzine’s predecessor, Stephen Friedman, served in the Bush administration as assistant to the president for economic policy and as chairman of the National Economic Council (NEC). Friedman’s predecessor as Goldman Sachs CEO, Robert Rubin, served as chairman of the NEC and later treasury secretary under Bill Clinton.

Agence France Press, in a 2006 article on Paulson’s appointment, “Has Goldman Sachs Taken Over the Bush Administration?” noted that, in addition to Paulson, “[t]he president’s chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Jeffery Reuben, are Goldman alumni.”

Prior to being selected as treasury secretary, Paulson was a major individual campaign contributor to Republican candidates, giving over $336,000 of his own money between 1998 and 2006.

Since taking office, Paulson has overseen the destruction of three of Goldman Sachs’ rivals. In March,

Paulson helped arrange the fire sale of Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase. Then, a little more than a week ago, he allowed Lehman Brothers to collapse, while simultaneously organizing the absorption of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America. This left only Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as major investment banks, both of which were converted on Sunday into bank holding companies, a move that effectively ended the existence of the investment bank as a distinct economic form.

In the months leading up to his proposed $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, Paulson had already used his office to dole out hundreds of billions of dollars. After his July 2008 proposal for $70 billion to resolve the insolvency of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac failed, Paulson organized the government takeover of the two mortgage-lending giants for an immediate $200 billion price tag, while making the government potentially liable for hundreds of billions more in bad debt. He then organized a federal purchase of an 80 percent stake in the giant insurer American International Group (AIG) at a cost of $85 billion.

These bailouts have been designed to prevent a chain reaction collapse of the world economy, but more importantly, they aimed to insulate and even reward the wealthy shareholders, like Paulson, primarily responsible for the financial collapse.

Paulson bears a considerable amount of personal responsibility for the crisis.

Paulson, according to a celebratory 2006 Business Week article entitled “Mr. Risk Goes to Washington,” was “one of the key architects of a more daring Wall Street, where securities firms are taking greater and greater chances in their pursuit of profits.” Under Paulson’s watch, that meant “taking on more debt: $100 billion in long-term debt in 2005, compared with about $20 billion in 1999. It means placing big bets on all sorts of exotic derivatives and other securities.”

According to the International Herald Tribune, Paulson “was one of the first Wall Street leaders to recognize how drastically investment banks could enhance their profitability by betting with their own capital instead of acting as mere intermediaries.” Paulson “stubbornly assert[ed] Goldman’s right to invest in, advise on and finance deals, regardless of potential conflicts.”

Paulson then handsomely benefited from the speculative boom. This wealth was based on financial manipulation and did nothing to create real value in the economy. On the contrary, the extraordinary enrichment of individuals like Paulson was the corollary to the dismantling of the real economy, the bankrupting of the government, and the impoverishment of masses the world over.

Paulson was compensated to the tune of $30 million in 2004 and took home $37 million in 2005. In his career at Goldman Sachs he built up a personal net worth of over $700 million, according to estimates.
—————————————————————————————————————–
Washington and Wall Street Analysis:

By Padmini Arhant

The beginning of the chain link usually found on the campaign trail, when corporations fund election campaigns through donation loopholes despite contribution limits by electoral commission and reign in on the successful candidate for the entire term.

After all, in the contemporary world focused on “What’s in it for me” deals, there is no free lunch with the exception of debt-consumed public yearning for believable change and better future offer available resources in terms of time, energy and money during the electoral process and beyond.

Who gets preference by the elected officials in the so-called democracy?

Indeed the Corporations due to the inter-dependency of sweetheart deals and brokering that take place throughout the election campaign. The deafening noise in the Capitol Hill about identifying the guilty party and pursuing disastrous course of action such as 90% tax on AIG bonuses after having approved without any stipulations predictably backfired at the victims none other than the average American taxpayers, presumably the majority shareholder at 80% of the multinational conglomerate.

In a bizarre development, more appropriately deterioration of the bailout fiasco, the headlines, news across the nation reverberate…
—————————————————————————————————–
AIG sues its biggest shareholder – us

By David S. Hilzenrath, Washington Post – March 21, 2009. Thank you.

As AIG takes billions of dollars from the federal government to stay afloat, it is suing the government for millions more.

The big insurer is trying to recover $306.1 million of taxes, interest and penalties from the Internal Revenue Service. Among other things, AIG is contesting an IRS determination last year that the company improperly claimed $61.9 million of tax credits associated with complex international transactions.

AIG has also asked a court to make the government reimburse it for money spent suing the government.

Given that the government owns 79.9 percent of AIG and has been using taxpayer money to fill a seemingly bottomless hole at the company, the lawsuit might seem like a case of biting the hand that feeds it. But an

AIG spokesman said the company has an obligation to press its case.

AIG believes it overpaid the IRS, and it “has a duty to its shareholders, including the government and other shareholders, to insure that it pays the proper amount of taxes,” spokesman Mark Herr said by e-mail.
Washington tax lawyer Martin Lobel agreed with that assessment.

‘If in fact they honestly believe that they’re entitled to a refund of those taxes, it would be a breach of their fiduciary duty not to” sue, Lobel said.

“On the other hand, the sense of entitlement from AIG is awesome,” Lobel said.

Because the dispute pits the government against a company that has essentially become a ward of the government, the only clear winners are likely to be lawyers, legal experts said. The legal expenses could consume millions of dollars, they said.

Lawyers at the firm Sutherland Asbill & Brenan, which is representing AIG, did not respond to an interview request.

For partners of similar stature to those representing AIG, fees can run $700 to $900 an hour, said Dan Binstock, managing director of BCG Attorney Search, a legal recruiter.

AIG’s dispute with the IRS focuses on taxes for 1997 and dates at least as far back as March 2008.”
———————————————————————————————————————

L.A. congresswoman defends actions

Husband Linked to Bank that got AID

By Richard Simon – Los Angeles Times – March 14, 2009 – Thank you.

Excerpts from the article:

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, on Friday defended her efforts to help minority-owned banks – including one with ties to her husband – scoffing at the notion that she, a liberal Democrat, could influence George W. Bush’s presidential administration in deciding what financial institutions would receive bailout funds.

Waters, a senior member of the congressional committee that, oversees banking, has come under scrutiny because OneUnited Bank, on which her husband Sidney Williams had been a board member and stockholder, received $12 million in bailout funds. The money was provided in December, three months after Waters helped arrange a meeting between officials from the bank and other minority-owned institutions and Treasury representatives.

“I followed up on the association’s request by asking Treasury Secretary (Henry) Paulson to schedule such a meeting, as did other members of Congress,” she said.

She said she did not attend the meeting. She released letters by the National Bankers Association requesting the meeting and following up on it – signed by the group’s incoming Chairman Robert Patrick Cooper an officer with OneUnited.

Waters said the decision to provide bailout funds to OneUnited was “based on the merits of the bank’s request, not based on anything said at the September meeting and not based on political influence.”

She said that she has fully disclosed her husband’s ties to the bank. Williams served on the bank board until early last year and held at least $500,000 in investments in the bank in 2007, the most recent year for which public financial disclosure statements are available.

Waters could not be reached for an interview Friday. OneUnited Chief Executive Kevin Cohee said Friday he didn’t have time to speak with a reporter.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said she found Waters’ behavior “inappropriate and certainly has the appearance of impropriety, even if it doesn’t rise to the level of an actual conflict-of-interest under House rules.”

Sloan said Waters’ comments that the meeting focused on the general problems of minority-owned banks “don’t seem credible” in light of statements from Treasury officials that the session became a discussion of one bank’s troubles. “At a minimum, Treasury officials should have been apprised of her interest in the bank before the meeting took place.”

Waters’ efforts, she said, raise a question: “How many members of Congress are having meetings with the Treasury Department pleading for funds for certain banks?”

“Treasury has said they’re going to list the lobbying contacts,” Sloan said.”
———————————————————————————————————————
Voice of the Electorate:

San Jose Mercury News – Readers’ Letters – March 18, 2009

Obama’s earmarks stance disappoints

I am disappointed that President Barack Obama backed off his campaign pledge to eliminate earmarks. The process subverts democratic government by avoiding votes on specific issues. It encourages our representatives to compete to spend more—if they fail to “bring home the bacon,” they may be seen as ineffective and not be re-elected. The further we move from specific votes for specific programs, the less inclined people are to support the government and the more inclined to resist taxes.

We must promote responsible stewardship. While many of the projects are meritorious, that hardly means they should be funded. Tax dollars are a scarce resource and every expenditure should be carefully scrutinized. Obama was right on this issue during the campaign; he is sliding off track now.

Christopher K. Payne

Stanford
———————————————————————————————————————

Ethical Lapse

By Padmini Arhant

The sparring political factions, the far left and the far right along with the centrists is in a strange dilemma today as they witness their reflection in the image of the accused parties in the most expensive soap opera entertainment.

As more Washington and Wall Street scandals are exposed, the more disingenuous the legislators appear to be in their pledge to turn the nation around.

An average citizen struggling to make ends meet asked the following questions –

“Why should I vote for anyone in the next election when I see politics as usual prevailing over the promised inevitable change?

Can the elected officials with public housing, guaranteed regular and several other sources of income, supreme health care, and free transportation relate to the suffering population dealing with job loss, foreclosure and other miseries?”

Unfortunately, the Washington atmosphere is secluded as elitist not making connection with the plight of the populist. The deepening of the recession combined with the multi-trillion dollar national debt forecast is a matter of great concern for the vast majority of population in precarious economic conditions due to job insecurity and declining prospects all around.

The American electorate enthusiastically elected the new administration with the hope to experience the “change” they deserve and the recent events are adversarial to the optimism built during the campaign.

Campaign promises involved Accountability, Transparency and changing Washington by eliminating corruption, cronyism and conventionalism. The passing of the $787 billion stimulus bill and subsequently the $410 billion omnibus spending bill loaded with earmarks confirms the status quo in Washington.

The pet projects, however meritorious they might be, cannot be more important than supplementing K-12 educational funding by retaining qualified teaching professionals and providing after school sports activities for students from lower income families and scores of other important social services for the constituents in California and other states.

It is obvious throughout the legislative process from the authorization of illegal invasion of Iraq war to Wall Street bailouts that lawmakers as representatives of the electorate in a democracy no longer consider it important to peruse the budget and other legislative bills because of the voluminous content. Hence, hastily resort to wasteful spending at taxpayers’ expense.

With the national debt projection in multi-trillion dollars, the wasteful spending in billions doesn’t seem to matter to the sponsors of the pet projects. Apparently, $8 billion added to the national debt for projects experimenting swine odor, road to nowhere, monuments ‘supposedly creating jobs’ when the industries are crumbling apart clearly signifies misplaced priorities by the legislators expected to be in touch with reality of their respective constituency.

The people are hurting and their mere existence is challenged by the hour while Washington and Wall Street continue to engage the nation in burgeoning financial crisis through legal and constitutional confrontations of the bailout débācle.

Perhaps it is time for the victims and the lame duck, the average taxpayers to rise to the occasion and execute power in the mid-term election to restore democratic values, ethical and moral standards desperately lacking in the corporate and political system.

It is best to eradicate the narcissistic culture that permeates the surroundings like weeds destroying the grassland and fertile grounds.

Evidently change is necessary and necessity is the mother of invention.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Earmarks, Pork-barrel Spending

March 8, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The budget vote delayed due to enormous ‘pork’ in the $410 billion spending bill. The defenders of various pork projects may have their own justification.

Nevertheless, Washington must relinquish wasteful spending through several pet projects carried out on behalf of lobbyists by lawmakers concerned about their own job security in the future elections.

As stated earlier in the article “Omnibus Spending” on the website www.padminiarhant.com , the nation is grappling with dire economic situation due to significant job losses and housing crisis at this time and families are desperately seeking relief from both free market system and the government.

Unfortunately, the free market system dependent on taxpayers’ bailout is barely capable of remaining solvent despite unprecedented capital infusion in modern financial history. The root cause of all these problems attributed to lack of ethics, accountability, transparency and importantly executive management failure.

The critics of taxpayers’ bailout argue in favor of non-interference in the market economy on the assumption the system would correct itself in due course. They fail to recognize the fact that the economic meltdown commenced in the early 2000, though the impact was not acknowledged up until late 2007.

During that limited or non-regulatory period, the capitalist system had ample opportunities to review and reassess their performance and prepare them for the worst scenario.

However, it did not happen, even though Wall Street witnessed and experienced the collapse of Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Global Crossing all in the year 2002 resulting from failed Corporate management, unethical accounting practices and blatant greed.

Somehow, the free market advocates seem to have forgotten these events because of their inability then to envision the domino effect on the entire economy in the immediate future. Another reason for the denial of economic crisis previously was the skyrocketing of the technology stocks combined with oil and defense stocks at the phenomenal cost of American taxpayers’ dollars and human lives in Iraq war.

The financial sector created its own superficial boom during that time with the concoction of subprime mortgages and diverse toxic assets bundled together and sold by the hedge fund managers in the overseas markets. This entire taking place while the past administration was preoccupied in the implementation of unjust Iraq war.

It is unequivocally a miserable failure on the part of the predecessors in Federal Reserve, Treasury department as well as the Securities Commission primarily responsible for monitoring and evaluating the daily market events and executing necessary precautionary measures to prevent the economy from overheating.

Surprisingly, with the history of ‘Great Depression’, Oil crisis, economic recessions, one would assume that the authorities would remain alert and watch over the economy with prudent advice against extravagant spending in unnecessary wars or at least demanded the administration engaging in wasteful spending provide legitimate cost and benefit investment analysis.

The gridlock in Washington or State legislature is contributed by political ideologies resisting flexibility to resolve any crisis. The fiscal conservatives steadfast against tax increases, the predominant revenue source for any government, consistently target essential programs designed to promote consumer spending vital for economic recovery.

Similarly, the spendthrift legislators on both aisles with a penchant for pet projects or pork spending refuse to yield to frugality and prioritize their commitments to lobbyists and local governments assuring their re-election over national interest.

The electorate voted for Change in 2008 and change has hope only with representatives in Congress and Senate quitting habits that create rather than solving crisis.

It is evident that the $410 billion spending bill is injected with significant pork projects and it would be appropriate for the sponsors to present cost / benefit ratio in monetary terms to justify inclusion in the bill.

Again, these projects must be evaluated to benefit the taxpayers and the nation as a whole rather than the individuals regardless of them being legislators or the lobbyists.

The lawmakers have lately advised ordinary citizens to downsize their lifestyle according to their means, the same should apply to them as any sermons, preaching, and advice is meaningful when individuals demonstrate through action.

After all, shouldn’t one practice what they preach others?

No matter how one circumvents the legitimacy of earmarks particularly at these tough economic times, it is inappropriate now and in the future to squander taxpayers’ dollars for far-fetched projects with beneficiaries being the authorizing entity and/or special interests rather than the entire nation.

Please refer to the following articles from other sources for data confirmation on earmarks / pork barrel spending.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant
——————————————————————————————————————-

Senate Republicans force delay on budget vote:

GOP Members want to offer Amendments on $410 billion plan criticized for Pork – By Andrew Taylor,

Associated Press – Thank you.

Washington – Senate Republicans, demanding the right to try to change a huge spending bill, forced Democrats on Thursday night to put off a final vote on the measure until next week.

The surprise development will force Congress to pass a stopgap-funding bill to avoid a partial shutdown of the government.

Republicans have blasted the $410 billion measure as too costly. But the reason for GOP unity in advance of a key procedural vote was that Democrats had not allowed them enough opportunities to offer amendments.

Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., canceled the vote, saying he was one vote short of the 60 needed to close debate and free the bill for President Barack Obama’s signature.

The 1,132-page spending bill is stuffed with pet projects sought by lawmakers in both parties.

Democrats and their allies control 58 seats, though at least a handful of Democrats oppose the measure over its cost or changes in U.S. policy toward Cuba. That meant Democrats needed five or six Republican votes to advance the bill.

None of the GOP’s amendments is expected to pass, but votes on perhaps a dozen are now slated for Monday night, Reid said.

The huge, 1-132-page spending bill awards big increases to domestic programs and is stuffed with pet projects sought by lawmakers in both parties. The measure has an extraordinary reach, wrapping together nine spending bills to fund the annual operating budgets of every Cabinet department except for Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.

Once considered a relatively bipartisan measure, the measure has come under attack from Republicans – and a handful of Democrats – who say it is bloated and filled with wasteful, pork-barrel projects.

The measure was written mostly over the course of last year, before projected deficits quadrupled and Obama’s economic recovery bill left many of the same spending accounts swimming in cash.

To the embarrassment of Obama – who promised during last year’s campaign to force Congress to curb its pork-barrel ways – the bill contains 7,991 pet projects totaling $5.5 billion, according to calculations by the GOP staff of the House Appropriations Committee.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Obama’s opponent in last fall’s presidential campaign, called the measure “a swollen, wasteful, egregious example of out-of-control spending.”

The earmarks run the gamut. There’s $190,000 for the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in Cody, Wyo., $238,000 to fund a deep-sea voyaging program for native Hawaiian youth, agricultural research projects, and grants to local police departments, among many others.”

—————————————————————————————————

Further Excerpt of the article –

Sen. John McCain blasts $237,500 for Japantown museum – By Frank Davies, Mercury News Washington Bureau – Thank you.

Reps, Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, and Mike Honda, D-Campbell, secured that money to help the museum.
Honda, who is Japanese American, – “Jap. Museum boost tourism (thus jobs) in SJ Japantown, last of 3 authentic US Japantowns, Zoe & I proudly supported its funding.”
—————————————————————————————————-

Omnibus Spending

March 5, 2009

March 5, 2009

It has been the topic of the day and rightfully so. The American taxpayers’ wallet is drained for various bailouts from financial institutions to auto industry and others waiting in line for their respective turn.

Is it the present administration’s fault that the nation is dependent on borrowings and charity?

The response varies as it depends on the network and the guests appearing on the programs to discuss economy, finance and stock market.

Those nostalgic about the previous administration claim that it is entirely the current administration’s fault.

For some reason their calculation of the incumbent administration in office since swearing in i.e. January 20, 2009 up until now works out to three months, unless they have a custom made calendar that converts every year into leap year with some months extending beyond thirty one days and somehow only the Democratic administrations are privileged to such magical occurrence.

To shed light on the relevant topic of spending bill $410 billion approved by the Senate and awaiting the President’s signature, there appears to be some legitimate concerns regarding the infamous “earmarks” or “pork barrel” issue that always finds its way into every legislative bill.

According to news media, 40% of GOP members and 60% of Democrats are responsible for the estimated 8,570 earmarks worth $7.7billion . The following article supports it.

March 4, 2009

Senate votes to keep earmarks in bill – By David Espo, Associated Press – Thank you.

“The Senate voted overwhelmingly to preserve thousands of earmarks in a $410 billion spending bill Tuesday, brushing aside Senator John McCain’s claim that President Barack Obama and Congress are merely conducting business as usual in a time of economic hardship.

McCain’s attempt to strip out an estimated 8,500 earmarks failed on a vote of 63-32.

The Arizona’s senator’s proposal also would have cut roughly $32 billion from the measure and kept spending a last year’s levels in several federal agencies.

Last year’s Republican presidential candidate said both he and Obama pledged during the campaign to “stop business as usual in Washington,” and he quoted the president as having said he would go line by line to make sure money was spent wisely.

The White House has said Obama intends to sign the legislation, casting it as leftover business from 2008. Spokesman Robert Gibbs pledged Monday that the White House will issue new guidelines covering earmarks for future bills.

McCain’s proposal drew the support of 30 Republicans and two Democrats, and the outcome reflected the enduring value of earmarks to lawmakers. While polls routinely show these pet projects to be unpopular, local governments and constituents often covet them.

The maneuvering came on legislation to assure continued funding for several federal agencies past March 6. At $410 billion, the bill represents an 8 percent increase over last year’s spending levels, more than double the rate of inflation.

Republicans made two other attempts during the day to reduce spending in the bill, but failed both times.

Sen. Dan Inouye, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said McCain’s call to hold spending level with a year ago “doesn’t account for inflation.”

As an example, he said some programs would have to be cut if federal workers were to receive a pay raise.

The House passed the legislation last week, and Democratic leaders are working to clear it without changes so the president can sign it by Friday.

While Republican opposition in the House focused more on the bill’s overall spending, McCain and allies turned the Senate spotlight squarely on earmarks.

“How does anyone justify some of these earmarks:

$1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa;

$2 million ‘for the promotion of astronomy’ in Hawaii;

$6.6 million for termite research in New Orleans;

$2.1 million for the Center for Grape Genetics in New York,” he said.

He also noted the legislation includes 14 earmarks requested by lawmakers for projects sought by PMA Group, a lobbying company at the center of a federal corruption investigation. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla, said he would seek to have them removed.

Taxpayers for Common Sense estimates the legislation contains 8,570 disclosed earmarks worth $7.7 billion. House Democrats declined to provide an estimate of the number of pet projects in the bill, and put their cost at $3.8 billion.”

———————————————————————————–—————————————–

Analysis:

It is evident from the article and news media discussions that this particular bill primarily aimed at stimulating the economy has some of its priorities mixed up. As stated earlier in my article “Economic Recovery Plan” earmarks or estimates for pet projects is a contentious issue with notable reasons for objection by some lawmakers.

This is no longer a partisan issue as both parties have participants in varying percentages responsible for wasteful spending. On the one hand, we have economic turmoil with American families receiving pink slips instead of paychecks and children literally dependent on charity for survival.

There are worse situations like in the golden state of California, northern Californian school district is forcing K-12 students in public schools to stay home on Friday, making it a four-day week due to again “messed up priorities” by the State legislators. The victims in the merciless fund slashing are none other than the educators and students.

Qualified teachers’ job contracts are terminated because of severe cuts in essential programs like education. The head of this state living up to the reputation of the title “Terminator” leaving students seeking help from parents, peer group, neighbors, and strangers/aliens on the cyber space or even outer space.

Do the pet projects’ sponsors have any idea how desperate the situation is for those struggling to make ends meet particularly with a fear mongering of the “socialism” concept by the capitalist panderers denying the failure of capitalism in the absence of regulatory process?

What does this mean to parents dealing with job insecurity and lack of support to take care of the children on the day, they should be in school?

Hoping the children will be protected by guardian angels while they are at work and risking visits from a social worker on accounts of child neglect and possible abuse.

Those who lack the support of extended family relying on hired help in this perilous economy have to choose between the safety of their children and the tight family budget, since borrowing is out of question with indefinite freezing of the credit market to families and small businesses.

One might assume the federal aid to states should address these problems. Even though the federal aid has been approved for this purpose, whatever benefits allocated for education and relief to families in the federal stimulus package is siphoned off by the state budget targeting the same programs.

The state legislators had to emerge victorious in the long fought battle to balance the budget using people at the bottom of the socio-economic scale as the sacrificial lambs.

Obviously, on the other hand both state and federal lawmakers favoring the pet projects vigorously debate in the House and the Senate floor to defend their own jobs as pet projects is an insurance for re-election in their constituency.

If surplus funds are the reasons for earmarks, why not allocate those funds to the deserving entity i.e. the taxpayers in the economy. It would make sense for taxpayers to use their own money to spend on their dependents’ education, health care and housing payments.

It is conclusive that earmarks like the ones highlighted in the articles should have never been inserted in the first place, and now regardless of whose business is being taken care of i.e. whether previous or present administration, the burden is squarely on the taxpayers with the passing of this bill loaded with unnecessary and meaningless pet projects.

American taxpayers were promised on the campaign trail about the elimination of earmarks by both parties and now is the time to honor that commitment without any reservation.

In the real world, students can enroll in the best educational institutions only upon excellent academic achievement, similarly secure dream jobs (during the glorious days) and stick with it purely on competence.

Unfortunately, the entities to whom the criteria should apply i.e. Washington and Wall Street are exempt from performance based hiring or firing despite their successful duo disastrous mismanagement of the world’s economic power, the U.S. economy.

Taxpayers as voters have the power to promote and implement the agenda in 2010 to realize the campaign slogan “Change is effective when it happens from the bottom up and not from the top bottom.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Presidential Communication

February 26, 2009

From: President Barack Obama

To: Padmini Arhant

Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:14:20 PM

Subject: My address to Congress

Padmini —

Last night, I addressed a joint session of Congress for the first time.

To confront the serious economic challenges our nation faces, I called for a new era of responsibility and cooperation. We need to look beyond short term political calculations and make vital investments in health care, energy, and education that will make America stronger and more prosperous well into the future.

Watch a few highlights from my address and share it with your friends now:

A little more than a month into my administration, we’ve already taken bold steps to address our urgent economic problems.

Through the Recovery Act, the Stability Plan, and the Housing Plan, we’re taking the immediate necessary measures to halt our economic downturn and provide much-needed assistance to working people and their families.

But to set our country on a new course of stability and prosperity, we must reject the old ways of doing business in Washington. We can no longer tolerate fiscal deficits and runaway spending while deferring the consequences to future generations.

That’s why I pledged last night to cut our deficit in half by the end of my term. Achieving that goal will require making sacrifices and hard decisions, as well as an honest budgeting process that is straight with taxpayers about where their dollars are going.

Watch some key moments from my address now:

http://my.barackobama.com/presidentialaddress

Central to this plan will be a renewed commitment to honesty and transparency in government. Restoring our country’s economic health will only happen when ordinary citizens are given the opportunity to hold their representatives fully accountable for the decisions they make.

I look forward to continuing to work with you as we bring about the change you made possible.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

—————————————————————————————————————————–

Response to Communication:

From: Padmini Arhant

To: President Barack Obama

Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:00:27 AM

Subject: Re: My address to Congress

Dear Mr. President,

Your address to Congress and American taxpayers was impressive and right on target.

However, any commitments towards short-term goals and long-term vision are authentic and acceptable with less skepticism when backed by specifics. I’m sure your administration will forward necessary details in the near future.

As for my continuing contribution to your administration;

With all due respect, to you and the office of Presidency, I request clarifications regarding your expectations from me.

It would be immensely helpful if you could please define my role and make it official to enable me in providing you unwavering support and service throughout your Presidency and beyond.

I hope you understand my predicament.

Look forward to your response in this regard.

As your vehement supporter, I wish you nothing less than phenomenal success in all your endeavors.

Thank you.

Best Wishes

Padmini Arhant

Reconciliation and Approval of Economic Recovery Plan

February 10, 2009

President Barack Obama’s candid appeal to Congress and Senate via press conference confirms the White House commitment to relieve severely hurting citizens from the agonizing pain of the ailing economy.

The legislators resisting compromise to the stimulus package obviously do not share the pain of their constituents. If they did, they would have no objection to essential and guaranteed investments specifically identified for job creation in President Obama’s plan.

It is frustrating that partisan politics remains a force to reckon with for the electorate in a democracy.

Tragically, ideology leads the way to oppose a bill designed to assist every taxpayer who is also the consumer and most importantly a voter from becoming a recipient of food stamps.

The excerpt from a recent article titled –

“Billions in aid to states cut amid struggle over stimulus”

By Associated Press, February 8, 2009.

“President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans bickered Saturday over his historically huge economic recovery plan after states and schools lost tens of billions of dollar in a late-night bargain to save it.

Forging compromise –

The compromise reached between a handful of GOP moderates led Susan Collins of Maine, the White House and its Senate allies stripped $108 billion in spending from Obama’s plan, including cutbacks in projects that likely would give the economy a quick lift, like $40 billion in aid to state governments for education and other programs.

Yet, it retained items that also probably won’t help the economy much, such as $650 million to help people without cable receive digital signals through their old-fashioned televisions or $1 billion to fix problems with the 2010 Census.

Among the most difficult cuts for the White House and its liberal allies to accept was the elimination of $40 billion in aid to states, money that economists say is a relatively efficient way to pump up the economy by preventing layoffs, cuts in services or tax increases.”
————————————————————————————————————————————–

Reality Check:

Now, any rational citizen regardless of party affiliation should ask the following questions to the GOP moderates seemingly endorsing the bill.

Where are the priorities?

Is helping people receive digital signals through their old-fashioned televisions and a staggering $1 billion to fix problems with the 2010 Census more important than investment in education, easing the burden on states to lift economy by preventing layoffs, cuts in services and tax increases?

Do GOP members realize the reason behind colossal defeat in the 2006 and 2008 election?

The American electorate is tired and bogged down with Washington’s immature revengeful tactics in the approval of legislative matters concerning the lives of every citizen.

Ironically, all those legislators against the approval of this bill targeting the future of our nation with respect to education, job creation and needful services forget that their jobs are also on the line in the process.

If they presume Capitol Hill to be a comfort zone for a specified period and expect immunity from the economic crises, they are being delusional as the electorate has choices to reject such representation in a democracy.

Where was the hype and concern when the previous administration committed the nation to a reckless war that has virtually bankrupted our economy?

Whatever happened to the various failed stimulus packages without any accountability to taxpayers or the oversight committee passed by the Bush administration and approved by the same legislators in opposition to the current one committed towards education and aid to states to revive the economy by preventing layoffs, cuts in services or tax increases?

The irresponsible conduct to block the bill simply suggests that come 2010 the democratic system would be better off with an alternative political party pledging support to the people and engage in constructive rather than destructive role in nation building.

Similar dilemma experienced in the State of California where the budget crisis has reached a point of no return due to political dogma upheld against pragmatic solutions.

The electorates are viewing the entire situation at both state and federal level and will deliver their decision in the ballot in less than eighteen months.

Despite presentation of this bill in the most cohesive manner, all those legislators on both sides prolonging the approval are not only jeopardizing the opportunity to help every constituent from economic failure but also their own career as an elected official to serve the people and the nation in crisis.

It is the duty of every public servant to recognize the plight of their population and heed to the call to oblige urgent needs by approving the stimulus bill particularly the aid to states that are broke along with education, jobs, services and tax modification.

There is no time for procrastination and all that is required is action. Unfortunately, the Presidency of Barack Obama with unprecedented transparency is subject to undue scrutiny for political strategies.

The campaign trail promises prior to election to office whether it is the House or Senate always remains a distant memory with "business as usual " demonstration upon becoming Senators or the House of Representatives.
——————————————————————————————————————–———————-
Decisive Action:

The economic recovery plan aimed at job creation, assistance to states sharing status quo of the nation, improvement of infrastructure and commitment to revival of education, energy, health care is the step in the right direction.

It is imperative for both Democrats and Republicans to get on board in a bipartisan effort and approve the bill without elimination of prudent investments mistaken for wasteful spending. The job losses in Indiana, near double-digit unemployment in California are real problems felt by hard working people across the nation.

The proposed bill with taxpayers’ dollars invested for taxpayers’ benefits is undergoing intensive criticism by lawmakers primarily responsible for allowing the previous administration to squander economic surplus along with exhaustion of national reserves and treasury in wild adventures as the signature mission of the Republican era.

President Barack Obama’s administration did not create this economic catastrophe. They have inherited it upon election to the office on January 20, 2009. Nevertheless, the rhetoric in the Senate and the House mocking hope and change in a theatrical manner is reflective of the opposition role to make noise, create roadblocks and exacerbate the crisis with an adversarial action or inaction.

Only if such fervor and excitement displayed during the approval of mass financial bailout worth a whopping $700 billion and the unlimited commitment of resources in an unnecessary war in Iraq by the Bush administration there would be no debate or discussion for any economic stimulus package today.

It is apparent from those legislators’ reluctance to acknowledge the realities that they prioritize their own needs to remain in power over their constituents’ hardships and suffering in a debilitating economy.

The electorates have a clear choice in the next election to remember those who care and reject those who abandon them during harsh crises.

Political parties might survive on rhetoric and empty promises but people cannot wait until political factions make up their mind for decisive action required to avert Armageddon upon failure to approve the authentic economic recovery plan by President Barack Obama.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Senate Debate on Economic Recovery Plan

February 7, 2009

The Senate is engaged in vigorous debate over the economic stimulus package from President Barack Obama.

It appears there is massive confusion in the determination of priorities on this bill. The honorable Senators are concerned about the effectiveness of this bill given the magnitude and the urgency to address serious challenges facing our nation.

Individual viewpoints during debate are healthy and sometimes serve the purpose to remain objective.

However, in this particular process overindulgence could lead to distraction and become counter-productive.

After viewing the Senate discussion of the bill, it is apparent that Senators are yet to configure the policies and programs to achieve the pertinent goals.

For instance, there is mix up between creating jobs and dealing with foreclosures. In order to target the specifics of the current economic recession, let us breakdown the various components in requirement of stimulus and revival.

The consensus is to have a stimulus plan that yields the desired result of averting further economic meltdown by setting the pace for recovery.

As stated earlier in the economic recovery plan posted on February 3, 2009 the culminating factors of the economic crises are;

Housing market, Job market and Stock market.

Housing market – It is important that foreclosures are dealt with effectively and refinancing opportunities made available to homeowners in dire state.

Current plan has $15,000 in tax credits for new homebuyers in an effort to improve the housing prices through home sales. Unless and until the existing homeowners rescued from losing homes through foreclosures and others with affordable mortgage payments to adjust the deficiency in home value, any measures in this sector will be futile.

At the same time, an amendment to the debated stimulus bill to handle foreclosures saving approximately 1.5 million families from this crisis is a repetitive exercise as claimed by those Senators in opposition to this amendment.

The reason being, as articulated by the Senators against the amendment, The Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) worth $700 billion was committed for this purpose along with bailout of financial institutions.

Accordingly, $50 billion was allocated towards foreclosures and restructuring of mortgage programs.

Therefore, it is imperative to derive that $50 billion from the previous TARP fund and apply towards the revival of housing market crisis. It is quite possible that $50 billion will not be adequate to provide instant relief but action recommended than inaction.

More reason to verify the exact distribution of the previous TARP fund i.e. $700 billion bailout and redirect any unused portion towards challenges such as housing market and consumer spending.

————————————————————————————————-

Objectives of the Stimulus/Recovery Plan:

The primary focus of the current stimulus package must be job creation, aid consumer spending and investments with safe returns.

Job creation: President Barack Obama’s proposal aims for creation of 3 million jobs through various avenues such as

Direct investments in public works projects i.e. repair and reconstruction of infrastructure across the nation.

Tax incentives and financial assistance to small businesses and corporations with limited resources.

Minimize payroll tax to curb mass layoffs.

Restore manufacturing jobs with necessary financial assistance and modified tax structure.

Consumer spending: The stimulus package offers relief to consumers with tax credit of $500 for individuals and $1000 for couples. It is essential for consumers to utilize the credits towards consumption of goods and services rather than reducing personal debts as again that would be beneficial to the financial institutions, the major contributor of the economic recession.

It is worth remembering that the Bush administration experimented with this stimulus strategy last summer, i.e. 2008 with $300 rebate per child and a cap on annual income of the family. Obviously, the trial and error method did not payoff due to neglect of other crisis like housing, stock and financial markets.

The lesson learned is to treat housing, job, financial and stock market crisis individually and isolate them from one another even though they comprise the entire cause of the economic recession.

Other ways to trigger consumer spending is to ease the burden on families with energy costs i.e. heating homes around this time of the year is significantly high and reduction of surcharges and taxes on the energy bill will provide relief to population in the worst affected regions of the country.

Consumers represented across the social and economic spectrum in a society range from youth population to families, senior citizens and self-employed individuals…

Any tax benefits and financial assistance should be inclusive of all potential consumers to obtain maximum gains.

Investments with safe returns: All investments must produce optimum returns, secured with viable collaterals and subject to rigorous oversight. Most importantly, the investment must generate jobs and/or income for taxpayers as well as create opportunities to tackle other issues like health care, energy and education.

—————————————————————————————————————–

Partisan Politics vs. National Interest

It is common knowledge that the two major political parties have unique positions on fiscal policies.

The Republican Party is vehemently opposed to tax increases to reaffirm the political platform of the party, while scouring for wasteful spending.

Fiscal responsibility is necessary for a nation saddled with alarming deficit. Nevertheless, desperate times call for desperate measures. Now is the moment to rescue the nation with prudent investments and techniques to revitalize growth in all sectors.

During elimination of costs proven liabilities, diligence is required from legislators to distinguish investments from wasteful spending. Funding National Endowment for Arts is a worthy cause as it promotes creative and Performing arts besides employment opportunities for a significant population who are ultimately taxpayers in the economy.

Sometimes, political debates overshadow the ambition to resolve major national crises.

The Democratic Party must be committed towards immediate mission to revive the economy and therefore abstain from elaborate spending spree on frivolous projects that form the basis for unnecessary political debates.

Compromise on both sides by finding common ground to restore consumer and investor confidence is vital for economic recovery.

With mass layoffs, collapse of housing, financial and manufacturing sectors… partisan politics is symbolic of Washington and it is time to get past conventional ways to demonstrate that representatives in the House and Senate care for their constituents, the real victims of the economic catastrophe.

Conciliatory effort and collective action from all sides is what required to helping our nation survive the worst economic period in recent times.

The Senators can confirm their willingness to work together for national interest by approving the President’s recovery plan.

Taxpayers as electorate are viewing the situation with the hope that policy makers will put aside their differences and reject political scores by pledging support to the job creation proposal from President Barack Obama.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

« Previous PageNext Page »

PadminiArhant.com