SEC Lawsuit against Goldman Sachs – Perspective

April 19, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

All the reports on Goldman Sachs from various credible sources confirm the fact that,

There is more to it than meets the eye.

SEC investigation must go underneath the surface.

For Goldman Sachs – it’s analogous to “make a mountain out of molehill.”

When in fact, it’s an erupting volcano that has already claimed many lives and threatening more in the present.

Wikipedia Report – Goldman Sachs Controversies: Thank you.

“Robert Freeman, who was a senior Partner, who was the Head of Risk Arbitrage, and who was a protégé of Robert Rubin, was also convicted of insider trading, for his own account and for the firm’s account.”

Per the above report on “Goldman Sachs’ Controversies,” juxtaposed to NYT article on the Obama administration’s economic team,

The New York Times report – By Jackie Calmes – Published: Monday November 24, 2008 – Thank you.

“The president-elect used the announcement Monday that he was appointing two Rubin protégés, Timothy Geithner as Treasury secretary and Lawrence Summers as senior White House economic adviser, to underscore his determination to step aggressively into a economic leadership vacuum in Washington while also maintaining continuity with the Bush administration before the transition of power Jan. 20.

Obama is expected to soon announce the appointment of another Rubin protégé, Peter Orszag, as White House budget director.

And even the headhunters for Obama have Rubin ties: Michael Froman, who was Rubin’s chief of staff in the Treasury Department and followed him to Citigroup, and James Rubin, Robert Rubin’s son.

Geithner, Summers and Orszag have all been followers of the economic formula that came to be called Rubinomics: balanced budgets, free trade and financial deregulation.

On Wall Street, Rubin is facing questions about his role as director of Citigroup, given the bank’s current troubles, and,

During the weekend held several discussions with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as a government rescue of Citigroup was organized.”

“What worries me is there is not one person in the senior group who is the outsider to this club.

And that’s particularly ironic, given Barack Obama’s bias toward copying Lincoln’s ‘team of rivals,”‘ said Robert Kuttner, a colleague of Bernstein’s at the liberal Economic Policy Institute who has written a book, “Obama’s Challenge,” on free-spending, pro-regulatory approaches to the economic crisis.

“Where is the diversity of opinion in this economic team?” he said.”
————————————————————————————————–

Perspective – By Padmini Arhant

The establishment’s control of the economic power in the Executive branch is noteworthy.

Whether it was the former Goldman Sachs CEO and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson serving the previous Bush-Cheney administration,

Or,

The Obama administration’s economic team identified as “Robert Rubin’s” protégés,

The trend continues with the economic management by those responsible for the economic crisis.

Is it an irony or the undermining of democracy with “business as usual” concept prevailing in any administration.

Goldman Sachs investigation is just the tip of the iceberg.

Rigorous investigation and appropriate action is warranted to resurrect the financial market and the Wall Street credibility.

Goldman Sachs’ dealings in diverse portfolio and the recent performance beckons scrutiny considering the ramifications experienced in the domestic and international financial markets.

Prime examples are Greece and the U.S.economy.

Several European banks reported to have lost money in the deceptive deal.

SEC cannot be complacent with the preliminary finding.

Therefore, it’s incumbent upon SEC to proceed with further investigations against Goldman Sachs to deliver justice to the victims and protect the system from systemic abuse.

The U.S and the global economy cannot sustain history repeating itself.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Finance Sector and Economic Impact

August 31, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

When the Bush administration officially recognized the economic recession in late December 2007, the malignant cancer in the financial sector was widespread – originating from gross mismanagement, underhand dealings, some in breach of lenient SEC regulations… a scenario analogous to the health abuse by overindulging individuals submitting to a potentially terminal illness.

Upon diagnosis, the prognosis called for a radical treatment to prolong life. Hence, the former administration executed a series of financial bailouts commencing with Bear Stearns, AIG, including major and minor banks bailout to a tune of $700 billion TARP (Toxic Assets Relief Program) fund.

Incidentally, the former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson bound by vested interest and commitment to his alma mater Goldman Sachs let the comparable investment group Lehman Brothers submerge into insolvency.

Is cherry picking a coincidence or key Treasury representative fulfilling obligations to the dominant force Goldman Sachs in the finance industry?

Please refresh your thoughts after reviewing the blogpost ‘Bailout Debacle’ March 22, 2009 listed under Economy and Business category at www.padminiarhant.com

In this context, the cited article revealing facts behind the bailout is attention worthy.

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.

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.

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 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.

————————————————————————————————–
True Perspective: By Padmini Arhant

The entire economic meltdown ceremoniously attributed to the financial sector’s wayward unruly conduct in the absence of limited or no regulation. Typically, it’s a free market voluntarily surrendering to a free fall after skyrocketing profits in the pockets of privileged few in the society.

Who did the private enterprise otherwise the market system’s oligarchs approach for salvation?

It was none other than the taxpayers of the economy represented by the government.

It’s poignant to underscore the convenience for private sectors to seek the taxpayer i.e. government’s assistance when they are drowning and fleetingly dismiss the same government as an incompetent, redundant agency during the buoyancy like in the health care battle.

The day is not far when the health care and insurance industry configured to the obscene profit driven settings mimic their counterpart finance industry imploring the taxpayers/consumers bailout.

When the wealth management industry succumbs to their own greed ladened follies, can the health care and insurance industry sustain the malpractice at the economy’s expense?

If there is any respect for the laws of nature or ethical consideration, the key economic components such as the finance, health industry and others would realize that universally every substance has a limited potential to thrive and exceed performance level at any given time. The mankind periodically experienced catastrophic blows in the form of severe economic recession to ‘Great Depression’ due to the prevailing markets inertia.

Still, the lesson is never learned by the delusional segment forging permanency on this planet; choose to remain confined to the improbable cause in wealth amassment.

Now directing focus on the finance sector, the ‘artful dodger’, a nickname of the Charles Dickens’ melancholy character ‘Oliver Twist’ when turned down for more porridge, despite the courteous magic word ‘please,’ was never discouraged to maneuver the situation in personal favor.

Unlike the character ‘Oliver Twist’ a victim of severe socio-economic disparity…parallel to the modern twenty first century reality, the finance sector is well armed with tactics adherence to the rule of law in appearance but decisively biting the hands that feeds them, i.e. the consumers and taxpayers.

What are the latest strategies by the finance industry to clean up the mess on their balance sheets?

The current trend in the finance sector is adapting to the new age attraction i.e. presentation and mass appeal even if it is lacking in substance. If anything achieved from the domino effects by the financial sector, it is the mastery of unsavory techniques to impress shareholders at the consumers’ peril.

During the bailouts, both the prior and the incumbent administrations were unequivocally guaranteed instant revival of the lending activity, a predominant factor in the liquidity crisis exacerbating the economy until date.

It’s been nearly twelve to eighteen months since the infamous massive bailouts with no relief to the average citizen, retailers or the small businesses, crucial for the economic recovery. The economy deprived of the consumer spending flow because of the financial institutions’ stringent policy to hoard the taxpayers’ funds received in the form of bailouts at zero percent or nominal interest rate. Instead the taxpayer bailout is unabashedly used for extravagant bonuses to the architects of the financial calamity.

Although, the Obama administration recently capped the finance charges and interest rates on credit card borrowings to ease the extraordinary burden on average citizens, the industry leapfrogged Congress with discretionary interest rates not limited to atrocious 29.9% APR and threatening to increase further on default payments.

Another proactive measure by the banks in an effort to window dressing the balance sheet was minimizing risk exposure related to credit card and consumer lending. The industry defiantly targets the vulnerable groups like students, homeowners and the lower to median income consumers with abrupt cancellation of accounts in good standing.

The irony is noteworthy. It’s considered perfectly normal if the finance industry absconded their responsibility to the American taxpayers/creditors not barring any accountability to the oversight committee regarding the bailout investments. However, the then taxpayers/creditors as consumers/borrowers now subject to scrutiny and unprecedented means by the same financial institutions holding the mantle to lending and borrowing.

While the myriad of finance industry borrowed taxpayer funds at zero or negligible interest rate, the sector in return either withholding financing in most cases or lending at an exorbitant rate to the consumers who are also the creditors.

In the housing market, the situation synchronizes with the other lending areas such as credit card, personal loans etc. The reason for the agonizing slump in the real estate across the nation squarely falls back on the commercial banks reluctant to unleash the cash flow to qualified first homebuyers and responsible mortgagees/homeowners unable to purchase or refinance their homes. The stranglehold on consumer borrowing precipitates the foreclosures notwithstanding the vertical decline in home sales and values.

Again, the White House initiatives to restrain foreclosures and assist primary residence owners through TARP fund allocation need evaluation as the financial institutions are focused on ‘business as usual’ and not measuring up to the rigorous standard that exists for average consumers while the bailed out financial industry borrowers exempt from it.

The status quo is inadequate and compromises the high value homes in the government pursuit to rescue the conforming loans, i.e. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac toxic assets. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is a private company backed by government funds.

Not surprisingly, the illicit practice permeated to the commercial real estate affecting the prospects in that segment.

Home equity, the major and sometimes the only asset for overwhelming majority being inaccessible along with the spiraling health care and insurance costs for families, the overall economic impact is enormous forcing many to bankruptcy accelerated by the escalating unemployment rate.

Did the bailout beneficiaries show any evidence to qualify for funding?

Supposedly not, then why should they be allowed to run the economy into muck and handsomely rewarded with taxpayer bailout for the colossal failure in financial history?

Where are the taxpayer funds invested and why are they not held accountable thus far?
Is the financial market granted constitutional immunity?

And if not,

What is holding the legislators from intervening on behalf of the electorate to probe the public affairs maintained as private matter by the industry?

Meanwhile, the investment group, Goldman Sachs implicated for alleged insider information to high value investors through trade specialists deserve proper investigation and due process. The SEC regulations must apply to all without exception in absolute transparency.

With the holiday season approaching, the consumer spending is vital to expedite the stagnant economic growth. As stated above, the positive development in housing and job market intertwined with the investment pace, only possible through private sector faithful participation in lending and reactivating the economy.

Unless and until the finance sector across the board, the commercial, investment and insurance industries get their act together and relinquish the ‘subprime’ syndrome, the sagging economy will continue and eventually consume the source, the financial groups.

The financial sector is obligatory to the taxpayers as creditors and borrowers particularly with respect to the disproportionate bailouts.

Finally, with no further procrastination on the financial markets audit, it’s imperative for the Congress appointed oversight to obtain legitimate explanation on investments and lending abstinence. Any dissatisfactory response and non-cooperation by the industry must be pursued with mandatory judicial protocol.

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