[Vision2020] The 1% in Congress

Mon Nov 14 01:01:53 PST 2011

In part, Paul wrote:

"All of this is just my opinion, of course.  It's based on what I've
happened to come across in the media.  I don't get TV, nor do I listen to
much radio (except for NPR when I drive to work).  Most of what I've seen
comes from online media, usually referenced by people already involved in an
argument on a forum somewhere."

With all due respect, I'd like to suggest that perhaps you expand your
horizons rather than assuming that the OWS movement is as limited as you
seem to think it is.  As others have pointed out, much of the movement is
more focused than your limited perception.

Even better, how about involving yourself with the OWS movement, sharing
your thoughts, and making a difference?  Reggie just recently posted about
local efforts, so why not take part & make your voice heard?  Any movement
is only as good as those actively involved, you know.

Who knows - perhaps if you & others would have gotten involved in the
undeniably astroturfed Tea Party movement in the beginning, the whole
perversion by the Evangelical Christians Lusting for a Theocracy takeover
wouldn't have destroyed the nuggets of gold.  Shoot - I happen to know
that's exactly what happened locally & nationally, which is really too bad
because there was some good stuff in spite of the astroturfing before the
so-called "Christian culture warriors" shouted everyone else down.

Another undeniable point, it seems to me:  those who've benefitted from
obscene transfer of wealth in this country aren't powerless, you know - they
have the wealth & power to influence outcomes, yet they've just been silent
while amassing their morally ill-gotten gains.  Until recently, at least,
when more than a few have rightly bashed the GOP for their obscene lunacy in
insisting that lower- and middle-class individuals & families should
continue to be economically robbed.

None of that changes the fact that the uberwealthy continued to take
advantage of the benefits the wealth of those in their class bought while
screwing the rest of us and Did Nothing to change that obscenity until the
grossness finally became undeniable.

Do you honestly  believe, Paul, that had the uberwealthy not been so
self-absorbed (at best) in amassing more & more & more that their wealth,
power, and influence couldn't have changed things before this great nation
was very nearly destroyed by greed?  I suspect that's where we disagree in a
huge way.

One thing I hope we as a nation have learned is that private charity doesn't
even come close to addressing the social & economic ills of transferring
wealth to the very few while screwing over the vast, vast majority of US
citizens.

JMHO,

Saundra

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Paul Rumelhart
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 7:32 PM
To: Reggie Holmquist
Cc: vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The 1% in Congress

I haven't seen a lot of well-reasoned commentary by protesters in general.
I've seen a few eloquent individuals on Youtube that had obviously thought
this through, but the majority of what I've seen has been an unfocused angst
from people who are having a bad time financially and are lashing out at
those who aren't. 

Everyone seems to take my commentary as unblinking opposition when it isn't.
I could say the sky is blue and people on here would go out of their way to
show me how wrong I am by showing me pictures of the sky on a cloudy day or
at night.  There are, however, two main reasons I'm speaking up here about
this:

One:  This is a prime opportunity for change to be made.  The climate is
right for it.  The power of the people could really do some good here.
Instead, we get articles like the one Jay posted about a bunch of miscreants
and their sense of entitlement.  Just camping out is not enough.  Organize!
I may even join you!  (You being the OWS movement, I don't know if you're a
member or not).

Two:  This focus on class can have some real downsides.  A generic rant
against the wealthy isn't helpful.  It's no different on it's face than a
generic rant about a particular religion or culture that has some bad
members.  There is a lot of potential here for ugliness on that scale.  How
long until someone who looks well off gets their ass handed to them by a
crowd of protesters?  There is real danger here.  It would go a long way for
the movement to acknowledge that and to focus on rational arguments and
plans to fix them rather than a simple venting of frustration.

All of this is just my opinion, of course.  It's based on what I've happened
to come across in the media.  I don't get TV, nor do I listen to much radio
(except for NPR when I drive to work).  Most of what I've seen comes from
online media, usually referenced by people already involved in an argument
on a forum somewhere.  Your mileage may vary.

Paul

On 11/13/2011 06:04 PM, Reggie Holmquist wrote: 

I don't think anyone hates anyone, except maybe for the greedy bankers who
ruined our economy by spreading around toxic CDOs.  But that doesn't mean
that we shouldn't aim for a higher effective tax rate for individuals making
millions and millions of dollars.  The rich can handle it better, it's more
fair, and right now America needs the public revenues, if for no other
reason than to pay down the debt.  Under FDR the highest tax bracket was
90%.  Even under Nixon it was 70%, and for much of Reagan's term it was 50%.
Right now it is 35%, and so many Occupiers think it would be good to push
that top marginal tax rate back to Reagan levels.  There is also a strong
argument for raising the capital gains tax, which is where most of the 1%'s
income comes from, anyway.  It's more fair, the rich can handle it better,
and right now America needs the public revenues.  There is no reason that
Warren Buffet should be paying a lower effective tax rate than his
secretary. 

Aside from that, Occupy has been making many of the arguments you seem to be
asking them to make.  They are against corporate tax loopholes, they are
against corporate personhood, they are against a system which allows the
financial industry to leverage our own economy against us (i.e. reinstate
Glass-Steagall).  A lot of them also support Campaign Finance Reform
(because a system that allows the 1% an exponentially larger amount of
influence in the elections is unjust, un-Democratic, and unAmerican), and I
have heard quite a few call out for Electoral Reform (move from plurality
voting to preferential, thereby allowing for 3rd parties).

To me, Paul, your amorphous argument against Occupy does not seem
significant or relevant.  Maybe I just don't understand your position?

-Reggie

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
wrote:

It's indiscriminate class warfare.  Targeting people  based solely on how
much money they have is not any different than targeting someone based on
any other random criteria.  So, instead of targeting randomly wealthy
people, target those who worked to pass those laws.  Target the laws
themselves.

It's the difference between saying "I hate you because you are rich" and "I
hate you specifically because you made a deal with a congressman to get a
special tax benefit that no others have so you could unfairly increase your
profits on the backs of all tax payers".  One requires actually thinking
about the problem and doing some research in an effort to fix it.  The other
is just lashing out because someone is doing well while they are not.

Target the greedy, not the well-to-do.  They overlap a lot, but not
completely.

I'd love for the Occupy Idaho folks to scour the State tax code looking for
unfair tax benefits and expose them.  Much more beneficial than just making
a statement.

Paul 

On 11/13/2011 02:00 PM, Sunil Ramalingam wrote: 

Paul,

You say, 'Condemn the laws that encourage it, such as the ability of
shareholders to sue if a company is making a decision that affects
short-term profits in favor of long-term growth or the various tax dodges
written into the tax code to benefit specific companies over their
competition (making for a non-free trade market).'

Do you think those laws are somehow disconnected from the institutions that
pass and sign them? Did they just spring up, somehow disconnected from their
beneficiaries and sponsors?

Of course there's a direct connection between a ruling class this wealthy,
and legislation that benefits others in their group, and in whose pockets
they so comfortably dwell.

How come that's not class warfare? How come it's only class warfare when
someone says, 'Those guys are screwing us?'

Sunil

  _____  

Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:09:18 -0800
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: rforce2003 at yahoo.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The 1% in Congress

This kind of thing is a good illustration of what concerns me about this
whole 1% / 99% metric.  Here is a list of people who are in Congress who
have a lot of money.  So what?  There is no indication as to how these
people got their money.  No condemnation of certain Congressmen because they
passed legislation that directly helped their bottom line.  No effort to
separate the wheat from the chaff.  How many of these people came into their
wealth and decided they wanted to do something good with it but also
understand the idea behind the phrase "free milk and a cow"?  The only thing
we can say is that they are doing well.

it looks vaguely like a target list, frankly.  What ever happened to the
good old American Dream(tm)?  

What we should be focused on is unmitigated greed.  It exists in all levels
of society, not just in the most wealthy.  Condemn the laws that encourage
it, such as the ability of shareholders to sue if a company is making a
decision that affects short-term profits in favor of long-term growth or the
various tax dodges written into the tax code to benefit specific companies
over their competition (making for a non-free trade market).  There are
plenty other examples of outright greed that we could be focusing on.
Instead, we are focusing on net wealth as some kind of metric of Good vs.
Evil.  Sure, the wealthy could be doing more to help the poor, but so could
each one of us.  

While we're on the subject of the seven deadly sins, why not take a close
look at "envy" while we're at it?  

Paul

On 11/11/2011 04:34 PM, Ron Force wrote: 

Table 2: All members of Congress with average net worth above $9 million,
from 2009

Name

Minimum Wealth

Maximum Wealth

Average

Chamber

Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)

$156,050,022

$451,100,000

$303,575,011

House

John Kerry (D-Mass.)

$182,755,534

$294,869,059

$238,812,296

Senate

Mark Warner (D-Va.)

$65,692,210

$283,077,995

$174,385,102

Senate

Jared Polis (D-Colo.)

$36,694,140

$285,123,996

$160,909,068

House

Herb Kohl (D-Wis.)

$89,358,027

$231,245,995

$160,302,011

Senate

Vernon Buchanan (R-Fla.)

-$69,434,661

$366,180,982

$148,373,160

House

Michael McCaul (R-Texas)

$73,685,086

$201,537,000

$137,611,043

House

James E. Risch (R-Idaho)

$38,936,114

$179,131,990

$109,034,052

Senate

Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)

$61,446,018

$136,218,002

$98,832,010

Senate

Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)

$64,210,256

$125,529,976

$94,870,116

Senate

Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

$46,055,250

$108,109,018

$77,082,134

Senate

Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.)

$49,083,204

$104,690,018

$76,886,611

Senate

Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)

-$7,356,915

$124,229,990

$58,436,537

House

Gary Miller (R-Calif.)

$19,365,053

$84,302,000

$51,833,526

House

Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)

$9,778,047

$91,656,998

$50,717,522

Senate

Diane Lynn Black (R-Tenn.)

$14,673,049

$84,145,990

$49,409,519

House

Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.)

$19,898,179

$67,697,000

$43,797,589

House

Rick Berg (R-N.D.)

$19,347,579

$58,981,451

$39,164,515

House

Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.)

$14,900,036

$63,125,000

$39,012,518

House

Kenny Marchant (R-Texas)

$13,303,385

$63,106,351

$38,204,868

House

Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.)

$6,598,014

$56,244,997

$31,421,505

House

Scott Rigell (R-Va.)

$11,618,078

$48,200,000

$29,909,039

House

Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine)

$12,556,055

$44,669,000

$28,612,527

Senate

James B. Renacci (R-Ohio)

$17,571,131

$39,297,044

$28,434,087

House

Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)

$11,522,909

$44,209,871

$27,866,390

Senate

Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.)

$7,045,017

$41,899,994

$24,472,505

House

Tom Petri (R-Wis.)

$5,111,026

$43,765,999

$24,438,512

House

John Campbell (R-Calif.)

$9,227,063

$37,282,000

$23,254,531

House

Steve Pearce (R-N.M.)

$8,368,014

$37,945,000

$23,156,507

House

Richard L Hanna (R-N.Y.)

$10,960,117

$33,276,000

$22,118,058

House

Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)

$15,681,206

$27,543,006

$21,612,106

Senate

Blake Farenthold (R-Texas)

$10,359,086

$31,381,997

$20,870,541

House

John Hoeven (R-N.D.)

-$12,829,960

$52,851,999

$20,011,019

Senate

Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

$7,102,036

$32,756,000

$19,929,018

Senate

Kay R. Hagan (D-N.C.)

$3,549,596

$33,149,981

$18,349,788

Senate

F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.)

$14,990,621

$20,923,567

$17,957,094

House

Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)

$1,056,768

$34,566,596

$17,811,682

Senate

Michael F Bennet (D-Colo.)

$6,217,020

$27,780,000

$16,998,510

Senate

Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)

$10,447,125

$23,082,001

$16,764,563

Senate

Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.)

$9,542,219

$23,259,000

$16,400,609

House

Fred Upton (R-Mich.)

$7,010,173

$25,651,000

$16,330,586

House

Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.)

$5,429,018

$26,697,997

$16,063,507

House

John McCain (R-Ariz.)

$9,769,247

$22,072,994

$15,921,120

Senate

Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)

$7,790,095

$20,949,999

$14,370,047

House

Cynthia Marie Lummis (R-Wyo.)

$4,939,028

$23,591,999

$14,265,513

House

Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.)

$6,393,295

$20,874,000

$13,633,647

Senate

Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.)

$6,593,088

$20,654,033

$13,623,560

House

Jackie Speier (D-Calif.)

$4,561,077

$20,503,000

$12,532,038

House

Tom Price (R-Ga.)

$7,653,606

$17,121,588

$12,387,597

House

Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)

$8,010,107

$16,623,001

$12,316,554

Senate

Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)

$4,100,005

$20,250,000

$12,175,002

House

Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas)

$6,126,070

$18,078,998

$12,102,534

House

Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)

$6,407,085

$17,427,999

$11,917,542

Senate

Rob Portman (R-Ohio)

$5,544,075

$17,468,999

$11,506,537

Senate

David Dreier (R-Calif.)

$5,264,092

$17,715,000

$11,489,546

House

David B. McKinley (R-W.Va.)

$5,216,060

$14,316,000

$9,766,030

House

John A. Yarmuth (D-Ky.)

$2,850,009

$16,349,999

$9,600,004

House

John Fleming (R-La.)

$2,153,834

$16,797,770

$9,475,802

House

Jon Runyan (R-N.J.)

$5,000,034

$13,674,999

$9,337,516

House

Source: Center for Responsive Politics
<http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/index.php> 

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

======================================================= List services made
available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse
since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

-- 
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what
the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another
theory which states that this has already happened. 

Douglas Adams

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20111114/57114a03/attachment-0001.html>