Why I Support Occupy Wall Street

Three years ago, a handful of banks facing eminent collapse took $850,000,000,000 from taxpayers, and promised to reform their ways.

One year after the meltdown, the executives who collectively ran the banking system into the ground rewarded themselves nearly $20,000,000,000 in taxpayer-funded bonus money.

Two years after the meltdown, the financial industry was spending more than $35,000,000 every month lobbying against any and all financial reform.

Three years after the meltdown, they lobbied House Republicans to bring our country to the brink of bankruptcy to block any attempt to raise taxes on people making more than $1,000,000,000 annually.

Today, these same financial vampires are vilifying our generation for being upset, and can’t understand why so many people hate them.

When you think about it, it is understandable why these bankers are confused.  They’ve been getting away with so much corruption for so long that trying to tell them that the system has to be fixed now is like trying to convince an alcoholic that liquor stores should be outlawed.

To be completely fair, a lot of these investment bankers do not believe their free-for-all “investment” tactics are corrupt in the first place.  A lot of them believe that their industry would better serve the economy if the government just eliminated all the rules, and left them to their own devices.  A lot of them don’t even believe that what they’re doing is gambling.  They think they’re investing money into the economy to create jobs.

But when you take money that customers deposit into your bank, and you use it to bet five times what your worth that poor people will indefinitely be able to pay their mortgages forever – you’re not creating jobs; you’re gambling away people’s savings.

Beyond the corruption of all that nonsense – this industry took $850,000,000,000 from taxpayers because they were about to disintegrate from the earth, and then used that to reward themselves $20,000,000,000 in bonuses.  Forget the fact that $20,000,000,000 could finance half of what the federal government spends on higher education, and let’s just focus on the concept of rewarding yourself a bonus when your bank breaks.

Anyone who worked for a bank that was bailed out and accepted a bonus that ended with the suffix “illion” would most definitely eat his own son.  And people like that belong in prison.

Which brings us to the third tier of corruption: why were these banks allowed to use taxpayer money to reward themselves huge bonuses?  Because people like (D) Senator Chris Dobbs were in charge of including that rule, but forgot to include it because AIG gave him $225,000 in campaign contributions after giving his wife $500,000 every year to serve on various AIG boards.

My parents are always confused about why the Occupy Wall Street movement is protesting Wall Street instead of the government.  But the concept I think our generation understands more extensively than theirs is how much our government is controlled by Wall Street.

And I don’t mean to say that we’re smarter or anything condescending like that.  It’s simply a testament to how much the Internet has revolutionized our ability to find out how governments all over the world really operate.  The same realizations are happening across the Middle East, where the Internet has enabled rebels from our generation to bypass state-controlled media and understand how their governments really operate.

I don’t think the Occupy Wall Street movement will end as dramatically as the movements in Egypt, Lybia and soon-to-be Syria – primarily because our citizens aren’t nearly as oppressed.  But I do see this movement as our generation’s anti-Vietnam War movement: when people realized on a massive scale how ridiculous it was to continue sending thousands of kids to die overseas for no strategic reason other than “fight the commies forever.”

I like the fact that our generation is occupying Wall Street instead of Washington, D.C., because it shows that we understand that Congress doesn’t write our laws – Wall Street lobbyists write our laws and deliver them to Congress where they come under a vote.  The occupation of Wall Street represents the knowledge that we know Wall Street controls our government, and we want that corruption to end.

And that is the reason I support Occupy Wall Street.

The OWS movement will inevitably fade like every other political trend.  But if it were to accomplish one demand, I would want Congress to pass a law that ensures “The Separation of Corporation and State” – so that giant companies will no longer be allowed to finance political campaigns, and install politicians that they can control.  Because we can’t even begin to fight the corruption until we stop the corruption from writing our laws.

Jayhawk fan (my dad) Occupies Wall Street

My dad occupied Deadspin, the Lawrence Journal World and CBS Sports this week after voicing his support for the Kansas Jayhawks at an Occupy Wall Street rally in Denver, CO.

It all started after my parents helped move me in to my new apartment, and my dad and I decided to walk through the Occupy Wall Street protest near the Denver capitol building.

Because my dad works for a bank, we thought it would be funny to take pictures of him standing in front of anti-bank signs pretending to shout angrily in support with his fist in the air (see pictures below).

After an intense showdown between the Denver SWAT Team and the protesters, we thought it would be even awesome to stage a Jayhawk fan among the intense emotions, shouting equally as passionately about his love for the Kansas Jayhawks.

We drove to a nearby Office Depot to pick up the supplies, quickly crafted a KU poster and picked up a Jayhawk finger from my apartment.  Once we returned to the demonstration, we waited for a stereotypical protester to start shouting.

The moment came when the guy at the beginning of the video started shouting angrily into a megaphone at a local Denver journalist, blaming him personally for manipulating the American people into supporting the invasion of Iraq.  By the time my camera was ready, he was ending his rant with the best possible stereotypical buzz words, and then Dennis started into his own rant…

“Kansas Basketball No. 1!”  He shouted, “Bill Self for Federal Reserve Chairman!  Five National Championships!  55 Conference Championships! …Missourah has won NO CHAMPIONSHIPS OF ANY KIND!”

Most people, including the guy on the megaphone and the journalist, laughed.  Others looked confused.  One guy yelled “Fuck Kansas!”

You can watch the video and pictures from the protest below.

The Video

Photos of Dennis Raging with OWS Protesters

Why we should let Bush Tax Cuts expire

I couldn’t agree more with Fareed Zakaria’s latest article in the Washington Post about the Bush Tax Cuts.

Republicans and Democrats both agree that the massive U.S. budget deficit looms as one of the most dangerous threats to our nation’s economy.  And Congress has the opportunity to immediately eliminate a fourth of that deficit by doing nothing.

The Bush Tax Cuts are set to expire this year, which will inevitably cut about $300 billion from the U.S. budget deficit.  These massive tax cuts – passed in 2001 and 2003 – lowered taxes for the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans.

Republicans had argued that these tax cuts would pay for themselves, by providing big businesses big profits and thus, more money to pay back in taxes.  But as former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday… “They do not.”

“I’m very much in favor of tax cuts but not with borrowed money and the problem that we have gotten into in recent years is spending programs with borrowed money, tax cuts with borrowed money,” he said. “And at the end of the day that proves disastrous.”

Democrats now want to let these tax cuts expire for anyone making more than $250,000 a year.  But Republicans argue we should extend these tax cuts for the rich indefinitely.

Republicans argue that letting taxes go back to Clinton-era levels would trigger massive layoffs as foreign investors and corporations look elsewhere to do business.  But even with these tax cuts, the U.S. has one of the lowest tax rates in the industrialized world.

President Bill Clinton raised taxes and the U.S. economy experienced robust growth and one of the largest budget surpluses since President Harry Truman.  President George W. Bush inherited that surplus and immediately cut taxes for the wealthy; we experienced a decade of very stagnant job growth, and one of the largest recessions in U.S. history.

The fact is that the Bush Tax Cuts were unaffordable, irresponsible, and a completely failed experiment meant to pander to a populist ideology, while winning campaign financing from mega-huge banks and corporations.

Allowing these tax cuts to expire is a necessary, responsible burden the country must confront.  Social security costs money; Medicare costs money; Medicaid costs money; and never-ending wars cost money – and Republicans do not propose cutting spending on any of those policies (particularly with the ultra-expensive Medicare spending bill they passed when they were in power).

The United States continues to have one of the smallest governments among the world’s rich countries (with the exception of our military).  We can argue all day that we must cut spending without any real suggestions for what to specifically cut.  But until then, we must figure out a way to pay for the government we already have.  And letting the failed Bush Tax Cuts expire would be a meaningful start.

New Arizona law may be unconstitutional

Arizona passed the most far-reaching illegal immigration law in U.S. history last week, igniting a new debate over the constitutionality of racial profiling.

The new law obligates Arizona police officers to pull over anyone who is “reasonably suspicious” of being an illegal immigrant, and arrest them if they do not have both a valid driver’s license and a birth certificate.  It also gives Arizona citizens the right to sue their local police departments if they think police aren’t doing enough to uphold the law.

Mexico immediately issued a travel advisory to its citizens after the law passed to use caution when visiting Arizona.  Hotels across Arizona have reported a wave of cancellation fees as thousands Hispanic Americans have launched a massive boycott against Arizona businesses. And San Francisco Supervisor, David Campos, plans to submit emergency legislation on Friday to call for a boycott against all businesses in Arizona.

One Arizona Sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, called the new law “racist,” “disgusting” and “unnecessary,” adding that he refused to enforce it.

“It’s just a stupid law,” he said at a press conference Wednesday.

In my opinion – the law is bluntly racist, and will eventually be ruled unconstitutional.

The elephant in the healthcare reform fix

President Obama signed into law on Tuesday the final fixes to the healthcare reform bill.  But included inside it was a reform to the way the government lends money for students to go to college.

The federal government will no longer give money to banks to lend to students.   It will instead loan that money directly to students at the federal (less expensive) interest rate.

The Student Aid and Financial Reconciliation Act basically ends government subsidies for private student loans, and uses the savings to expand the government’s Pell Grant student loan program.

Democrats believe the act will save the government money ($61 billion) and help make college more affordable for students, by eliminating the middle men (banks).  Republicans fear that cutting banks out of the higher-education equation will hurt the private sector, and push the government into debt by making it the sole financier for college tuition.

The White House plans to coordinate with college newspapers across the country next week to answer questions for students in a live chat on its website.

How the new healthcare plan works

President Obama on Tuesday signed into law the Democrats’ historic healthcare reform bill.

Democrats promise the new law will expand health coverage to 32 million more Americans, eliminate egregious insurance tactics and save the country more money in the long-run.  Republicans argue that the law will result in a government take-over of healthcare, force the U.S. into bankruptcy and usher in a new era of increased dependence on the government.

Regardless of what you think of the bill, it is now the law of the land.

Immediate Effects

Among its immediate effects:  it will be illegal for insurance companies to deny children coverage for pre-existing conditions, or drop customers from coverage once they become sick.  Small businesses with fewer than 50 employees will receive tax credits to help finance 50 percent of each worker’s health insurance costs.  Young adults who recently graduated from college can now stay on their parents’ healthcare plans until they turn 26.  Adults suffering from pre-existing conditions can now buy health insurance.

How the insurance industry will pay for it

To off-set the losses insurance companies would experience from having to fulfill these promises, the government has promised the industry an influx of new customers.  Starting in 2014, the government will require all Americans to purchase health insurance – similar to how all drivers are required to carry automobile insurance.

How it plans to lower insurance costs

To keep health insurance affordable, the government will require insurance companies to reveal how much money they spend on bonuses and administrative salaries.  Non-profit insurance companies, such as Blue Cross Blue Shield, must now maintain a medical-loss ratio – in which 85 percent of its income must be spent on medical procedures (rather than administrative salaries and bonuses) in order for it to take advantage of IRS tax benefits.  The government will implement new screening procedures over the next few years to identify and eliminate fraud and waste within the insurance industry.  And whenever an insurance company wishes to change a program, it must now go through an appeals process that gives customers the opportunity to challenge the merits of the new program.

How the government will pay for it

The government will obviously need some money to pay for the initial stages of this new plan.  Starting in 2012, the government will enforce fees against drug companies.  Starting in 2013, the government will raise taxes on single people who make more than $200,000 per year, and couples who make more than $250,000 per year.

Democrats hope that by 2014, the huge influx of new customers for the insurance industry, the new drug company fees, and the higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans should enable the new system to sustain itself – and save the country money over the long-term.

How the new system plans to save money

Democrats project that by expanding health insurance to more Americans, it will lower the cost of each individual’s health insurance overall.

This is because under the former system, patients who visited the emergency room without health insurance forced hospitals to foot the bill, which passed the costs on to the insurance industry, which passed the costs on to everyone else in the form of increased premiums.

By expanding health insurance to everyone, individuals will pay less because the responsibility is now spread out to more people – instead of forcing only those who pay for health insurance to pay for everyone else.

The new PR health campaign

The new healthcare bill also includes a PR campaign aimed at encouraging Americans to live healthier lives.  Fast food restaurants will now be required to disclose nutritional facts on their menus – similar to food in grocery stores.  The government will enforce a sales tax on tanning salons.  And the bill allocates $1 billion in credit for firms to research new techniques and therapies for preventing diseases – instead of relying on drugs.

The Politics

Many Americans remain skeptical after an emotionally charged debate in which fear embodied the primary force of opposition.  Republicans will likely use their remaining fear juice to win some Congressional seats in November.  But as for restructuring the way our healthcare system operates – it’s mission accomplished for the Democrats, and the Republicans cannot repeal it.

Healthcare reform passes, what it means for you

The House of Representatives late last night passed its healthcare reform bill, which promises to give 32 million more Americans access to health insurance.

The House voted 219 to 212 in favor of a comprehensive reform package, which President Obama will now sign into law.   A second piece of legislation that makes fixes to the reform bill was also passed through the reconciliation process by a vote of 220 to 211, and will move to the Senate for a final vote.  Zero Republicans voted for the bill.

Sunday also marked the complete removal of any federal funding to go toward abortions, which encouraged a number of pro-life Democrats to jump on board.  President Obama also agreed to enact an Executive Order that eliminates any language that opens any possibility for a loophole that provides federal funding for abortions.

The vote punctuates more than a year of highly emotional debate.

What it means for you

Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. John B. Larson wrote in the Huffington Post that the bill means 10 major changes for Americans.

1)  Insurance companies will no longer be allowed to deny children access to healthcare based on pre-existing conditions, such as the baby in Colorado whose insurance company said he was born too fat for health insurance.

2)  Insurers can no longer drop their customers once they become sick.

3)  The federal government will provide tax credits to small businesses as incentives to provide health insurance for employees.

4)  Insurers must insure Americans with pre-existing conditions.  These customers will fall under a “temporary high-risk pool.”

5)  Drug companies must now chip in on prescription drugs for senior citizens to help close the “donut hole.”  The donut hole was a gap in coverage that stopped paying for seniors’ medical costs after they exceeded $2,700; and kicked back in once their costs reached $6,154. Drug companies will now pay half of the costs while seniors are in the “donut hole.”  The pharmaceutical industry agreed to the change back in June of 2009.

6)  Insurers can no longer enact lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in healthcare plans.

7)  Insurers must cover their customers’ dependents up until age 26.

8)  Insurers must develop new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations, such as flu vaccines, without cost-sharing.

9)  Insurers must develop a reliable process for customers to appeal for new insurance plans.

10)  Insurers with high administrative costs (companies that shower their upper management with enormous salaries and bonuses) must pay premium rebates to customers.  They must also disclose what percentage of their overhead costs come from customers’ premiums.

Some of these changes go into affect today – all of them go into effect by 2014.

Democrats consider banning all earmarks

House Democratic leaders are debating whether to enforce a party-wide ban against all earmarks for a year, the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported on Monday.

Nancy Pelosi introduced the idea last Tuesday.  Roll Call reported that her plan is to use the measure to help the Democratic Party “regain ethical high ground” and “outflank” Republicans, who have remained divided in recent years on whether to ban earmarks in their own party.

Leaders involved in the discussion have decided to explore the idea further with Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.).  But they expect the ban will meet heavy resistance from the dirty, dark corners of the Democratic Caucus who love earmarks and are oblivious to their party’s stereotype.

Senators from both parties immediately jumped on board with the proposal.  Moments after the meeting,  Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said he “would try to force a Senate vote on a one-year earmark ban.”

“Nancy Pelosi and I don’t agree on many things,” he said in a statement, “but if she’s willing to take a stand for taxpayers, I’ll work with her to put an end to the earmark favor factory.”

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) also released a letter that endorsed the idea:

“I strongly endorse that effort, and urge you both to push for an end to this abusive practice in your respective caucuses,” Feingold wrote.  “Unauthorized congressional earmarks continue to be a serious problem. For all the lip service Congress pays to this issue, there are still thousands of earmarked spending provisions enacted every year.”

He went on to explain that $50 billion of taxpayer money (or IOU’s) went to earmarks during Fiscal Year 2004; $7 billion went to earmarks in 2009; and $3.7 billion has been spent on earmarks, so far this year.

“Earmarking pet projects in appropriations bills continues only because it has bipartisan support. Once it loses bipartisan support, the abusive practice will end,” he wrote.  “I hope the two Democratic Caucuses will take the lead in putting an end to unauthorized earmarked spending in appropriations bills.”

Warren Buffet: Current healthcare system eating away U.S. economy (Video)

The current healthcare system is like “an economic tapeworm” eating away at the U.S. economy, Billionaire Warren Buffett said Monday in an interview on CNBC.

“What we have now is untenable over time,” He said, citing that the cost of U.S. healthcare has jumped from 5 percent of the country’s GDP to 17 percent of GDP.  Most other developed countries maintain healthcare systems that cost about 10 percent  of GDP, he said.

“If you want to get the very best; you want to spend a million dollars to prolong your life another three months… you can probably do it better here in the United States than any place else,” Buffet said.  But, ”We have a healthcare system that, in terms of cost, is really out of control, and if you take this line and project what has been happening into the future, we will get less and less competitive,” Buffet said.

Buffett said he thought the proposed healthcare bill does not do enough to address the cost situation.

“We need something that will end the constant increase in medical cost as a percentage of GDP,”  Buffett said.

When asked if President Obama should scrap the current healthcare bill and start over, Buffet responded:

“If I were President Obama, I would just show this chart of what’s been happening and say, ‘this is the tapeworm that’s eating at American competitiveness.  And I would say that, ‘one way or another, we’re going to attack cost, cost, cost; just like they talk about jobs, jobs, jobs…

“I would try to get a unified effort and say, ‘This is a national emergency to do something about this – we need the Republicans; we need the Democrats… We’re going to get rid of the nonsense and we’re just going to focus on cost, and we’re not going to dream up 2,000 pages on other things…’

“I believe in insuring more people, but I don’t believe in insuring more people until you attack the cost aspect of this… And I admire people for tackling it because it’s so tough politically.  But I’d really like to see [Obama] get the job done.”

GOP tactics hurting U.S. image abroad

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testified to Congress on Wednesday that the Republican blockade on President Obama’s appointees is starting to damage America’s credibility abroad.

For more than a year, the GOP has delayed nearly all of Obama’s nominations, including key foreign policy, international assistance, and U.S. military positions.

“We’re now more than a year into a new administration and whether you agree or disagree with a particular policy, a president deserves to have the people that he nominates serving him,” Clinton told the Senate Appropriations Committee.  “It became harder and harder to explain to countries, particularly countries of significance, why we had nobody in position for them to interact with… People don’t understand the way our system operates, they just don’t get it.”

Clinton did not name names, but I’ve actually written about two examples.   Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., delayed Obama’s General Services Administration Chief for more than a year in an attempt to secure $125 million for a building project in Kansas City, Mo.  Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., put a blanket hold on 70 of Obama’s nominations to secure two earmark projects for Alabama.

Paul Volcker, chairman of Obama’s economic advisory board, said last Sunday in an interview with Fareed Zakaria that this was the most dysfunctional government he had seen in his lifetime.

“Let me give you an example that resonates with me and I can generalize it around the government…  We had a new government come in last Januaury in the midst and the aftermath of this great financial crisis, and a clear need to consider reform…  We are [now] more than a year after the inauguration and neither the under-secretary for international or the under-secretary for domestic finance – you don’t have them.  It’s not because people haven’t been put forward.  It took a long time to get them nominated, and an impossible amount of time to get them confirmed.  I mean why?  What’s going on here?

“My memory is when I became under-Secretary of the Treasurey in 1969,  I was in office on Inauguration Day…  Nobody questioned the legitimacy of me being there, and I think I was confirmed within a week.  How can the Treasury effectively function… without the top officials in place that are needed? …What’s the matter with this government that we can’t even get together and get an administration installed.”

Volcker served as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve under Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagon, and is widely credited for helping reduce the 1970′s inflation.