Thomas “Tip” O’Neill

A Horrifying Scenario: A Tea Party Republican Congress And President–What It Would Portend!

Ronald 2 Comments

Any sane, centrist oriented American, who might be disgusted with and frustrated by how the federal government is working these days, and therefore is tempted to join the Tea Party Movement that has taken over the Republican Party in the House of Representatives and in many state governorships, needs to realize what would happen if the Right wing tilt that began in the midterm elections of 2010 went all the way to a dominant Tea Party Republican House of Representatives, Senate, and a President Perry or Bachmann!

The purpose is not to promote horror and fear, but to make people realize, based on the agenda of the Tea Party Movement, what would happen without any barrier in the way, such as one of the legislative bodies or the Presidency being in the hands of the Democrats.

In no special order, the following would be likely:

1. The repeal of the Obama Health Care Plan in its entirety
2. The privatization of Medicare over ten years
3. The cutting of Social Security benefits over time
4. No government assistance for home owners in trouble on their mortgages
5. No federal limits on greenhouse gases, and the elimination of the Environmental Protection Agency, and therefore no limits on strip mining of coal or regulations on oil drilling
6. A “war” on labor unions, and the elimination of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, plus the end of the minimum wage laws
7. The elimination of the Consumer Product Safety Commission and lack of regulation of big business and banking, regarding consumer rights, including the right to lawsuits for malpractice or discrimination
8. The cutting back or elimination of the federal Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, and Health and Human Services, or agencies within those cabinet agencies at the least, as well as the Federal Reserve Board
9. Promotion of anti abortion legislation to end legal abortions
10.Enactment of laws to discriminate against gays, and return “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the military
11. Restrictions on immigration, and deportation of millions of undocumented immigrants
12. Promotion of Christianity in all areas of government institutions and activities
13. Refusal to raise the debt level, and ruthless cutting of government programs to deal with the elderly, the poor, racial minorities, and the disabled instead
14. Further cutting of taxes on the wealthy and corporations
15. Promotion of a right wing based education system in the areas of science and history in the schools
16. End of funding for National Public Radio and Public Broadcasting System.
17. Cutbacks on civil rights enforcement for African Americans, Hispanics and Latinos, and native Americans, and total end of affirmative action programs
18. Growing hostility and confrontations with the Islamic world, as part of the Christian crusade against Muslims
19. Civil liberties limitations in the name of public safety against domestic terrorism, including against social media and public demonstrations of protest against government policies
20. Making the Supreme Court more right wing than it is now, guaranteeing the longevity of conservative Republican Tea Party policies for a generation or more

Can anyone reading this list NOT be terrified at the thought of a Tea Party Republican dominant Congress and President?

This is why it is ESSENTIAL that at the worst, we have a divided Congress as we had under President Ronald Reagan from 1981-1987, with a Democratic House and Republican Senate and Republican President, with the House under Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill preventing the worst excesses of the Reagan agenda, and in the process, actually making Reagan look a lot better in history than he would have without a Democratic House of Representatives.

And based on the present situation we face, it is clear that it would be better to have a Democratic House and Republican Senate, the opposite of what we have now, as the House has greater impact and control over spending and the budget. A Republican Senate, as has occurred five times in the past century, is far less negative and destructive than the present experience with a Republican House!

While hating to think of a Republican Senate, it seems likely now with only four seats needed to gain control, while for the Democrats, regaining 25 seats for a majority in the House, seems more than likely to occur!

So a split government the opposite of what we have now might be the best scenario, if not an all Democratic controlled Congress and President, to avoid the nightmare of a Tea Party Republican dominated government!

The AARP Begins To Concede On Social Security And Medicare: Is That A Wise Move?

Ronald Leave a comment

The American Association For Retired Persons has long been a group unwilling to recognize the long range financing problem of Social Security and Medicare.

Suddenly, the organization has made an about face and is beginning to concede that some changes in the systems set up by Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal and Lyndon B. Johnson and the Great Society in the 1930s and 1960s are essential for long term survival.

Those who are strongly progressive are bitterly opposed to any changes, but it is not a question of what one would wish. Rather, it is of what MUST be done to avoid privatization or destruction of the system, with privatization really much the same as destruction!

The author has stated earlier in this blog, over the past couple of years, of the need for two changes: raise the amount of income taxed for Social Security to be unlimited, just as with Medicare; and raise the retirement and eligibility age for Social Security and also Medicare.

Also, tighter controls over Medicare fraud and payouts MUST be instituted, so that the system will be available for the long term future!

One must recall that Speaker of the House Thomas “Tip” O’Neill of Massachusetts and President Ronald Reagan, who often sparred with each other with their totally differing views of the role of government, came up with an agreement in 1983, which transformed the Social Security system, with very little negative effect. That was to raise the retirement age for those born after 1938 by two months, making it 66 for those born in 1944 and after, and age 67 for those born after 1960.

The change was done with additional taxes on higher incomes up to the range of $106,800 where it now stands, and no one was victimized, because everyone knew that 20 plus years later, the changes would affect them, and they had time to plan for their own retirement in addition to Social Security benefits. And for those who wished to retire earlier, the younger age of 62 was kept, although at lower rate than earlier, but again with a generation of notice as to the changes which were coming.

So, to raise the retirement age for full Social Security to age 68 for people born after 1980 and to age 69 for people born after 1990 is acceptable with plenty of warning. The reality is that people are living longer and staying healthier longer and often working longer, so as long as one prepares ahead of time, and with the earlier retirement age of 62 at lower rate of payment available, there is no reason why such reforms cannot be accomplished.

As far as Medicare age, it could be raised for people born after 1980 to age 66 and those born after 1990 to 67, with provision that those who are in poor health could start at age 64 or 64 with reduced benefits.

This will not please everyone, but such changes will be essential in order to avoid the Republican plan to privatize and or destroy both systems, part of our safety net, that MUST be preserved, but in a rational way!

Former Senator Alan Simpson: Lots Of Common Sense, But Highly Controversial!

Ronald Leave a comment

Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming, who served from 1979 to 1997, has always been known for being blunt, colorful in his language, and highly controversial.

A conservative in his voting in the Senate, Simpson, however, exudes a lot of common sense, even though he antagonizes on a regular basis.

A critic of the American Association Of Retired Persons (AARP), who he accuses of being only a business to make money, rather than an advocate for senior citizens, Simpson headed the President’s Deficit Commission last year, co chairing with Erskine Bowles, Democrat and Bill Clinton advisor.

The two men came up with recommendations to change the Social Security System long term and to pare defense spending by bringing many of our troops home from foreign countries, and they were immediately vilified for their stand.

But what they advocated makes a lot of sense, and their suggestion to raise the retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075 is certainly reasonable, as we already have had one change in age, the 1983 law negotiated between Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill and President Ronald Reagan, raising the retirement age to 66 for those born after 1960.

Simpson has now come out to declare that the Republican Party has a horrible group of candidates, none of which enthuses him, and he was particularly super critical of those, such as Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin and others who use the “social” issues of gay rights and abortion as part of their appeal.

Simpson may be annoying to many, but he has a lot of common sense and practical advice, and should not be ignored!

But it is clear to Simpson and to this author that the GOP is in real trouble, with very few candidates that are legitimate!

Again, as the author contends, the ONLY GOP candidates that have real credentials that could possibly lead to a serious challenge to President Barack Obama are Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, and Tim Pawlenty.

With Romney announcing an exploratory committee today, and Pawlenty hiring his campaign manager, the race is beginning, but too much air is being taken out by the loonies and the crazies, and unless one of these three above named can pull things out of the ditch, the Republican Party will be a joke in 2012!

The 30th Anniversary Of The Attempted Assassination Of Ronald Reagan: A Time To Reconsider Stronger Gun Control Laws!

Ronald 2 Comments

Today, March 30, thirty years ago, after only ten weeks in office, President Ronald Reagan was subjected to an assassination attempt by John Hinckley.

Reagan was seriously wounded, and without the wonders of modern medicine, would have died after what would have been the second shortest term of a President in American history, only surpassed by William Henry Harrison, who died of pneumonia from cold weather conditions on Inauguration Day, exactly one month after he became President in 1841.

Reagan is also the only President ever shot who would recover from his wounds, although former President Theodore Roosevelt, shot while campaigning for election as a Progressive in 1912 after his time in office, also recovered from his wounds.

Reagan’s shooting demonstrated the chaos and anarchy that can happen for a period of time after such a tragic event, with no one really sure who was in charge in the moments after the assassination, due to Vice President George H W Bush traveling overseas at the time, and Secretary of State Alexander Haig claiming he was in charge, when actually Speaker of the House Thomas (Tip) O’Neill technically was next in line, but Bush able to act from afar, not having to be present in the nation to be in charge.

Press Secretary James Brady suffered much greater wounds than Reagan, who fully recovered, although some wonder if he suffered mental damage that led to his later Alzheimers diagnosis after leaving the Presidency. But Brady suffered major brain damage, was paralyzed and forced to spend his life in a wheelchair, and even today, speaks in a distorted manner. But his wife, Sarah, is a true example of a loyal wife, who has stuck through thick and thin with her husband, an example of true love!

The Brady Bill for gun control finally resulted in the Clinton Administration, but was not renewed ten years later during the Bush Administration, and we have seen the dangers of lack of gun control, with the recent attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona in January.

We need President Obama to speak up on this issue in a much more forceful manner, and of course, we know that the National Rifle Association and the Republican Party will fight any attempt at gun control, but this is a moral cause, and the memory today of how we almost lost our 40th President thirty years ago today should sustain us in this fight!

The Leadership Of Nancy Pelosi And Harry Reid: Pilloried But Successful, Nevertheless!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Democratic leaders in the now ended 111th Congress, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, both faced unprecedented attacks by Republicans, conservatives, and much of the news media, as well as the general public which was mostly ignorant of what they were doing, and the pressures they were constantly under.

Never in the history of the nation has Congressional leadership been so pilloried, ridiculed, abused, mistreated, disrespected to the level that these two stalwarts faced daily, as the barrage of criticism was non stop for both of them.

For Harry Reid, in some ways, it was worse, as his opponent for re-election, Sharron Angle, blamed him for everything that was wrong with America, including, it seemed, “original sin”!

But despite that, Reid came back to the Senate for another six year term, after having the burden of Republican filibusters, his campaign problems, and his wife’s serious auto accident. What a set of burdens to carry, and Harry Reid carried them with grace and dignity. A soft spoken man, often underrated, he did much more than anyone thought he could, culminating in the Lame Duck Session triumphs of the past two weeks!

Pelosi, considered in the class of Thomas “Tip” O’Neill and Sam Rayburn as a Speaker of the House, faced vilification, with much of it based on the fact that she was a woman, a strong, outspoken woman, who was not going to take GOP opposition and allow it to dominate the Congressional agenda. More legislation was passed under her than since the mid 1960s, and there were also hundreds of other bills that never made it through the Senate, making her an extremely productive leader!

There is no way around it, but to say, that we should applaud both Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for a job well done, and a Congress which will stand out in history as one of the best ever, despite all the naysaying and negativism that prevails.

Will John Boehner have anywhere near the level of accomplishment and success of Nancy Pelosi with his caucus, with so many Tea Party activist rebels in the group? Don’t bet on it! 🙁

The Debate Over Social Security’s Future And The Fiscal Responsibility and Reform Commission

Ronald Leave a comment

The President’s Fiscal Responsibility and Reform Commission, headed by Erskine Bowles, Chief of Staff for President Bill Clinton, and former Republican Senator Alan Simpson, came up with a statement last week, three weeks before the Commission’s official report on December 1, calling for radical changes in the way the nation looks at the deficit crisis that the country faces in its future.

The immediate reaction was for harsh denunciation by ideological forces on the left and on the right, condemning any suggestions that were made by the joint heads of the Commission.

There is much to be chewed over about the recommendations, but it was surprising that so much attention was paid to the Social Security portion of the recommendations.

Bowles and Simpson both promoted the idea of raising the amount of income taxed for Social Security, which is presently $106,800, to much higher levels, with Medicare, as it is, having no limits on being taxed on incomes. Also, in the year 2050, the age limit would be 68, and in 2075, would rise to 69, in order to keep Social Security solvent.

All of the above makes sense, as one forgets that in 1983, by bipartisan agreement between Republican President Ronald Reagan and Democratic Speaker of the House Thomas”Tip” O’Neill, and the support of the Republican Senate and Democratic House of Representatives, the retirement age for full Social Security was raised for those born after 1940 to age 66, and for those born after 1960 to age 67.

So what is so radical about the proposals set forth by Bowles and Simpson, but one would think it was extremism, based on the reaction by political forces that seem unwilling to compromise! 🙁

This is the problem today, as compared to nearly thirty years ago, that there is no willingness to compromise in any form by either side of the political spectrum! 🙁

Think about what the above reform suggests: So people born after 1980 will have to wait to age 68 to collect full Social Security benefits, and would have notice FORTY years ahead!

And people born after 2005 would have to wait to age 69 to collect full Social Security benefits, and would have notice SEVENTY years ahead!

And realize that age longevity and health have improved, and anyone could still collect lower benefits as early as age 62!

And if the income limit is raised, Social Security will survive for the long run, and be well funded by these changes!

And in no case, can anyone expect that they will survive on Social Security benefits, so part of the plan for life is to SAVE early and responsibly for one’s retirement in the long run!

This plan is NOT extreme! Instead, it is totally responsible and MUST be adopted if Social Security is to prosper in the long run!

It is time to stop ranting and raving on both sides of the political spectrum, and to recognize the validity of these proposals set forth by Bowles and Simpson!

Why The 111th Congress Will Be Seen Positively In American History Despite Election Results!

Ronald Leave a comment

A question that has arisen recently is how to judge the actions of Congress in historical terms.

If a party loses control of Congress after bringing about historic legislation, does that mean it should be regarded as a failure for the party historically?

Many are saying that Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party have failed, because they have lost control of the House of Representatives by the biggest margin since 1938!

Others would, however, say that in the long run of history, the fact of repudiation means nothing, as the health care legislation and other massive changes passed by the 111th Congress will be long lasting, and eventually be seen as positive upon reflection!

Are momentary reactions to leadership always seen as accurate in historical terms? If that were true, then Abraham Lincoln and Harry Truman would still be regarded as among the worst Presidents we have had, instead of being ranked in the top five of our Presidents, with Lincoln first and Truman fifth!

Is the only purpose of holding power to continue to win elections, or to bring about reforms that affect the country long term?

Despite the results of the election, it is still a fact that the present Congress has accomplished more good for the nation than any since 1965-1966, 1933-1934, and 1913-1914, and despite much rhetoric in the past against those Congresses, what they did has had a long range impact on the nation, as this Congress will have, when we look back in future generations, and wonder why there was such short sightedness and anger over the good actions taken in the midst of economic hard times!

History will record that it was the Democratic Party under Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Barack Obama which brought about fundamental change in so many ways, and that it was the Republican Party which stood in the way of reform, but despite later Congressional gains, failed to repeal the reforms that have made America a better place for the middle and lower classes, even as the upper class wealthy condemned what was happening as “socialism”!

So forget all the rhetoric of the campaign, and the pledges to “repeal” what has happened, as it will NOT happen, and the Republican Party will suffer as it attempts to destroy the changes that the Democratic Party has courageously brought about!

Nancy Pelosi may be condemned by many, but she will remembered as the Speaker of the House who historians will record as the path breaking Speaker who will compete with Sam Rayburn and Thomas “Tip” O’Neill as the greatest Speaker in the past one hundred years!

John Boehner, Social Security, And The Long Term Future: A Proposal Of A Solution!

Ronald 1 Comment

House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio has stirred up a controversy with his statements about the future of Social Security!

There is no question that the problem of the future of Social Security is a crucial one, that desperately needs to be dealt with in a serious manner, as it was in 1983!

That year, President Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill negotiated an agreement which governs Social Security ever since then. Despite their political and ideological differences, the two men and their party members recognized the need for Social Security reform.

Sadly, the reforms of 1983 were not enough to solve the problem for the long term, meaning to the end of the 21st century, but it did solve the problem to the mid point of this century. As a result, people born in 1943 and after had to wait to age 66 to receive full benefits, and those born in 1960 and after had to wait until age 67. But these people were given plenty of notice in order to plan their futures, and age 62 remained the minimum age to receive lower Social Security benefits!

Now, John Boehner has proposed that the Social Security age be raised to 70 for those twenty or more years from retirement, meaning those born after 1970. He also suggested that although everyone pays in, that those who are wealthy give up the benefit as they do not need it! He also stated that this sacrifice would help finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan!

The uproar is massive, but Boehner is not totally wrong in what he advocates!

There has long been a reality to recognize the need to raise the retirement age long term. What makes more sense, however, is the following proposal: Raise the retirement age to age 68 for those born in 1970 and after; to age 69 for those born in 1980 and after; and to age 70 for those born in 1990 and after!

This means that people now 40 and under would understand that the age is 68; that people now 30 and under would know that the age is 69; and that people now 20 and under would accept that the age is 70 for full retirement benefits! This gives all these groups plenty of years to plan ahead!

Also, we need to face the facts that age longevity is growing, and now with national health care, it should improve further, so there is no reason that people cannot work to the older ages if they wish! But always, they can retire as early as age 62 at lower benefits!

But beyond this reform, should wealthier people give up their benefit? The answer is NO, as they have contributed to Social Security and should be entitled to the proceeds of their efforts! There should NOT be a means test for Social Security!

But to help finance the long run future of Social Security, the limit of Social Security contributions should be lifted to cover ALL wages, just as is with Medicare! That will supply a much larger amount of funding from the growing percentage of people earning much more than $106,800, the present limit!

Finally, should Social Security be linked to support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Absolutely NO, as the plan should be to withdraw from both wars as soon as possible, as neither has contributed one iota to our security and safety after September 11!

So John Boehner has contributed to the debate over Social Security, but what has been suggested by the author is a much better solution to the long term future of Social Security and its recipients!

We must not have young people thinking that they will see the demise of Social Security, therefore lowering their desire to want to see it continue!

When Social Security was started 75 years ago, it was seen as a contract with the American people to give an element of peace of mind to senior citizens and widows and orphans. It is a social contract that cannot be allowed to be broken!

So the only way to protect and preserve it is do what is suggested above, and also NOT to invest it in the unstable stock market! That is a person’s private choice with other funds, but not with their Social Security contributions!