An Open Letter to Bernie Sanders

An Open Letter to Bernie Sanders

Dear Bernie,

We love you and are working tirelessly to elect you.  We realize it is an upHill battle.  We know you are likely to back Hillary if she wins the nomination.  We respectfully ask that you NOT do this.  As much as we respect you, we Bernie Or Busters will NEVER give her our vote, and our numbers are growing daily.  Doing so means turning our back on the truth and everything we have worked for, everything you represent.

This election has been rigged from its inception.  We have seen huge voter fraud, suppression of votes and vote flipping.  It needs to be investigated by an independent third party, not Clinton backers who have no interest in finding the truth.  It seems apparent from watching the public meetings on the voting issues, that the Democratic elected officials for Hillary are much more interested in covering it up than finding the truth and fixing the fraud, suppression, and the errors.  

We know that Hillary is does not care about Mother Earth and our environment.  From promoting fracking to promoting the use of GMOs and the pesticides that accompany them (and which are killing our honey bees and our soil), she is terrible for the planet.  Global warming is more and more a threat to the earth and our very existence.  With her in charge, I fear nothing will happen with the urgency necessitated by global warming. 

We know what Clinton’s foreign policy looks like.  We have had a taste of it while she was Secretary of State.  A Clinton presidency not only would be a bad for our troops and our country but would likely be a disaster for many countries around the world.  Hillary has been the direct or indirect cause of deaths of innocents in Honduras, Libya and Iraq among other places.  We do not need her policies.  We do not need perpetual war and the human and financial costs associated with it.  She has no empathy for the peoples of the world. We see that with her refusal to even consider the Palestinian people.

We know she lies on the little things:  sniper fire, college loans, immigrant grandparents, $15 minimum wage, being dead broke (with an eight million dollar book advance!) etc.  If she will lie boldly to our faces on the small things, she will definitely do it on the larger things.  Additionally, she withholds and hides information (transcripts, personal server).  One reason behind the personal server seems to have been to avoid the FOIA requests.  Plus, she deleted thousands of e-mails that we now have to take her word  were personal e-mails.  And we are very skeptical of her word. Hillary is anything BUT transparent.   

We want big money out of campaigns and out of party politics.  She is the poster child for big money.   Hillary is beholden to big corporations, special interests and, through her foundation, to countries who harbor terrorists, suppress women and execute gay and lesbians,  countries whose human rights records are abysmal overall.  We wonder why all these countries who received arms deals contribute so much to her foundation?  We wonder if they would continue to contribute large sums if she were not running for president?  The answer seems obvious to us.  We do not feel she will represent We The People. 

Hillary professes to be a feminist and to support other women.  We know this to be untrue because of the way she has handled the women who have accused her husband of sexual harassment, and even rape.  She has chosen to support her husband, a known perjurer, instead of confronting the truth and treating these women with kindness and sympathy.  Instead, she smeared these women and ruined their reputations unfairly while Bill walks around as if nothing has happened.  This is not a woman who supports other women.  Top this off with the fact that the women at the Clinton Foundation also make less than the men.  Significantly less.  Yet she purports to be for equal pay for equal work.

Hillary has never tried to compete on a level playing field during this campaign.  She has tilted the field from the beginning with her relationship with the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Shultz…a bought politician if we have ever seen one.  The DNC is corrupt and that is evidenced by the debate schedule,  the Hillary Victory Fund and the Super Delegates.  She even tilted the field her way with her cozy relationships with corporate America who own the main stream media.  This election has never been fair and she has worked very hard to make sure that it has not.

Lastly, the youth of our country deserve to be heard.  Hillary has insulted them at every turn.  From essentially telling young women that she deserved their vote because she is a woman too, to continually talking down to them and all but ignoring the real issues that impact them, she has paid them a great disservice.   She has been condescending to young black women and even had one who was a paying guest forced out of the event.  Millennials see this and do not approve, nor do we.  Hillary continually treats young people as if they have no substance, which is far from the truth.  They are the future of our country and of the Democratic Party and they can choose to vote and to join the Democrats, or not. 

 In conclusion, we do not trust her.  While we are in agreement with her on a few issues, we are in disagreement with her on the most important ones.  Most of us are not beholden to the Democratic party in any way and will not support her…not even to keep Donald Trump out of the White House.  While we may think he will be bad for America, we are virtually certain that she will. 

The Democratic party is likely to hemorrhage members after this election is over.  It no longer represents us and, if Hillary becomes president, it likely never will.  So, we will write in your name, no matter how futile that may seem if you endorse her, or we will cast our votes for Dr Jill Stein of the Green Party, a party that much better reflects your position on the issues than does the Democratic Party of Hillary Clinton.  But we would rather legitimately vote for you, as an Independent if need be.

Thank you for running and thank you for listening,

Connie Ehlmann

#BernieOrBust

Creating a New Political Party and Renaming the Old Ones

I propose renaming the two major political parties to reflect their modern leanings, including their positions and actions.  Additionally, I propose the creation of a new party because the existing parties need competition.  The two major parties, together, have a monopoly on all major offices in the United States.  We all know that monopolies take advantage of their customers and are frowned upon in a capitalist society.  I would also advocate for some changes to the current political mascots and for the creation of a mascot for the proposed new party.

I propose that the Democratic Party become the Collusionist Party because they collude with big business although they like to pretend that they don’t.  The Collusionists support for the TTP treaty, the Dark Act, and the recent “Monsanto Rider” in the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which takes Monsanto off the hook for liability for poisoning a town, are just three examples that prove that they do collude with (and are sold to) big business. The Collusionists also collude within their party and with local officials.  An example of this is their effort to ram their choice of presidential candidates down the public’s throat.  They do not want the voters, even voters from their party, to decide.  They would prefer to collude, break rules, and commit voting fraud to impose their will on the people.  The donkey as their mascot will not change but will now be referred to as a jackass because everyone knows that 50% of donkeys are jackasses.

The Republicans will become the Obstructionist Party because they are best at obstructing progress. Since they are so good at ignoring the elephant in the room, the elephant mascot will become an ostrich.  Like an ostrich with its head in the sand, pretending to itself that it cannot be seen, Obstructionists like to pretend that they represent the American people instead of big business and big donors.  They also like to pretend things like climate change are not real and that our climate is not impacted by human activity when 99% of scientists agree it is on both counts.   Additionally, they stick their heads in the sand when they think that We The People don’t know that they are not following the Constitution (which they purport to revere) when they do things like refusing to even consider a Supreme Court nominee from a duly elected president.  No matter their rhetoric, their obstructionism in this case is primarily caused by the fact that they do not like the president nominating the candidate, and that the president is not also an Obstructionist.  They want more Obstructionists on the Supreme Court.

For the new party, I propose the moniker the “Truth Party” because America has a great need to hear the truth.  We so rarely hear the truth from either existing party, or from the media.  America has long needed a third major party.  The Truth Party will be the party of truthfulness and integrity.  There will be stringent rules limiting who is allowed into the party and who is not.  Liars and those who accept large campaign contributions from big businesses, the very rich, and Super-PACs need not apply.  Truth Party members will be people whom we know are truly fighting for We The People and for our country.  The Truth Party will adopt as their mascot the owl.  The owl has long been the symbol of wisdom.  The owl also has the ability to not only turn it's head completely around, it can fly high above the land to see and report what is really happening, no matter what the jackasses and ostriches would tell the public.  Owls are also a type of falcon much like our national symbol, the Bald Eagle.  I nominate Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren as the heads of the new Truth Party. Tulsi Gabbard and others like her should also have posts of distinction.

/sarcasm (but not totally)

A response to violence at a Trump rally

This was a response I felt compelled to write on Facebook in response to (yet another) article that popped up in my feed on violence taking place at a Donald Trump rally. It is heartfelt. A link to the article is attached below.

Assault at North Carolina Trump Rally

Trump seems to have become the de facto leader, the rallying force behind the white supremacy movement. He encourages this racism, this division, and this violence. This is NOT the kind of world I want to live in or want my kids to have to live in.

We need to come together as a people, not tear our own country apart. We've seen how well that works not just in history, but by watching the news every night. We see countries being torn apart around the world: Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Ukraine, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, the insurgencies in the Sahel and Nigeria among other places. There is unrest in many other countries as well. Let us not bring it here.

I am ashamed that violence at American political rallies is what other countries are seeing when they watch the news at night or go on the internet. We look like the biggest hypocrites in the world when we expect other countries to behave better than we do.. We sure won't "Make America Great Again" by ripping America apart, by harming, demeaning, and mocking our own citizens. Again, Trump's rhetoric reminds me of Hitler. And, no, I've never said, or felt that way, about any other candidate. Read your history books.

Please read this whole article. If this is okay with you, or if you support this behavior then, please, unfriend me now. I honestly have no desire to stay friends with anyone who supports or condones this. It's only a matter of time before someone gets seriously injured either at one of his rallies or afterward because of Trumps rhetoric and seeming support.

If you are a Christian, I ask you to look into your heart. If God is love, what love do you see here? What love do you find in his words? How can you support this? If it starts with blacks, Hispanics, and Muslims, where does it go next? Peace

An Open Letter to Congress

To All Members of Congress,

I, and many other Americans, are fed up with the blatant inequality in Congress, the corruption employed in the running of Congress, and the corruption involved in the making of our laws.  To quote the singer, Makana, it is time you “do the bidding of the many, not the few.”  The following are my specific complaints, and suggestions for improvements.

 1.    You do not resemble the racial or gender make-up of this country.  Congress is 80 percent white, 80 percent male, and 92 percent Christian.  I realize that, we, the voters have some responsibility in this, but more responsibility lies with the two major parties.  The Democrat and Republican parties need to push for candidates that more closely resemble We The People, instead of choosing to support predominately white male candidates. 

*https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/01/05/the-new-congress-is-80-percent-white-80-percent-male-and-92-percent-christian/

In addition, while you like to talk about how you understand the plight of the middle class and the poor, you are not of us, and it is clear you cannot relate to us.  Your median net worth is $1.03 MILLION while the average American household is just $53,355.  It is no wonder you do not relate to us.  You continue vote yourself raises and cost of living increases when people are struggling and you condemn many to the plight of living on starvation wages.  You cut needed nutrition benefits to the most vulnerable among us, children and seniors to thwart the few who may be taking advantage of the system.  Indeed, punishing the many for the transgressions of the few.  You would not discipline your own children thusly.  You publicly talk about the need to support our veterans, but your actions do not support your words, and you are the only ones with the power to change this.

*  http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/01/12/making-it-rain-members-of-congress-are-mostly-millionaires/

2.   You accept large money donations from large corporations and wealthy individuals which you use to publish ads to convince us to vote for you.  Then you turn your backs on will of the people and vote the interests of your financial backers instead.

After collecting 20 years of data, professors from Princeton and Northwestern Universities, Gilens and Page respectively, used that data to answer the simple question, “Does the government represent the people?”  Below is the result.  They found that the opinion of the people literally does not matter unless you are an “economic elite” when laws are being considered or passed.

“While the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America have a "statistically non-significant impact," (meaning they really don't matter).  Gilens and Page found that economic elites, business interests, and people who can afford lobbyists carry major influence.”  The following graph depicts the likelihood that Congress will represent the will of the people when passing laws versus the reality.

* http://www.upworthy.com/20-years-of-data-reveals-that-congress-doesnt-care-what-you-think

Because purchasing political influence in this country is actually legal, albeit legalized corruption, you get away with it.  Legal does not equal ethical, and you know this but do not seem to care.  This is wrong.  

3.   In many cases, you actually allow lobbyists and industry to write the bills you submit for proposed new laws.  It comes as no surprise that lobbyists and industry write the laws to their own advantage instead of for the advantage of America as a whole.  This is an abdication of your responsibility to the American people and can no longer be tolerated. 

For instance, the largest banks in the world, which we, the taxpayers, bailed out with our hard-earned money, should not be writing a bill which gives it access to public deposit insurance (which we also fund) to bail out their questionable financial activities.  It is astounding that the same people who created the financial mess which ruined people’s lives, robbing them of their homes and jobs, were not imprisoned but go on their merry way, robbing the American people and continuing to reward themselves for their success in getting away with it.

*http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/11/11/243973620/when-lobbyists-literally-write-the-bill

      4.   You attach riders to bills that will or must pass in order to push things through Congress which you or your donors want, but which would fail (or not even come up for a vote) if the issue had to stand on its own merits.  This allows you to circumvent the will of the people time and time again to the tune of millions and billions of dollars.  It all adds up.

PROPOSED CHANGES:

For the above, among other reasons, I am humbly proposing the following changes:

      1.   Work with your your respective parties to better regulate yourselves and choose candidates to run for office who more closely resemble the general electorate.  Please do not tell us that you cannot find suitable candidates.  We know this is untrue.  There are definitely persons of great knowledge and skill in the general public whom you may put forward as candidates if you only look for them and ask them to run.  Please make sure that they also resemble Americans more as a whole and NOT the millionaire class.  We will know if you are trying or not.

      2.   I propose a Constitutional Amendment which bans any person or entity from contributing over $3000 per year to any person running for Congress or to any entity supporting that person, publicly or privately.  No exceptions.  All financing must come from We The People in small donations or via the matching funds provided by the government.  

In addition, pass a bill which requires public media outlets, including those billed as entertainment but which discuss political issues, to give equal time and equal quality of time (days / hours of airing) to all candidates or be ordered to refrain from any coverage of a political nature.  Policy questions asked of one candidate must be the exact same questions asked of all other candidates (no soft-balling or hard-balling to cast some candidates in a good light while others in a bad light).  It is a clear and well known fact that media coverage unduly influences the voters and that media coverage is skewed and unfair.  In its present state, control of the media gives the owners of media outlets a direct and unfair advantage in influencing voters to choose candidates which benefit them financially. This needs to be regulated to remove unfair practices.

      3.   I propose a bill to be passed immediately, which requires members of Congress to abstain from voting on any bill which relates to any person, or entity, who donated more than $10K to their election in any way, form or fashion.  It should also require them to abstain if any family member benefits financially from any person or entity impacted by the bill.

Our judges must recuse themselves from presiding over cases in which they have a financial or personal interest.  Congress should be held to the same standard.  I feel that Congress would do a much better job of representing We The People if they were prohibited from the improper influence of any outside person or entity.

      4.   I propose a Constitutional Amendment which:  (a) requires all bills to be single, one topic bills, and (b) disallows any riders to any bill which are not directly related to the bill or to its implementation.  No exceptions.  I do not believe it was the plan or vision the founding fathers that bills encompass so many disparate items, and it is evident to all that they do so only for the purpose of passing unpopular items.  This will be a hard pill for Congress to swallow, I understand, but if you truly want what is best for the country, you will support this amendment.  I am fairly certain that the States will ratify it.

These are my proposals and I feel they will benefit the American people as a whole.  I respectfully request that Congress examine them and act upon them with haste.

Sincerely,

Connie Ehlmann

Do People Actually Deserve a Living Wage?

Yesterday, I had a former student pose the following question in a comment on Facebook.

Where does the notion come from that people

 who work 40 hours "deserve" a "living wage"?

He went on to share that his first job was at the Meijer’s grocery and department store chain while he attended school. He worked 40 hours per week and made about $8.50 per hour which is over the minimum wage.  He expressed that this was okay because he knew the job required minimal skills.  He indicated that he worked hard for the money but he knew that he needed to work to improve himself so that he could make “more money or a ‘living wage’”.  He clearly knew that even $8.50 per hour was not a living wage.  He went on to state the opinion:

It is not the governments job to make sure life is "fair" 

for complacent people that don’t want to take the initiative 

to work hard in life to earn more money or a ‘living wage.

Because I hear this so frequently from some Republican friends of mine, and because I disagree so entirely, I felt compelled to respond.  Below is my response.  I have made a couple of minor changes for readability or to make my point more understandable.  I was a bit impassioned when I wrote it.

I am always astounded when people feel that others who work hard do not "deserve" to earn a wage they can live on. A "living wage" is the minimum amount a person needs to be paid in order to NOT need public assistance. It is the minimum amount needed by a person to be able to afford to pay for housing, for utilities, and eat from their own efforts, typically while driving an old beater car or using public transportation. It doesn’t mean getting rich. It is simply the price of giving people respect and allowing them to respect themselves.

How did you come to the idea that working people might not be “deserving” of a living wage? You yourself said you worked hard for the money you made at Meijer's. Others doing the same job, but with lesser prospects than you, may be working very hard as well.

Everyone has different levels of skills and talents. Not everyone is cut out to go to college. Consider your high school class. Was everyone in your class intelligent enough (laughing, because I remember your class) to cut it at college…even if really applying themselves? Or, were there some who just weren’t very “book smart”, or who had learning disabilities, maybe some that had more muscle than brains, etc.? Do those people not deserve to make enough money to live on if they work hard 40 hours per week?

And, playing devil’s advocate, say you were right. Suppose everyone was smart enough and worked hard enough to get a college education. Who would then do all the menial jobs which still must be done? Who would work at the restaurants, who would be the hairdressers, who would clerk at all the stores at the mall, who would work at Walmart and Meijer, and cashier at gas stations, and the dry cleaners, etc.. Consider that the following jobs (some skilled) in most states start pay at, or pay just a few cents higher than, minimum wage: emergency medical technicians, pharmacy technicians, nursing assistants, pre-school teachers, teaching assistants, and substitute teachers, cooks, lifeguards, nannies, auto mechanics and the list goes on and on. There are not enough part-time students to do all of these jobs nor are they qualified to do some of these jobs (nor would we want them to). People doing minimum wage jobs will never become rich, even if the rate is raised. They may never have much in their savings accounts, if they even have one. But, in my humble opinion, they should be able to afford to live and eat and respect themselves for earning their own living.

Answering the last part of your question, why should the government be involved and set a minimum wage? Because corporations and the very rich over the history of this country have proven that they will pay slave wages and have unsafe working conditions if they can get away with it. That’s why unions were formed and a big part of the reason why the government established the minimum wage (and workplace protections) in the first place. Someone gets hurt on the job, just fire them and hire someone who is not hurt. I don’t want us to ever go back to that mentality. Want some fascinating reading? Read about the industrial revolution in our country and others. It is both fascinating and appalling.

NOTE: It is often the same people who think others do not “deserve” a living wage who also grudge the working poor housing and nutrition assistance, too, when they cannot afford to live on their minimum wage salaries. I did not take you for someone with so little empathy for your fellow man.

Perhaps my response may seem harsh, but there aren’t enough good paying jobs in this country to go around as it is.  NAFTA and CAFTA and other trade agreements have made it more lucrative for companies to move our solid middle class jobs overseas where they can still get away with paying slave wages and having unsafe working conditions with little penalty.  And there are fewer and fewer good jobs as time goes by and as corporations continue to move jobs to other countries to save a few dollars for their shareholders.  I believe corporations owe something to the very people who helped make them successful and am astounded that the greed of some clouds their vision of what it means to be humane? Increasingly, the new jobs in America are service jobs which pay minimally. Today, there are too many people who have difficulty finding a good paying job even with a college degree.  Condemning all those who are willing to work hard for 40 hours or more per week to living on pay that keeps them in poverty is not only inhumane, it’s un-Christian, and it should be un-American.  We can do better than this.

Does government have a moral responsibility to guarantee everyone a decent standard of living?

I am a former Social Studies / History and Business teacher with minor hours in Economics.  I am also an Independent who has, in most years, voted Republican in national elections.  However, I almost certainly will not be voting Republican this year (unless Hillary gets the nomination…then I’ll have to think about it).  I find myself, strangely, a staunch Sanders supporter.  Before you dismiss me out of hand as going off my rocker, please understand why!  

I saw this posted on a friend’s Facebook wall this week and I find I can agree with this only to a certain extent.  I believe we are responsible for our actions and what we do to ensure a decent standard of living for our family and ourselves.  The government is definitely not responsible for what I do with my opportunities. I am!  However, I must qualify my agreement.  I have to humbly disagree that the government bears no responsibility and that this quote is truthful as an absolute.  When the standard of living for all middle and lower class people (the 95-99%) is being jeopardized by the very rich, large corporations, and the government that should protect us, I believe there IS a moral and ethical responsibility that our government is not living up to.

Many Americans are only now waking up to the fact that Congress members have, for years, been putting forth, and passing, bills which were often not even written by lawmakers for the benefit of society.  Often these bills were written by, or were written with enormous input from, the large corporations they are intended to regulate or tax.  It is no wonder that these laws benefit those same corporations and the very rich and not We The People.  These laws are then pushed through a Congress that has been bought and paid for by lobbying companies who promise: (1) lucrative (and cushy) jobs when the lawmaker is no longer in office, (2) high-paying jobs to lawmakers’ family members, and (3) huge campaign donations.  Would you do all these things without expecting something in return?  These corporations definitely expect something for their money!  These companies, and their lobbyists, are run by, and benefit, the top 1%.  Tax loopholes, corporate welfare, and lax regulations written into law, and the repeal of protective government controls, are primarily what caused our recent recession.  They are what continue to hurt We The People as 95-99% of all new income goes to the top 1%.  

Money is not unlimited.  I believe we are in a situation much like that of the 1920s preceding the Great Depression.  Jobs are disappearing, lower wage jobs constitute most of the new ones available, and most of the money is being held at the top.  Do you remember from history what happens when the lower and middle classes can no longer afford to buy the products produced by companies in the United States?  Consumption goes down, and eventually companies can no longer afford to operate.  When this happens, the companies shut down factories and businesses and even more people lose their jobs and their standard of living.  When these companies close, the restaurants and service industries around them suffer as well.  With the passage of NAFTA and CAFTA, we inserted a new phase into this cycle.  A new phase in which companies, to stimulate consumption, take steps to reduce the price of their goods.  Thus, these companies move production to countries with few or no regulations protecting their workers or the environment in order that Americans, again will be able to consume their, now cheaper, products…and close their factories here.  We are in a slow downward spiral.  Does anyone really believe our economy is actually getting better?  Democrats say it is (Right!!!), I believe it’s a temporary small gain in a long spiral downward.  Further cutting taxes for the corporations is NOT going to fix our economy.  Making it lucrative for the 99% will.  

Meanwhile, we pay more and more for health care.  Meanwhile, the Republicans I once supported want to reduce Social Security and Medicare in order to cut the deficit, they say.  Our seniors have responsibly paid into Social Security for decades, in order to maintain their standard of living in retirement.  Social Security had, and still should have, enough money to pay baby boomers and their aging parents, except that much of the money was “borrowed” with an IOU from the government to the tune of billions during the Bush administration to pay for the Iraq war among other things.  Frequently, Republicans now say that they want to privatize Social Security.  This means that the moneys in it invested in it will be invested the stock market which, if things continue to spiral down, may eventually crash and leave people with little to nothing.  Neither cutting Social Security, nor privatizing it is a good option for those who rely on it or who expect to benefit from what we paid in one day.

The recent recession was brought on as much by Congressional corruption as by Wall Street.  Let me give you a personal recollection:  Where I live, in a very nice community 45 minutes north east of downtown Detroit, at one point one in four houses was for sale or in foreclosure just a few short years ago.  South of where I live, and in the city, this percentage was much higher.  People I knew lost their jobs.  People I knew lost their homes.  They lost their standard of living that they worked so hard to maintain.  The jobs that were available to most of them paid far less that what they had made before.  I taught in the general area made famous by rapper Eminem.  Our district ran just north of 8 Mile Road up past 11 Mile Road.  I taught homeless kids whose families were now split up as some lived with one relative, and others with another.  Some lived in low rent, cheap hotels that offered weekly rates for a single dismal room for a family of 4 or more.  Some moved into the government project housing which was a far different environment than these kids (or their parents) had ever experienced. This was all through no fault of their own.  Many of these people were college educated and many had savings which rapidly depleted as they tried to keep their heads above water.

When the tax dollars people have paid in by working at a job that previously kept their family in a nice house in the nice neighborhood are used to bail out the very industry that placed them where they are.  When no one goes to jail for their corruption.  And when, instead, these same people receive millions of dollars in bonuses, it is hard NOT to blame the government which was complicit in the deal.  It is hard to say that that government holds no moral responsibility at all for your standard of living.

Does the government have a moral responsibility to guarantee everyone a decent standard of living?  No, probably not, but it does have a moral responsibility to ensure that the opportunity is not stolen from hardworking men and women (We The People) by the predatory practices of large corporations, the very rich, and a Congress that is corrupt on both sides of the aisles!

Believe me, I thoroughly researched Bernie Sanders before I decided to back him.  Bernie Sanders is not a communist as many would have us believe.  There is absolutely no way I would support him if he was.  Sanders is a DEMOCRATIC socialist.  There is a HUGE difference.  Democratic socialists believe in capitalism but that capitalism should be tempered by a government that protects its citizens from its excesses.  Sander’s platform is very similar to that of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s in the 1930s.  Some of his policies line up directly with Eisenhower’s, Kennedy’s, and Johnson’s and were once supported by people on both the right and left until the right was co-opted by big business.  Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government.  But, democratic socialists don’t want big corporations and the wealthy to control society either.  Economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect…in other words, We The People.  

Is there no one who remembers our history?  That our founders decided all children, and not just the children of the very rich, should learn to read and write and do arithmetic for the betterment of our country so they established public grammar schools.  That as people become more educated and our society progressed that the government added middle years up to 8^th grade and high school?  During my lifetime (I was born in 1960), publicly funded kindergarten was also added as a requirement in most (44) states and preschool was added in many disadvantaged areas.  I live in one of the six states where kindergarten is not actually required by law (Michigan) but the school districts provide it because they see the advantages.  Why is the natural extension of public funding to colleges and universities as countries around the world have done such a problem for some?

Why is it a problem for people that everyone should have health care?  If you take the amount of money that Americans already pay for healthcare and divide it by the number of citizens we have, we are STILL paying vastly more than any other country on earth…and yet some of our citizens cannot afford health care or medications.  It is ludicrous.  Sanders wants a single payer system and to get rid of the companies that are ripping us off.  He does not want to socialize medicine and healthcare itself.  Some would use the veterans hospitals and administration as an example of government run healthcare.  That is not Sander’s plan at all.  And, I might remind everyone that the VA is woefully underfunded.  Sanders just wants to have a single payer who pays and that can negotiate and set how much.  If that passed, most of us would pay far less than we pay now.  How is that a problem for anyone?|

Why is it a problem that Sanders will raise the income tax for people making over $250K per year and close some loopholes allowing many millionaires and billionaires to pay much less as a percentage than most of us pay?  I don’t know who threw out the 90% tax number but anyone who actually took the time to read Sanders plan would know that all but a very small percentage of us will have no change in income tax rates at all.  Unfortunately, there are some within my own family who would rather publish false, negative and misleading propaganda rather than educate themselves.  The world has my apologies for that but they are adults and, as this is a free country, they can remain as ignorant as they desire.  Their cognitive dissidence is astounding.

Before you write Sanders off because of everything you hear and see on television, please note this.  Massive corporations now own and dominate the U.S. media.  The media is no longer liberal as it once was.  Although they like to throw out the “liberal bias” line, it is mostly no longer truthful.  Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, the very wealthy and the large corporations now control almost everything we see, hear or read.  There is not a single major news network that is not now owned by these corporations and billionaires.  Do you really think they are telling us all the truth…or what they want us to believe?  Some of it is spin and some of it is outright lying.

Readers, before you close your minds to Sanders ideas, please PLEASE do your research as I have done.  Spend several days on the Internet researching and comparing what you learn.  Learn what you are saying "No" to.  The future of country and the future of our children depend upon you.

College Costs and the Shrinking Middle Class

The middle class over the past fifty years has become the primary tax base for the United States, paying over fifty percent of the taxes collected. In the 1940s and 50s, corporations and the very rich paid substantial taxes as well, but tax rates have shrunk for them even as overall costs for the country have risen.  Our country was once the envy of the world for it's strong middle class. But the middle class, from carrying the burden too long while jobs and benefits have been cut and disappeared, is now reaching the breaking point.

Add to the fact that the middle class is carrying more and more of the tax burden, the fact that over the last 40+ years, the middle class has steadily shrunk. In 1970, 62% of households comprised the middle class. Today, that number is just 43%. It's easy to see why this is problematic. Most people agree that the middle class needs to be regrown and it will also help if we have far less people requiring government assistance.  If current trends continue, it spells potential disaster for our country. Something needs to change, and quickly.

Historically, attaining the American dream of breaking into the middle or upper class meant getting an education. But that has become difficult as well due to rising college costs. College costs have increased far faster and higher than even healthcare. College costs from 2003 through 2013 rose 79.5%  Contrast that with medical care which also rose substantially, but still only at a rate of 43.1%. We cannot grow the middle class if the poor and middle class cannot afford to attend college.

It has become much more difficult for students to work their way through college. From ‘The Myth of Working Your Way through College’ published by The Atlantic Monthly Group, “…the average student in 1979 could work 182 hours (a part-time summer job) to pay for a year's tuition. In 2013, it took 991 hours (a full-time job for half the year) to accomplish the same.” Yes, 182 hours vs 991 hours. That's a massive difference. This doesn’t even take into account the costs of room and board.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/10/23/charts-just-how-fast-has-college-tuition-grown

Today, some students opt out before even beginning college. When I was teaching, I saw this happen every year. Students became discouraged because they had no way to finance college without going deeply into debt. What is the point of attending college if you're going to be so deep in debt that ten or twenty years after you graduate, you'll be in no better shape financially if you didn't bother to go at all? Our country has to do something about college costs if we are going to re-grow the middle class.

I propose Bernie Sanders solution of making tuition at public colleges an universities publicly funded, that is, free to all students, (excluding foreign students). Does no one remember our own country's history? When we first established public schools in our nation, for many years they were only elementary schools and those were mainly for the lower and middle classes. The wealthy were expected to pay for their children's educations. Yes, students back then received a grammar school education. Later, we added the upper grades and then, later, high schools became public. When I attended school, Kindergarten was not included. If your child attended Kindergarten back then, it was through a private program such as those provided by churches. Yet, Kindergarten was funded for all students in my home state in my lifetime as were preschool programs for the disadvantaged through federal programs such as Head Start. If we can do these things, why not college, too?

There are so many naysayers in this country when you mention publicly funded education that it's almost like telling someone in the 1800s that you want to build a program to send someone to the moon. It cannot be done, they say. We all know that it CAN be achieved. Many first-world countries now provide free tuition and fees. Iceland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Germany, France and more have free tuition. Even Slovenia and Brazil have free higher education. Are the entire Republican field of presidential candidates and Hillary Clinton telling us that we are not as good, not as capable as these countries? Not as good as Slovenia or Brazil? I refuse to accept that. And you should too. Imagine what our youth could achieve if there were no barriers?!

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/middle-class-not-rich-or-poor-pay-majority-federal-taxes-says-cbo-data

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/ http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/10/23/charts-just-how-fast-has-college-tuition-grown https://smartasset.com/student-loans/countries-with-free-college

Privatization - Code for Someone Is About to Get Screwed

Privatization ~ the transferring an enterprise or industry from the public sector (government) to the private sector (for-profit company). 

Privatization, to me, is just a code word for someone's going to make money on the enterprise (whatever it is) and someone else is going to get screwed.  Privatization, in theory, is done to save the government money.  The rationalization is that private enterprise can do things more cheaply than the government.  I’m sure that, in some instances, this is probably true.  However, in many (most?) cases, the companies that are given the business are ones who have some financial link to the lawmakers who are making the decisions to privatize.  I think, in most instances where you see privatization occur, if you look closely enough and follow the money, you will find corruption.  Family members, friends, and/or colleagues will benefit.  NOT the public.

Two examples:

Private Prisons:  People sent to private prisons tend to stay there months longer than those sent to public prisons. They are often fed food that many of us definitely wouldn't serve in our homes.  And, they frequently don't get the health care that they need. Why? Because the prisons are making money off of the number of prisoners they have and the length of time they have them.  It benefits private prisons to have a high incarceration rate whereas it hurts our country to have such high incarceration rates. Cutting costs (food, health care) helps the private companies that run prisons to pad their bottom line. 

http://time.com/3928184/private-prisons-longer-incarceration/

Charter schools:  Charter schools are the much touted Republican antidote to schools whose students are failing. Charter schools make money off of taxpayers.  Charter schools cherry pick what students they will accept. They don't take problem kids, kids with disabilities or learning disabilities, or who need extra help.  Or, they accept them but only keep them until “count day” when the students are counted for the purpose of receiving their allotment of state money.  After that date, BAM, those students are sent packing back to the public schools. The charter school keeps the money, the public school gets the kid.  As a former teacher, I lived this scenario.  The public school has to take everyone, no exceptions. Even with all this, the kids in charter schools do not fare better than the kids in the public ones even though charter’s have this huge advantage. Who suffers?  Teachers and students do.  Charter school teachers are paid much less (and teachers aren't paid much to begin with), sometimes making half as much as public school teachers.  They often live almost in poverty, and teaching is a tough profession.  Students in public schools suffer because money is drained away from the public schools so fewer resources are available.  Class sizes are forced to increase and there is more disruption.  Teachers are forced to become more involved in crowd control and time is siphoned away from teaching time.  Who wins?  Only the owners or shareholders in the company running the charter schools.

Now, there is a lot of talk that the Republicans want to privatize Social Security. I have heard this from several of the Republican candidates. Who do you think is going to get screwed if this happens? Yep, you guessed.  All of us...the 99%.  It sure as heck won't be Wall Street.  They are going to make a ton off of it.  Make your voice heard. Tell your lawmakers that you are against this before it's too late.

USA - Number 1 in Childhood Poverty

FORGET FOR A MINUTE that this is a Bernie Sanders ad. How is it possible that our mostly Christian nation have allowed us to become No 1 in childhood poverty in the industrialized world? How can either party cut nutrition programs for kids. And how can our President (Democrat or Republican) sign such a bill into law. Kids who don't get enough nutrition, kids who are hungry, have trouble learning and don't live up to their potential. This hurts our entire nation. Also, it drives some to become shoplifters.

When I was teaching, I kept cereal, granola bars, and dried fruit and nuts in my cabinet for hungry kids. I had kids who didn't eat (or ate only one meal a day) on the weekend. In whose mind is this acceptable? I sometimes used to fill a few students' backpacks with cereal and granola bars on Friday. One Saturday morning, I actually took one student to the grocery store and filled a basket with food for the family for the week. He called me Friday night and said they had no food in the house. No, I'm not kidding. And no, I'm not wonderful or special, I sure as heck didn't do it for kudos. I just have a heart like most people do. Also, I did this out of my teachers salary...which our government also kept reducing or freezing the pay. And I was by no means the only teacher doing this. But that's an entirely separate subject.

What is wrong with Americans? What is wrong with our government? What is wrong with the priorities in this country? As a side note, if you are FOR cutting food programs that support kids because you don't want to give a handout to the parents, well, that is just mean and short-sighted. Some of you who support these cuts say you are Pro-Life? Forgive me if I have a hard time believing that.

Democratic Socialism - We Already Have It

DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM:  I don’t know what folks are so scared of?  We ALREADY HAVE democratic socialism:

We have:

1. Local ,state and federally financed roads and interstates
2. Public schools
3. Public parks
4. Police
5. Fire departments
6. United States military:  Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard
7. GI Bill
8. 40 Hour Work Week (due to socialist unions)
9. Minimum Wage
10. Social Security
11. Medicare

Don’t you want to bring down the costs of health care and to have everyone covered?  Everyone will be able to go to get healthcare when they need it and will be able to afford their prescriptions.  Right now, my husband gets his prescriptions filled every month.  His medications cost us over $250 per month.  I do NOT get mine filled; it is $268.  Why his and not mine?  His is a life threatening condition (severe asthma).  Mine is painful, but non-life threatening.  I get to live with the pain and discomfort.  Yes, it sucks, but we don't have over $500 to shell out each month on drugs.

And, what is so different between having publicly financed K-12 and having publicly financed college?  When I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s, Kindergarten wasn’t included.  Schools were just 1-12.  Now, it’s K-12 and we have Head Start and Preschools.  College is a natural extension.  Our young people should not be starting out with crushing debt.

Some History that shows the progress our country has made:

1647:  When the first schools were established in the U.S. there were ONLY elementary schools, no middle or secondary schools.  Attendance wasn’t required.

1785:  Public schools were only for the poor in some places.  The rich were expected to pay for their children. 

1820:  First public high school in Boston.

1827:  Public school is made available to all (Boston).

1851:  First compulsory attendance laws passed in Massachusetts.

1954:  Brown vs. Board of Education – segregated schools are abolished as “inherently unequal”

Let's continue to move forward.

5 Truths You CANNOT Disagree With - But I Do!

I frequently see the following graphic posted on friends Facebook pages and, every time, I think it is too simplistic. I believe it is a tool of the far right to try to justify bad legislation and is actually harmful to the poor in our country.

When you read this list, on the surface, it seems indisputable.  However, these are NOT absolute truths.  There are some things you MUST consider.

1.       You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. 

However, you can require that corporations and the wealthy pay a living wage to those who work for them.  A living wage is hardly what most of us would consider prosperity. Nor will the rich become poor if they are forced to pay decent wages. However, some would have us think this is the case.

It is a common misconception that minimum wage jobs are all fast food entry level jobs mainly for high school kids and college students.  This is simply not true.  Nor are students even available all day or all night to work these jobs.  They are in school.  Laws also regulate when, and how many hours, teenagers can work each week.  Consider this, many jobs that are at, or near, minimum wage require training. Some even requiring college.  The following jobs pay at or near minimum wage in most states:  bank tellers, EMS workers, nursing assistants, department store and grocery store clerks and stockers, many construction jobs, teaching assistants and paraprofessionals, janitors and building cleaners.   Even regional airline pilots, adjunct professors, home health aides, and hairdressers typically only make only slightly more than minimum wage.  These are all jobs that we need.  They are not entry level jobs.  These people deserve a living wage, not a starvation wage.  The top 1% will still be the top 1% even if they are required to pay living wages.  This is NOT legislating the poor into prosperity and the wealthy out of it.  

The minimum wage was originally established in 1938 as part of the Fair Labor Standards Act which, by the way, also established that people had to be paid overtime for work that they did over 40 hours per week.  The rich didn't want to pay that either.  The minimum wage was set as the minimum amount that was necessary to live on for someone working 40 hours per week but it has not been adjusted to stay current with inflation.  Thus, it is clearly no longer a living wage.  Had the minimum wage been tied to inflation, and had cost of living adjustments been made yearly, we might not have many of the problems we have today. 

2.       What one person receives without working for, another must work for without receiving.

                                                                              and

3.       The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from someone else.

Partially true.  Certain things must be shared for the good of society.  Although others receive the benefits of your tax dollars, so do you.  Schools are public, and are paid for by state taxpayers and local homeowners, yet not everyone has children who will attend them and not everyone is a homeowner.  We pay for and share Police, Fire Departments, roads, etc., with our tax dollars, too.  We also pay for prisons, which no one wants, yet I bet it would be hard to find one person who doesn’t think they are necessary.  No one wants to be on the receiving end of that tax benefit!

I submit that a single-payer health care system should be added to the list of these “socialist” programs that we all need.  Otherwise, we must assume that the poor person, or the middle class person, does not deserve health care and deserves to die if they become very ill and cannot afford to pay.  By this standard, only the rich deserve to live, because medical services often cost a lot of money.  Whom would you deny health care to?  One benefit of providing universal health care is that it would actually cost each of us, individually, LESS than we are paying now because everyone who pays taxes would be paying into the system.  Even the poorest among us who are working are paying into Medicare and Social Security and a single payer health care system would work the same way.  The rich could still have swankier hospitals and doctors if they wanted to pay more for them.

Statements like #2 and #3 above are primarily used to attack food stamps and assistance programs for the poor and disabled.  And, no, I don’t disagree that there are those who abuse those programs.  However, a huge number of people who are receiving assistance are also working full or part time.  Look at Walmart workers for example.  They are working, yet not making enough to live on and often receive food stamps.  Would you take the food out of their mouths when they are at least trying to earn an honest living?  Wouldn’t it be better if Walmart paid them a living wage so that they could afford to pay for their own food and they didn’t need a hand.  Studies have shown that, to raise workers’ wages to a living wage, Walmart would only have to raise their prices by about 1 cent. 

4.       You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. 

Actually, in a sense, you can.  It’s simple economics.  Money that is not circulating is not creating jobs and opportunities for others.  We already learned the hard way that “trickle-down economics” does not work.  Money is hoarded at the top.  By taking a fair portion (dividing) from the extremely wealthy and corporations, and using that money to repair and support the infrastructure of our country, jobs and income are created.  Those receiving the income spend it, and more jobs are created (multiplying wealth).  This supports a healthier middle class.

The entire tax burden for supporting the infrastructure of this country should not be, and cannot continue to be, placed on the back of a shrinking middle class.  The middle class is far too small at this point to continue to bear the burden.  When successful corporations receive handouts larger than anything we pay for social programs from the poor, and when a millionaire pays just 15% or less in taxes while someone in the middle class with far less money pays 25% or 28%, there is something fundamentally wrong with the system.  Corporations and the wealthy must, once again, begin to pay their fair share. 

5.       When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. 

It is a sad commentary about our nation if we believe that half of the people are not working to earn a living.  The statistics just do not bear this out.  Most people want jobs, and most people are working.  The unemployment rate would be far higher otherwise.  Of course, there are those who don’t want to work, and they are the ones who, unfortunately, get the press.  It is not a crime, or shameful, to be poor.  What the statistics do bear out is that the middle class, who pay the bulk of the taxes, is shrinking.  Thus, the burden on them is becoming greater and greater and this cannot continue indefinitely.  We are at, or near, the breaking point.

Many of the financial problems our country is experiencing now can be traced back to reducing the income tax on corporations to the point where highly profitable corporations now receive tax money back from the taxpayers instead of paying taxes.  And the wealthy now pay less, percentage-wise, than the middle class.  The bills that made this happen were bought and paid for by the wealthy and corporations and were written into law by our corrupt corporate-owned Congress.  Additionally, American companies have moved jobs overseas, further eroding the middle class.  And, the minimum wage is no longer a living wage so more people need assistance.   

Our government used to protect our industry by use of tariffs to keep our companies competitive with foreign goods.  For a foreign company to gain a foothold, it had to either provide superior goods, or lesser goods, but for a lesser price.  Now, everything is cheap and throw-away.  The Free Trade Agreements have benefited foreigners, corporate executives, and everyone BUT the average American.

No More Politics as Usual

In the latest Gallup Poll as of January 6-10, of this year, Congress has a whopping (NOT!) 16% approval rating. A full eighty percent (80%) think Congress is doing a BAD job. 4% don't have an opinion. But let's not wring our hands and shake our heads. Y’all, this is an election year. We CAN do something about this dismal statistic. In fact, this year we have the power to do more than at any other time in the next four years.

When you go to the polls for the primaries and then the general elections, DON'T blame everyone BUT your own Congressman or Senator. DON'T VOTE STATUS QUO! That's what always seems to happen. We blame every other state’s politicians and not our own. When we vote the same folks back into office over and over again, then NOTHING CHANGES. More than likely, your senators and congressmen/women are part of the problem just like ours in Michigan are. I have been following ours here in Michigan and I KNOW they are part of the problem. I've watched some (one Democrat in particular) slowly turn against the very people who voted them in and seen them support things that will hurt our people and our country. They have lost my support. I'm talking Democrats AND Republicans. (I'm an independent and I vote for the person, not the party.)

Please, take some time and do some homework on your own representatives and senators. See how much they are worth ($$$) and then check their voting records. Are they ordinary Americans or millionaires? Do they really understand the lives of ordinary Americans? More importantly, do they care? Especially look into these areas: Do they want to gut Social Security? Do they vote to support our Veterans? Do they vote to keep our land, air and water healthy? Are they trying to sell OUR beautiful National Parks out from under us? Who do their votes benefit? Is it “We The People” or Wall Street and big corporations and the wealthy? Do they want to regulate Wall Street and the big banks or do they not? Do they want corporations to pay taxes or do they want the shrinking middle class to cover more and more of the burden? What are their ties to companies that sell to our military? You might be surprised (or not).

Don't rely on the politicians' own glossy pamphlets to tell you who and what they really are. You know the ones, the pamphlets they send out every election season in the mail that are all professionally done and have shiny happy pictures and that say what wonderful people they are and how much they have done for you. (Really!!!) After all THEY wrote them to SELL YOU the story of how well they are representing you. Dig a little deeper. Their rhetoric is just that. They can say anything they want. Their VOTES tell the TRUE story.

Don't vote for the same old, same old. As the saying goes, "If you keep using the same ingredients, you're gonna bake the same old cake." We all know that cake is old, dry, and not very nourishing for anyone but the top .01%. WE, TOGETHER, have the power. For once, let's not waste it. Let's actually USE our votes to send the message to Congress that the same old same old isn't good enough anymore. If there are just two candidates this year, I'm voting against the incumbent. I don't care what the political party is I'm voting out, or what the party I have to vote in is. LOL We need to shake 'em up!!! Believe me, they won't go up there an sell us out if they know we're willing to throw them out so easily.

I, personally, think the only way to effect REAL change is to VOTE THE INCUMBENTS OUT! Get some new blood up there in Washington, someone who doesn't think, "We can't do that!" and who is stubbornly against anything that doesn't give them 100% of what they want. With that attitude, we have stalemate...which is exactly what we have. Instead, we need some go-getters. Not these bought-off yahoos that are NOT voting in the best interest of the 99%. Let's get some folks who are willing to work together...you know, folks who know how to come together and compromise and shake hands at the end of the day. Think about it. Nothing would send a message better than a MASS turnover and the new folks would KNOW they had been sent to Congress to make changes.

Oh, and lastly, PLEASE keep your heart open and stay away from any politician of any party who peddles hate and fear or who isn't willing to take on the corporations and the top 1%.

And that, folks, is what I REALLY think! I'm a radical, I know. LOL If you took the time to read all of this, I thank you and you're a true friend. We can still be friends even if you don't agree with me. grin emoticon

P.S. There are a few of my friends whom I think should consider running for public office. I think this because their posts show that they actually do their homework, and have true considered opinions on things...and I don't even agree with them all the time. LOL! But they are highly intelligent, stand-up folks who would do a fine job for We The People: Jay Cherry, Mary Steinberg, David Gantt Jr. Who better than REAL people to represent US!

I'm Connie Ehlmann and I approve this message!