A Common Sense Budget: The People's Budget

Reps. Maxine Waters, Mazie Hirono (podium) and Raul Grijalva introducing The People's Budget at the Capitol

Politicians like to support their theory's with poll results. If you look at the polls, the public's message is clear: protect Medicare and Social Security, spend less on the military, and raise taxes on the wealthy. And while we're at it, let's tax the Wall Street speculators who wrecked our economy.

If you listen to the pundits and TV commentators, the federal budget problem has a simple solution: cuts, cuts, and more cuts. They cheer politicians for making "tough choices," which usually entails taking money away from schools, stiffing public workers, and telling the poor and the elderly they need to make do with even less. Tough choices, indeed — but for whom?

Main Stream Media does not reflect Main Street.

But if you look at the newspapers or your TV screen, those ideas are rarely, if ever, part of the budget debate. Is there no one in Washington who is sticking up for what the majority of the public wants?

But wait.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus, which includes 74 House Democrats and Sen. Bernie Sanders, released an alternative budget blueprint back in April. This "People's Budget" would achieve a better balance by taxing the wealthy, reining in runaway military spending, and protecting the New Deal social safety net — just what people tell pollsters that they want

So why is it that the People's Budget isn't being discussed?

There's a good chance you've never heard about this part of the budget debate, though there's been a mountain of media coverage of the budget mess — thousands of articles and television programs. If you've paid attention to any of it, you're probably well acquainted with Rep. Paul Ryan. The Wisconsin Republican has "jet black hair and a touch of Eagle Scout to him," according to one magazine profile. The New York Times told readers about his "piercing blue eyes." It's not just his looks that impress the media. His budget plan, which pairs yet more big tax breaks for the rich with spending cuts for everyone else, is constantly touted as being "bold" and "serious."

And the People's Budget? Well, it's not even mentioned. There were no hard news stories about in the big papers. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote about the press conference unveiling the People's Budget only to mock it— right down to poking fun at one lawmaker's tie.

Here's a general overview of the People's Budget:

• Reduces unemployment—and thus the deficit—through extensive investment in infrastructure, clean energy, transportation and education;
  
• Ends almost all the Bush tax cuts, creates new tax brackets for millionaires and new fees on Wall Street;
  
• Full American military withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, along with other reductions in military spending;
  
• Ends subsidies for non-renewable energy;
  
• Lowers health care costs through a public option and negotiating Rx payments with pharmaceutical companies;
  
• Raises the taxable maximum on Social Security.

That is a very quick summary, and full details can be read here. The Economic Policy Institute has a full analysis here. At the press conference introducing the budget, economist Jeffrey Sachs praised it as the "only budget that makes sense" and "a lot more serious than everything else on the table." He's also previously written about The People's Budget on the Huffington Post.

Partisan Politics

The budget debate is locked up in a partisan stalemate. That makes it as good a time as any to tell the people about the People's Budget. Most newspapers and TV networks aren't doing that. And when you look at who stands to gain — and who stands to lose — it's no mystery why corporate-owned media are keeping us in the dark.

The budget mess is covered daily by the media. It is time to let the public know about the People's Budget.

For a discussion and analysis of the People's Budget, WATCH:

One issue that 'progressives' and 'right-wingers' seem to agree on is the way in which the Obama Administration has handled, or to be more direct, mishandled the banking industry.

John Judis at the New Republic thinks that Obama just doesn't get it when it comes to understanding the issues of Wall Street and Main Street.

The excerpts that Bloomberg published Wednesday from its interview with Barack Obama provoked some indignation from Simon Johnson, Paul Krugman, and others, but the full interview, published yesterday morning by Bloomberg BusinessWeek, deserves a few additional howls. It shows the degree to which Obama not only doesn’t understand but, on a deeper level, also doesn’t share the outrage many Americans—from left-wing bloggers to right-wing tea-partiers—feel toward the Wall Street CEOs and traders who have made off like bandits during the financial crisis they helped bring about.

It’s not the substance of what Obama says—he doesn’t back off on financial regulation or health care reform. It’s his tone, his emphases, and where he allows his sympathies to fall. [...]

Overall, the impression the interview leaves is of a president surprisingly oblivious to the fury that is sweeping the nation. Obama has occasionally attempted to speak to it, or read speeches that address it. But this interview shows that, in the choice between Main Street and Wall Street, his natural inclinations lie more toward one side—and it ain’t Main Street.

Matthew Rothschild at The Progressive points out that Obama and his advisers have failed to embrace progressive solutions to the banking and economic crisis. This has allowed similar criticism from both sides of the political spectrum.

Barack Obama and many Democrats have been way too timid in going after big business. In fact, the coziness of Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke and Larry Summers with the Wall Street bankers has left Obama wide open for this kind of criticism.

A few Democratic populists have recognized this, most notably Marcy Kaptur, Dennis Kucinich, and Bernie Sanders, but Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod and Obama himself have been reluctant to embrace progressive populism.

Sanders has called for some of the Wall Street wheeler-dealers to go to jail, and Sarah Palin suggested the same thing on Saturday.

The bank bailout is killing Obama. All Obama could muster in his State of the Union was the comment, “If there's one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, it's that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. You hated it.”

But Obama voted for the bailout when he was a Senator, and then expanded it when he was President.

It is a cement block tied around his ankles.

Both sides are criticizing Obama's handling of the banking and economic crisis. Both sides have answers on how to 'untie' the mess. But don't expect any agreement on the solution.

No More Obstruction, Pass Economic Recovery NOW

From Campaign For America's Future:

House and Senate leaders have crafted a big and bold economic recovery bill that will create and save 3.5 million jobs in clean energy, infrastructure, health care and education. But Sen. Mitch McConnell is still playing the old conservative game of distort and delay. He even tried to claim that "We know for sure that the big spending programs of the New Deal did not work."

Conservatives don't know history, don't know how to create jobs, and don’t have any businessesobstructing action.

Go to http://ga3.org/campaign/econ_recovery_now to email your congress people, and tell them "Ditch Mitch". Pass BIG and BOLD economic recovery NOW!”

After that, call your House and Senate representatives to put maximum pressure on Congress. You can call the main congressional switchboard toll-free at 1-866-544-7573.

If you’re having difficulty getting through, try calling your representatives’ offices directly, either in Washington or at home. Go to House.gov and Senate.gov for more information.