Dick Durbin

On a recent Meet the Press face-off between Democrats and Republicans, a politician claimed we urgently need to cut government spending. He embraced a plan to slash vital government programs and gut retirement security, while actually cutting taxes for the rich. The only tax hikes in his plan were targeted toward the already-devastated middle class. more »

More »»

This morning I appeared on KPFK's Uprising program with Sonali Kolhatkar to discuss the "payroll tax holiday" debate now going in the Senate. more »

More »»

Yesterday Thom Hartmann and I discussed the proposal to extend and expand what Democrats have called the 'payroll tax holiday.' (Video is below.) There are no heroes in this debate, but there are certainly villains. There are several different ways this could end - and most of them aren't good.

By proposing to expand and extend this 'holiday,' Democrats have bypassed more efficient ways to help the economy, and have once again endangered Social Security. And by demanding tax breaks for millionaires while blocking them for the middle class, Republicans have once again demonstrated their willingness to blow up the economy for self-serving purposes.

The choice is either to back the highly flawed Democratic proposal or let the Republicans block it, which would plunge the economy into an even deeper hole than it's in right now. Imperfect as the proposal is, the alternative is unacceptable. If it failed the already-wounded economy would suffer even more, and millions of jobless Americans would be left without the unemployment insurance they need. more »

More »»

On Wednesday forty radicals in the United States Senate took an extremist position by voting to end Medicare.

That simple sentence will be challenged by a lot of political and media people. They'll say I don't understand the popular mood, and that I'm applying my own values to Wednesday's vote. But I can prove this statement is true, using only a dictionary and some polling data. They'll even say they didn't vote to end Medicare! But that can be proved, too.

When 40% of the Senate votes for a policy that's opposed by 78% of the public, it suggests that one of our political parties has been profoundly radicalized. In a two-party system, that's a serious challenge for democracy.

A radical, extremist vote

Rep. Paul Ryan's budget proposal was rejected by 57-40. All the Senate's Democrats voted against it, and so did Republican Senators Rand Paul, Olympia Snowe, Scott Brown, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski. On Medicare at least, these five Republicans did not reveal themselves to be radicals or extremists on Wednesday. Good for them.

Let's be clear: Americans in all walks of life, including politics, have every right to hold radical or extremist views. Some of our best and noblest ideas have come from radicals. The abolition of slavery, a woman's right to vote, financial security for elderly and disabled Americans -- each was considered a radical or extreme position at some point in history.

More »»

Historians of the future may one day write that the death of the New Deal began this year. If so, it goes without saying that corrupt forces like the Chamber of Commerce will be a big part of the story. So will billionaire ideologues like Pete Peterson, and greedy politicians looking for a handout. Unfortunately, so will a lot of reasonable people whose biggest problem is that they're temperamentally inclined toward being reasonable and moderate - even when circumstances don't warrant it.

The problem's become so severe that it will take more than one day to address it. It will require criticizing people that I respect, and who in some cases I've met and like personally. A great many moderately-minded individuals seem to have been lulled into accepting a Washington consensus in which the "new normal" means accepting that only remaining choice is between a radical assault on the middle class and a moderately radical assault on the middle class. In that world, a "judicious" assessment of Republican radicalism can easily turn into accommodationism. That can lead in turn to bad deals that create needless suffering.

More »»

It's almost like they had a plan. The right-wing has been trying to dismantle the New Deal since its inception, but after decades of failure it's found a new path to success. They're already persuaded quite a few Democrats to support the first steps toward dismantling Medicare and Social Security. They've also convinced a lot of journalists to ignore detailed economic analyses, and accept the ideological platforms of the far right as "moderate" and "reasonable."

How do you do it? How do you sell a nation on dismantling its most popular programs at a time when they're more needed than ever? How do you convince an entire class of people - the middle class - to voluntarily surrender their health and financial security to benefit those who are far wealthier than they are?

Well, we found it! We found the twenty-year-old PowerPoint presentation that outlines the whole thing - the radical agenda, and the 12-point marketing plan that made it possible. Here it is, available to the public for the first time anywhere: more »

More »»

It should have been the lead story from coast to coast: A bipartisan panel of senators, including some of that body's most conservative members, released a damning report that slammed bankers, regulators and ratings agencies—and they made it clear that they'd like to see warrants issued against the CEO of Goldman Sachs and other financial executives.

This report was endorsed by all of its Republican members, including conservative co-chair Tom Coburn and Tea Party Senator Rand Paul. Hey, editors, how's this for a headline? "Libs and Tea Party Senators demand: 'Bring me the head of Goldman Sachs.'"

Now that's what I call news!

The media responded with a collective yawn.

Last week also saw yet more coverage of the relentlessly publicity-grubbing "Gang of Six." It's hard to imagine a more stale story. The Gang's just the latest in a series of right-leaning groups that throw a few persuadable Democrats in with Republicans, label them 'bipartisan' or even 'centrist,' then start issuing calls for a conservative agenda that cuts entitlements and keeps taxes low for the wealthy. We've seen that story a thousand times, both in general and specifically about these six senators. What's more, the Democratic Gang members have been bypassed by President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, so a few more interviews with this over-exposed crowd aren't exactly "man bites dog" stuff.

More »»

We're working with some of the best state-level bloggers from around the country to help us tell the truth about key economic and social policy issues, and to draw the contrast between the rhetoric of the right and the progressive alternative. Please visit our CAF State Blogger Network page to see more. more »

More »»

George Orwell would be proud. The latest Washington catchphrase deserves a place of honor in the 1984 lexicon, right between "War Is Peace" and "Love Is Hate." It's a virus of the language that's spreading faster than the stomach flu.

"The President's budget punts on entitlement reform," reads a statement by House Republicans. "Our budget will lead where the President has failed, and it will include real entitlement reforms." "You have to do entitlement reforms if you are serious about this budget," says Rep. Paul Ryan.

Reality check: Nobody's proposing 'entitlement reform.' That term is a cloaking device for some very ugly intentions. It's a meaningless manufactured phrase cooked up by some highly-paid consultant, and it diminishes the sum total of human understanding every time it's used. The phrase is a euphemism for deep cuts to programs that are vital and even life-saving for millions of elderly and poor people, but it's politically unpalatable to say that. So it became necessary to come up with yet another cognition-killing term designed to numb us from the human toll of our political actions. "Entitlement reform" is the new "collateral damage."

More »»

Slasher-Movie Economics

A vicious, savage, axe-wielding killer stalks the political landscape, yearning to draw blood, slash victims, and amputate limbs. That's not my description of austerity economics - that's how its fans talk about it.

"Austerity" is defined as "the trait of great self-denial (especially refraining from worldly pleasures)." Austerity economics, on the other hand, is the practice of denying others things that they need while at the same time ensuring your own continued privilege and comfort. This practice is usually accompanied by a round of self-congratulation for showing such courage and discipline. Its usually sinister spell has seduced Republicans into aiding and abetting felons with budget cuts that would make them de facto accomplices to a thousand crimes. And what the president's about to do will literally send chills down a million spines.

Anne Applebaum nearly worked herself into a case of the vapors when Austerians got elected in Great Britain, when she palpitatingly repeated the phrases used by journalists there to describe the new government's budget. The new British leaders, said journalists, were "axe-wielders" who were inflicting "vicious," "savage," and "swingeing (sic) cuts." (Is that what "bangers and mash" really means?)

More »»