Crucial Conversation Luncheon-Dean Baker

September 23rd, 2008

NC Policy Watch and the NC Justice Center invite you to a very special Crucial Conversation Luncheon featuring nationally recognized economist, author, and commentator

 Dr. Dean Baker, co-director of the Washington, DC-based Center for Economic and Policy Research.

"America after Bush: What the next president must do to build an economy that works for all." 

 

When: Tuesday, September 23.                                                                                                Registration opens  at 11:30
Discussion begins 12 noon.

Where: The N.C. Association of Educators (NCAE) Building, 700 S. Salisbury Street in downtown Raleigh. Click here for directions.

Cost: $10 - includes a box lunch

Space is limited; Pre-registration required by September 22.

Dean Baker is one of the nation's most visible, prolific and coherent voices for progressive economic policy change. He has authored and co-authored dozens of books and articles, including The United States Since 1980 (Cambridge University Press, 2007); The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer (Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2006); and Social Security: The Phony Crisis (with Mark Weisbrot), (University of Chicago Press, 1999).

Baker has worked as a consultant for the World Bank, the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress, and the OECD's Trade Union Advisory Council. His columns have appeared in many major media outlets including the Atlantic Monthly, the Washington Post, and the London Financial Times. He is frequently cited in economics reporting in major media outlets, including the New York Times, Washington Post, CNBC and National Public Radio and writes on a daily basis at Beat the Press, a blog hosted by the American Prospect.

Click here to register for this event





Email This Article

Obama steers a steady course

September 6th, 2008

Palin choice may inadvertently help Democratic nominee pass his final test

There's an old saying in the legal profession (usually delivered by law professors to their first year classes with a twinkle in their eye) that goes like this:

"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. And if neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound on the table."

Although he never practiced law or, apparently ever paid much attention in school, this appears to be a lesson that John McCain absorbed well at some point in his life. One week into the Sarah Palin era, one thing is unmistakably clear: the Arizona senator believes that pounding on the table is his best and only hope to win the affections of a majority of voters.

To heck with sober policy debates about health care, the national debt and the Geneva Convention or high-minded dialogue about geopolitical strategy. A hard look at the polls in states that McCain simply must have (like North Carolina, Missouri and Michigan) has clearly convinced the Republican nominee that the only way for him to win is to rev up the most ardent and emotional part of the conservative base - religious conservatives who have, at times, been willing to vote against their own economic and personal well-being based on emotional appeals over social issues.

And since, given his own unpopularity with the far right, McCain was literally incapable of raising his fist to do the table pounding himself, he did the next best thing - he found someone to pound the table for him. In an election that all of his advisors had convinced him was about the country's overriding desire for change, McCain chose the only available course to someone whose policy promises are virtually indistinguishable from the incumbent with record low approval marks: he found someone who would help him create the impression of change - even if it was only an impression.

So far, the move has worked out about as well as McCain could have hoped. The news media, faced with the most obscure running mate since Spiro Agnew (and the first since Agnew to have literally zero experience in national affairs) has engaged in a week long spasm of 24/7 Palin-mania as it has tried to compress the ordinary political vetting that national political figures must endure into a few days. This, in turn, has revved up the social conservative troops even more as it has allowed McCain operatives to assail the media as "elitist" for having the temerity to have raised questions about Palin's razor-thin resume.

Not taking the bait

The only flaw in the McCain strategy that has emerged thus far (and it is likely a big one) has been in its failure to provoke the desired response from his opponent. In addition to inflaming the jury (or, in this case, the base), the second goal of the "pound on the table" strategy is to sucker one's opponent to get down in the muck: to get him or her to engage in an "oh yeah, sez who?" debate over irrelevancies that will cause the jury (voters) to forget what's really at issue and at-stake.

To the credit of the Obama, Joe Biden, and their advisors, however, the Democratic team seems smarter than that. Maybe it's because both men are sharp lawyers and maybe it's just good political instincts, but whatever the case both seem to have realized that their political base is already energized. The events of the past eight years combined with even a few days of the McCain/Palin convention were enough to send progressives throughout the country diving for their check books and credit cards. 

Perhaps even more importantly, both Obama and Biden seem to grasp intuitively that the main challenge to their winning in November is the concern amongst some swing voters (like the surprisingly large number in North Carolina), that Obama is somehow untested and incapable of handling the heat of the Oval Office. Fortunately, for their candidacy, it does not seem likely that anyone can sucker Obama into getting off his game and revealing some kind of lack of discipline. Anyone who doubts this should force themselves to check out the Illinois senator's unflappable appearance with far right talk show screamer, Bill O'Reilly

Like veteran courtroom lawyers at their best who know when to spur the jury's emotions and when to return to a plainspoken restatement of the facts and the law, Obama and Biden have resisted the temptation to take the bait thrown out by McCain in the form of Sarah Palin. Both have soberly praised the Alaska governor for her personal story and then turned the discussion back on McCain and his support for Bush - as if to say "Counselor, that's a very interesting theory you've propounded, but what does it have to do with the issue before the court?"

This is not to say that either will or should ignore Palin's impending rants. Progressive voters will expect their candidates not to be wallflowers who cede the debate over important social issues.

Neither should the two men allow themselves to be called names or have their personal integrity impugned (as Palin has already tried with her assault on Obama's early years as a community organizer). This was one of John Kerry's key mistakes during the whole "swift boat" fiasco.

Again, however, Obama and Biden seem to get this. Obama's responses to the attacks on him that Palin read from a teleprompter the other night (in which he has noted that the other side wants to make the election about him and that he wants to make it about voters and their lives) have been sharp and appropriately barbed, but full of toughness and confidence.

Looking ahead

As voters prepare to cast their votes in the weeks ahead (mail-in voting in North Carolina starts in just a few days!) it appears that McCain's last, creative, hardball gambit may, inadvertently prove to be the thing that pushes Barack Obama over the finish line.

After two years in the crucible of national presidential politics, the Democratic nominee has demonstrated to voters that he is uncommonly intelligent, thoughtful and inspiring. The only thing he has not had the opportunity to fully convince them of is his ability to take a punch from someone who will simply try to goad him into an emotional, bare-knuckled political brawl.    

Now, with the nomination of Sarah Palin, Obama has the chance. And thus far, it appears that the Obama team is steering a calm, steady and forceful course - exactly what they will need to do to get elected and to have a successful presidency.  





Email This Article

The Follies

September 5th, 2008

An agenda to ignore

Raleigh's leading market fundamentalist think tank has come up with another document that policymakers ought to ignore, unless they want to read it to learn what not to do. It is the group's biennial policy agenda and virtually every section is filled with all sorts of questionable ideas.

Rob Schofield of NC Policy Watch explores the ramifications of the recommendations about Medicaid in his latest Weekly Briefing.

The plan would eliminate Smart Start, the widely praised and recognized early childhood program launched by Governor Jim Hunt, as well at More at Four, Governor Mike Easley's initiative to help at-risk kids.  There's a call to sell the state ports, abandon any notion of public transit, and set up a voucher system for education, which would destroy public schools.

The "Agenda for Disaster 2008" would ignore the proposals from the state's commission on climate change because the market fundamentalists don't believe there's a problem. The agenda would stop requiring health insurance companies to cover mammograms and mental health treatment and end Health Choice, the state's program that provides health care for children in low-income families.

Other lowlights include a recommendation to resist smart growth planning initiatives because the think tankers believe they somehow increase crime, a call to abandon efforts to address the role of big money in elections, and of course shrink government and cut taxes, cut taxes, cut taxes, no matter the affect on people's live in North Carolina.

The anti-government and tax suggestions come despite a chart included in the report that shows that state and local taxes combined are at exactly the same level as they were in 1988 as a percentage of personal income.

It's quite a report, taken as a whole. The solution to almost every problem facing the state is to programs that help poor and working poor families, including their children, and turning virtually everything over to the perfect and holy free market, presumably to go back to the days when there was no safety net or universal education and no thought about the effect on the environment of decisions made by corporations.

The report is actually called "Agenda 2008," but that must be a typo. It was supposed to be "Agenda 1908."

Roving into hypocrisy

Finally, the most interesting quote of the week comes from the national frenzy of John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Republican talking heads have been furiously defending her against charges that she is far too inexperienced to be vice-president as she has been governor for less than two years and before that was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a town of less than 10,000 people.

Karl Rove is among the defenders of Palin and repeatedly brushes off suggestions that she lacks the experience to be on the ticket. But progressive blogs and programs like the Daily Show are reminding voters what Rove said just a few weeks ago on Face the Nation  about the possibility of Barack Obama selecting Virginia Governor Tim Kaine as his running mate.

"With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he's been a governor for three years…he was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it's smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It's not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I'm really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?"

Does that mean McCain is not concerned about Palin being capable of being president? If Richmond with a population of 200,000 people is the 105th largest city in the country, wonder where Wasilla, Alaska ranks in population?





Email This Article

Profit or care for the mentally ill

September 5th, 2008


Click here to listen.





Email This Article

The politics of Golden Leaf

September 5th, 2008


Click here to listen.





Email This Article

Senator backs less business regulation

September 5th, 2008

 

By Daniel Goldberg : The Herald-Sun
dgoldberg@heraldsun.com
Sep 5, 2008

PITTSBORO — State and federal governments can boost small businesses in counties like Chatham by getting out of the way, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole told a group of business and community college representatives Thursday.

"There's too much excessive regulation of small business that is strangling small business," Dole said during an early afternoon stop at Central Carolina Community College to speak with members of the Chatham County United Chamber of Commerce. During a question and answer period that lasted nearly 45 minutes, Dole supported greater tax breaks for manufacturers, elimination of the estate tax and giving the go-ahead to oil drilling off the North Carolina coast.

"I think anything we can do to make it a pro-growth climate … ," Dole said in describing her philosophy for supporting entrepreneurial ventures in Chatham.

Chamber leaders questioned the Republican first-term senator for positions on energy alternatives and immigration policy. Dole faces Democratic challenger Kay Hagan in the November general election.

Siler City resident David Poe cited the western part of the county as a microcosm of the national immigration debate, calling the growing Hispanic population a vital contributor to the county's schools and work force. (more…)





Email This Article

Drunken Driving

September 5th, 2008

Published: September 5, 2008

The grief of one Forsyth County family over the deaths of two of its sons in what police suspect was an alcohol-related automobile wreck is repeated, unfortunately, all too often in North Carolina. It's time for our state leaders to renew the battle against drunken driving.

As Journal reporter Paul Garber

poignantly conveyed, the mother of 15-year-old Noe and 17-year-old Sergio Marroquin was inconsolable when interviewed after the Tuesday night wreck, which also killed two other young men. But her story is becoming far too common here. The number of North Carolina families that lost loved ones in alcohol-related traffic deaths jumped last year.

North Carolina had the biggest percentage increase in alcohol-fueled wrecks in the nation — 15.7 percent. In 2006, 421 people died in such wrecks. In 2007, 487. And, while this death count dropped in 32 states, it also rose in two of our neighboring states, Virginia and South Carolina. (more…)





Email This Article

Easley budget adviser Gerlach going to Golden LEAF

September 5th, 2008

ROCKY MOUNT, N.C. - Gov. Mike Easley's longtime chief budget adviser is the new president of a foundation

that doles out some of North Carolina's tobacco settlement money.

The Golden LEAF Foundation's board chose Dan Gerlach on Thursday to succeed the retiring Valeria Lee. The foundation receives half of the state's settlement money and makes grants to help tobacco-dependent communities and other economically distressed areas. (more…)





Email This Article

Lottery case before Supreme Court next week

September 5th, 2008

The Decision 2008 blog and related election work has been keeping me hopping lately, but the wheels of government continue to turn here in Raleigh.

Some of those wheels can be found at the North Carolina Supreme Court, which has the lawsuit seeking to end the lottery on its docket for Monday.

The case was brought by the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law, a conservative legal think tank based in Raleigh, on behalf of several plaintiffs, including Rep. Paul Stam, the Republican minority leader in the House.

Click here for the institute's document library on the case, which includes filings from both sides. (more…)





Email This Article

Balking at a nutritious start for kids

September 4th, 2008

For the last 10 years, Queens Creek Elementary School in Swansboro has provided a free breakfast for all its kindergarten students. But not this year. There's an announcement on the schools' website that kindergarteners will have to buy breakfast on their own from now on.

North Carolina began the statewide kindergarten breakfast program on 2000 and the state spends $2.2 million a year to feed the students.

And it makes sense. Studies are clear that kids who eat breakfast before school are healthier overall than kids who don't.  And they do better in class and make higher scores on standardized tests.

Federal programs that provide free or reduced lunch and breakfast to poor students are important, but not enough. Some kids are embarrassed to participate because they don't want their classmates to know they are poor. Some families who earn too much to be eligible still can't afford breakfast every day and single moms often need the help.

All that prompted North Carolina lawmakers to establish a program that would provide breakfast for every student in kindergarten. No stigma, no eligibility requirements, just a basic breakfast for all the four and five year olds in their first year of school.

But not all elementary schools offer breakfast, just ones that have a certain percentage of poor children, based on eligibility levels for free and reduced lunch. The 2007 budget prohibits the State Board of Education from setting the eligibility percentage below 39.04 unless lawmakers provide money to expand the program.

The State Board asked lawmakers for $500,000 in new funding in 2007, but the final budget included no expansion. Neither did the 2008 budget, so kindergarten students in roughly a fourth of the elementary schools in the state don't get a free breakfast even if more than a third of the students at the school are poor.

It is not clear than another $500,000 a year would to pay for the program at all elementary schools but education officials say it might come close. Half a million dollars in a $21 billion budget isn't much to fully fund a program that lawmakers were wise enough to start nine years ago, especially when kids' nutrition and health is at stake.

The unwillingness to expand the breakfast program for kindergartners is far from the only problem schools face in addressing child nutrition. The State Board asked for $20 million this year to help schools offer healthier meals, an important part of the state's initiative to reduce childhood obesity.

The healthier meals proposal didn't get $20 million. It got nothing. Lawmakers instead funded a few obesity pilot projects, leaving schools scrambling with their food budgets and forcing many to fall back to cheaper, high calorie foods that make things worse, not better.

Legislative leaders like to boast about their commitment to public education. Too bad that commitment doesn't include supporting efforts to make sure kids are fed in the morning and eat the right food at lunch.

Too bad the kindergartners at Queens Creek Elementary won't get breakfast this year. 





Email This Article

Suffering until suffrage

September 4th, 2008

Recently, Americans celebrated the 88th Anniversary of women's suffrage in the United States. One hundred and forty-four years after the founding of this country, women-representing more than half the population and having birthed the other half-won the right to vote.

In spite of their numbers, women were the last citizens to be granted the right to vote in this country. This quintessential American story of triumph after struggle is filled with wonder, courage and inspiration. Yet, the official anniversary of this incredible achievement, celebrated as Women's Equality Day on August 26, receives little fanfare much less media coverage.

This is particularly noteworthy in an election year dominated by calls for change. Remarkably, the first female candidate with a viable shot at the White House didn't seem to register with voters as something new. During Primary 2008, Barack Obama delivered a mesmerizing speech to the nation on the issue of race in America. Imagine a national conversation about gender. It's not likely to happen very soon.

Perhaps our inability to talk about gender shouldn't be surprising. Gender is another word for sex. It really would represent unprecedented change if we talked about sex in an honest way.

We live in a highly sexualized world where skimpily clad bodies and suggestive postures are used to sell everything from cars to computers. Sex resonates and thus sells because sexuality is a normal part of human development regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. It should be viewed as normal and healthy.

Instead, the private sector in the United States typically exploits sexuality to their benefit while the public sector runs scared or, as evidenced by the Bush Administration, tries to regulate the most intimate aspects of human sexuality-none more so than a woman's right to make personal childbearing decisions.

Recently, for example, the Bush Administration proposed a new regulation governing how recipients of federal funding must provide health care - or, more precisely, how they are not to provide health care.

The proposed rule stipulates that recipients of federal funds may not "require any individual to perform or assist in the performance of any part of a health service program or research activity funded by (HHS) if such service or activity would be contrary to his religious beliefs or moral convictions."

The Administration said their intent was merely to clarify existing laws that allow health care workers to refuse to participate in abortion or sterilization if they are personally opposed to this care. In fact, this rule goes much further. And, the Bush Administration knows it.

In announcing the proposed rule change, HHS Secretary Leavitt conceded that some groups might want to "press the definition of abortion," to include birth control. Earlier this summer, HHS issued a draft version of the proposed rule that explicitly defined abortion to include some forms of birth control. The draft was leaked to the press and public outcry forced HHS to make changes.

It's astounding, really, in this day and age that we're still fighting over birth control. Studies show that 98% of women use some form of birth control in their lifetime. The average American woman spends five years trying to get pregnant, being pregnant and nursing. She spends three decades trying not to get pregnant.

Birth control is basic health care for women. One might even say it's as basic as the right to vote.

Paige Johnson is the Director of Public Affairs at Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina

 





Email This Article

Perdue’s hindsight on mental health

September 4th, 2008


Click here to listen.





Email This Article

Bowles opposes lowering legal drinking age

September 4th, 2008

UNC President Erskine Bowles says he won't support a change to laws that set the legal drinking age at 21.

In an Aug. 29 memo to chancellors of the 16 UNC-system campuses, Bowles said there is evidence the age-21 law saves lives and reduces alcohol-related injuries and deaths among young people. He cited data from UNC-Chapel Hill's Bowles Center for Alcohol Studies, which was named for his father, Skipper Bowles, and created with family money.

"Furthermore, I've seen no scientific evidence that supports the contention that lowering the legal drinking age would reduce binge-drinking or lessen other alcohol-related problems on our college campuses or in society at large," Bowles wrote.

Recently, a group of 128 university and college presidents issued a public statement calling for a new debate on the federal law that sets the minimum legal drinking age. The presidents say the legal limit creates a "culture of dangerous, clandestine 'binge-drinking.' "

Duke University President Richard Brodhead signed the statement. (more…)





Email This Article

State’s sex-ed debate reignited

September 4th, 2008

N.C. focuses on abstinence

North Carolina's debate over abstinence-based sex education in public schools smolders on like an underground fire — ready to flame when events bring it to the surface.

The most recent spark came with news that Sen. John McCain's vice presidential choice, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, has a pregnant 17-year-old daughter. Palin has spoken out for the abstinence-based approach, which is backed by President Bush and taught in most North Carolina counties, including Wake, as the only sex education allowed.

Prompted by the Palin case, conversations about sex education in the Triangle this week have highlighted the issue's polarizing effect. Christian activists continue to support the abstinence method, saying that high-profile cases such as the Palins' don't mean the approach should be changed.

"You don't make things better by lowering the standard," said the Rev. Mark Creech, executive director of the Christian Action League of North Carolina. He said sex outside marriage should be discouraged, just like any other risky behavior, including drug use, drunken driving, smoking and fighting.

Others, including a state public-health task force, have pushed to add more detailed information about contraceptives to the abstinence-based course. Earlier this year, a bill in the state legislature would have allowed local school boards to add topics, including the use of contraceptives, without the public hearings that have stalled comprehensive sex education in several counties. The bill made headway and will likely re-emerge when legislators return in January. (more…)





Email This Article

Tax deduction reduces N.C. burden

September 4th, 2008


Does the Tax Foundation overstate North Carolina's tax burden?

Critics of the nonprofits rankings of state and local tax burdens note that it leaves out the amount paid by North Carolinians in federal taxes.

That's important because the Internal Revenue Service allows you to deduct your state and local taxes from your income when filing. For states such as North Carolina that rely heavily on a state income tax that means a reduced federal tax burden.

That would affect North Carolina's overall tax burden compared to other states.

"Compared to the rest of the Southeast, North Carolina is probably one of the biggest beneficiaries of the state and local tax deduction," said Gerald Prante, an economist with the Tax Foundation. (more…)





Email This Article