The 2010 Reforms in the House Healthcare Reform Bill

Here is a first look at the House Health Insurance reform bill that would initiate these changes in 2010! It is truly worthy of our support.

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

House leadership has released this fact sheet on the key elements of the House healthcare reform bill that will begin in 2010.

House leadership has released this fact sheet on the key elements of the House healthcare reform bill that will begin in 2010 [pdf].

Among the most important of these front-loaded provision are the creation of the high risk pool, extension of COBRA benefits (which should also include some sort of subsidy program, since COBRA rates are often unaffordable, though select groups do receive assistance under the Recovery Act), upping the age that people can be covered by their parents' plans, and the increased funding for Community Health Centers are all very good starts for 2010. The most key for staunching the bleeding in our system, if you will, are the high risk pool and the Community Health Center funding. More of the uninsured will be able to get insurance through the pool and the CHCs, which are absolutely critical to providing care for the uninsured, will at least see some increased ability to do so.

A handful of the reforms will immediately address issues for Medicare beneficiaries, all solid reforms that should also provide some political help in 2010--seniors vote.

Here's the full list of what will start happening in 2010 under the bill.

1. BEGINS TO CLOSE THE MEDICARE PART D DONUT HOLE — Reduces the donut hole by $500 and institutes a 50% discount on brand-name drugs, effective January 1, 2010.

1. IMMEDIATE HELP FOR THE UNINSURED UNTIL EXCHANGE IS AVAILABLE (INTERIM HIGH-RISK POOL) — Creates a temporary insurance program until the Exchange is available for individuals who have been uninsured for several months or have been denied a policy because of pre-existing conditions.

1. BANS LIFETIME LIMITS ON COVERAGE—Prohibits health insurance companies from placing lifetime caps on coverage.

1. ENDS RESCISSIONS—Prohibits insurers from nullifying or rescinding a patient’s policy when they file a claim for benefits, except in the case of fraud.

1. EXTENDS COVERAGE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE UP TO 27TH BIRTHDAY THROUGH PARENTS’ INSURANCE— Requires health plans to allow young people through age 26 to remain on their parents’ insurance policy, at the parents’ choice.

1. ELIMINATES COST-SHARING FOR PREVENTIVE SERVICES IN MEDICARE—Eliminates co-payments for preventive services and exempts preventive services from deductibles under the Medicare program.

1. IMPROVES HELP FOR LOW-INCOME MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES—Improves the low-income protection programs in Medicare to assure more individuals are able to access this vital help.

1. PROVIDES NEW CONSUMER PROTECTIONS IN MEDICARE ADVANTAGE— Prohibits Medicare Advantage plans from charging enrollees higher cost-sharing for services in their private plan than what is charged in traditional Medicare.

1. IMMEDIATE SUNSHINE ON PRICE GOUGING—Discourages excessive price increases by insurance companies through review and disclosure of insurance rate increases.

1. CONTINUITY FOR DISPLACED WORKERS—Allows Americans to keep their COBRA coverage until the Exchange is in place and they can access affordable coverage.

1. CREATES NEW, VOLUNTARY, PUBLIC LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE PROGRAM—Creates a long-term care insurance program to be financed by voluntary payroll deductions to provide benefits to adults who become functionally disabled.

1. HELP FOR EARLY RETIREES—Creates a $10 billon fund to finance a temporary reinsurance program to help offset the costs of expensive health claims for employers that provide health benefits for retirees age 55-64.

1. COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS—Increases funding for Community Health Centers to allow for a doubling of the number of patients seen by the centers over the next 5 years.

1. INCREASING NUMBER OF PRIMARY CARE DOCTORS — Provides new investment in training programs to increase the number of primary care doctors, nurses, and public health professionals.

via The 2010 Reforms in the House Healthcare Reform Bill | PEEK | AlterNet.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Truth about Healthcare (citizengkar.wordpress.com)


• Who's behind the attacks on a health care overhaul? (citizengkar.wordpress.com)


• Talking Points for Healthcare Reform (citizengkar.wordpress.com)


• The Return of the Welfare Queen and Open Class Warfare (citizengkar.wordpress.com)


• 7 Ways We Can Fight Back Against the Rising Fascist Threat (citizengkar.wordpress.com)


• Big Money Pulling the Strings of Protests (citizengkar.wordpress.com)


• The Ever-Expanding Exchange, or How Everyone Could Get Choice of Public Option (fdlaction.firedoglake.com)


• Howard Dean on Health-Care Bill: 'This Is Real Reform' (crooksandliars.com)


• Healthcare Debate Explodes on Twitter (huffingtonpost.com)


• Russ Feingold: What Liberals Want is a Single-Payer System (videocafe.crooksandliars.com)


• Too late for Obama to opt out (timesunion.com)


• Health-Care Reform: Democrats Brace for Next Challenge - TIME (time.com)


• Democrats Increasingly Optimistic About Public Option In Health Care Reform (themoderatevoice.com)


• Jindal gets a clue, endorses Democrats' health care reform bill (drumsnwhistles.com)


• Feingold: No Public Option "A Very Strong Reason Not To Support" A Health Care Bill (news.firedoglake.com)

Health Care Public Option: Did money talk?

Image via Wikipedia

The so-called "public option" component of health care reform died today when the Senate Finance Committee's Health Care Subdivision essentially the entire committee rejected an attempt to include it in legislation the panel is considering. Other bills circulating at the Capitol still have "public option," but Sen. Max Baucus removed it from his bill under pressure from Republicans, who considered it Socialist. The number of Democrats refusing to support the idea pretty much sinks it.The vote was 15-to-8, with Democrats Baucus, Sen. Tom Carper, Sen. Kent Conrad, Sen. Blanche Lincoln, and Sen. Bill Nelson joining all of the committee's Republicans with "no" votes.Most of the Democrats voting against the bill, were among the biggest Democratic recipients of health care cash in campaign fundraising. Coincidence? Who can say? The campaign finance system is such that one can only speculate what role it plays when legislation is considered that affects the campaign contributors. So you have to decide.

via Did money talk? | News Cut | Minnesota Public Radio.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Abstinence-only funding is still winning votes (bilerico.com)


• Huff Post: The Beginning Of The End For The Public Option (americablog.com)


• Schumer Upbeat on Public Option (politicalwire.com)


• Following the Money (mydd.com)


• Senate Finance Committee Rejects Public Option Amendments (mydd.com)


• Rockefeller Amendment Fails (talkingpointsmemo.com)


• Senate Committee Passes Quasi-Public Option Amendment (huffingtonpost.com)


• This tops them all for the moment: Grassley suggests to eliminate $7 billion a year in fees to corporate health insurance and make it up by reducing benefits to the poor (iflizwerequeen.com)

Study links 45,000 U.S. deaths to lack of insurance

It's hard to believe that this country can tolerate this scale of problem without taking action. 45000 died each year due to lack of healthcare. Healthcare debt figures into most every bankruptcy. The time for action is now!

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year -- one every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday.

"We're losing more Americans every day because of inaction ... than drunk driving and homicide combined," Dr. David Himmelstein, a co-author of the study and an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, said in an interview with Reuters.

Overall, researchers said American adults age 64 and younger who lack health insurance have a 40 percent higher risk of death than those who have coverage.

[..]

The Harvard study, funded by a federal research grant, was published in the online edition of the American Journal of Public Health. It was released by Physicians for a National Health Program, which favors government-backed or "single-payer" health insurance.



An similar study in 1993 found those without insurance had a 25 percent greater risk of death, according to the Harvard group. The Institute of Medicine later used that data in its 2002 estimate showing about 18,000 people a year died because they lacked coverage.



Part of the increased risk now is due to the growing ranks of the uninsured, Himmelstein said. Roughly 46.3 million people in the United States lacked coverage in 2008, the U.S. Census Bureau reported last week, up from 45.7 million in 2007.



Another factor is that there are fewer places for the uninsured to get good care. Public hospitals and clinics are shuttering or scaling back across the country in cities like New Orleans, Detroit and others, he said.



Study co-author Dr. Steffie Woolhandler said the findings show that without proper care, uninsured people are more likely to die from complications associated with preventable diseases such as diabetes and heart disease.

via Study links 45,000 U.S. deaths to lack of insurance | U.S. | Reuters.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Study Shows 45,000 Die Each Year Because Of No Insurance (alan.com)


• No health coverage tied to 45,000 deaths a year (msnbc.msn.com)


• 45,000 U.S. deaths linked to no insurance (cnn.com)


• The Uninsured: The Best and Worst States (abcnews.go.com)


• 45,000 excess deaths annually linked to lack of health insurance: Harvard study (scienceblog.com)


• Is This High Tide for Senior Finances? (usnews.com)


• Uninsured More Likely to Die, Study Finds (abcnews.go.com)


• What Being Uninsured Means (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)


• Most American Bankruptcies include extreme medical expenses. Kent Conrad's co-op plan won't be helping these people. (iflizwerequeen.com)


• Study Finds Medical Bills Cause Most Bankruptcies (shoppingblog.com)


• The Return of the Welfare Queen and Open Class Warfare (citizengkar.wordpress.com)

SIBEL EDMONDS' DEPOSITION: VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT RELEASED

Long-gagged FBI whistleblower's full under-oath testimony from Ohio election case, details Congressional blackmail, bribery, espionage, infiltration, more...

via The BRAD BLOG : SIBEL EDMONDS' DEPOSITION: VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT RELEASED.

7 Ways We Can Fight Back Against the Rising Fascist Threat

AlterNet

First: The teabaggers must not win this one....

Second: Think nationally, fight locally....

Third: Brush up on our nonviolent resistance -- but leave the heavy lifting and rough enforcement to the cops....

Fourth: We need to make absolutely sure that the media get the story right....

Fifth: Support legislators who don't show fear....

Sixth: Shut down the hate talkers....

Finally: Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty....

More here.

Liberal Dems Say No to Deal on Health Care Reform

Image via Wikipedia

It's about time someone stood up for the little guy.
Mother Jones

This could be a big deal. Fifty-seven liberal House Democrats sent a letter on Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representative Henry Waxman, the chair of the House energy and commerce committee, saying they cannot vote for the deal Waxman cut with the Blue Dog Dems, citing the compromise's weak public option provision. It's a short note, but a possible big monkey wrench. Without these votes, the Democrats are far short of a majority.
The letter:

We write to voice our opposition to the negotiated health care reform agreement under consideration in the Energy and Commerce Committee.
We regard the agreement reached by Chairman Waxman and several Blue Dog members of the Committee as fundamentally unacceptable. This agreement is not a step forward toward a good health care bill, but a large step backwards. Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, for a public option with reimbursement rates based on Medicare rates - not negotiated rates - is
unacceptable. It would ensure higher costs for the public plan, and would do nothing to achieve the goal of "keeping insurance companies honest," and their rates down.
To offset the increased costs incurred by adopting the provisions advocated by the Blue Dog members of the Committee, the agreement would reduce subsidies to low-and middle-income families, requiring them to pay a larger portion oftheir income for insurance premiums, and would impose an unfunded mandate on the states to pay for what were to have been Federal costs.
In short, this agreement will result in the public, both as insurance purchasers and as taxpayers, paying ever higher rates to insurance companies.
We simply cannot vote for such a proposal.

Back to you, Waxman.

Related articles by Zemanta

• "It is because of the Blue Dog Coalition that there is no floor vote before the August break." (americablog.com)
• Progressives push back on conservative health care concessions (americablog.com)
• House Committee Reaches Health Deal (politicalwire.com)

How Dennis Kucinich May Save the Health Reform Battle

Image via Wikipedia

AlterNet

On Friday, an amendment he authored was added to the House bill that allows states to create their own single-payer systems instead of adopting the federally-run exchange system. The original bill allowed states only to enact their own exchange system -- it was a nod to federalism -- with the proviso that if a state (think a deep red one in the South) refused to adopt the plan, the feds could step in and set it up.
The Kucinich amendment is really key. If it were to survive the legislative sausage-making and be enacted into law, the we might expect a progressive state to take advantage of the opportunity and enact a single-payer system in the coming years. And, if those of us who have been pushing such an arrangement are correct, the result will be greater access and better outcomes at a lower price tag for that state's residents.
And then we can move from an often ill-informed argument over the Canadian or British systems to a debate in which we can hold up a model in which millions of real Americans see very tangible benefits from an actual single-payer system in action.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Small Victory for Long-Term Single-Payer Strategy (bradblog.com)
• Senate Panel OKs Plan To Revamp Health Care System (huffingtonpost.com)
• Single-Payer and the 'Democracy Deficit' (bradblog.com)
• Reader Calls Out Milbank For Distorting Health Care Debate (huffingtonpost.com)
• Myths about Canadian health care (masbury.wordpress.com)
• Call a Canadian (scienceblogs.com)

Al Franken's secret

Image via Wikipedia

Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com

David Broder has a column this morning calling for bipartisanship. I know, you're shocked. But what struck me was this bit about Al Franken:

Franken, the loud-mouthed former comedian, will be the 60th member of the Senate Democratic caucus ...

Two points.
First, implicit in this characterization of Franken is the notion of the Senate as a decorous gentlemen's club. I doubt that club ever existed in reality; but in any case, these days the World's Greatest Deliberative Body is, not to put too fine a point on it, chock full o' nuts. James Inhofe: I rest my case.
Second, Al Franken's dirty secret is that ... he's a big policy wonk.
I used to go on Franken's radio show, all ready to be jocular -- and what he wanted to talk about was the arithmetic of Social Security, or the structure of Medicare Part D.
In fact, the only elected official I know who's wonkier than Al Franken is Rush Holt, my congressman -- and he used to be the assistant director of Princeton's plasma physics lab. (The campaign's bumper stickers read, "My Congressman IS a rocket scientist.")
So what will Franken do to the level of Senate discourse? He'll raise it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Time to End False Bipartisanship (bravenewfilms.org)
• Paul Krugman sees the recession ending this summer (dailyfinance.com)
• Krugman is right: This is not the time to reverse economic policies (dailyfinance.com)
• Al Franken Wins Minnesota Senate Seat (theapiary.org)
• The biggest threat to President Obama's healthcare reform efforts comes from his own party (kevinmd.com)

Former PR Exec at Cigna: Health Care Industry vs. Health Reform

Center for Media and Democracy

I'm the former insurance industry insider now speaking out about how big for-profit insurers have hijacked our health care system and turned it into a giant ATM for Wall Street investors, and how the industry is using its massive wealth and influence to determine what is (and is not) included in the health care reform legislation members of Congress are now writing.
Although by most measures I had a great career in the insurance industry (four years at Humana and nearly 15 at CIGNA), in recent years I had grown increasingly uncomfortable serving as one of the industry's top PR executives. In addition to my responsibilities at CIGNA, which included serving as the company's chief spokesman to the media on all corporate and financial matters, I also served on a lot of trade association committees and industry-financed coalitions, many of which were essentially front groups for insurers. So I was in a unique position to see not only how Wall Street analysts and investors influence decisions insurance company executives make but also how the industry has carried out behind-the-scenes PR and lobbying campaigns to kill or weaken any health care reform efforts that threatened insurers' profitability.
I also have seen how the industry's practices -- especially those of the for-profit insurers that are under constant pressure from Wall Street to meet their profit expectations -- have contributed to the tragedy of nearly 50 million people being uninsured as well as to the growing number of Americans who, because insurers now require them to pay thousands of dollars out of their own pockets before their coverage kicks in -- are underinsured. An estimated 25 million of us now fall into that category.
What I saw happening over the past few years was a steady movement away from the concept of insurance and toward "individual responsibility," a term used a lot by insurers and their ideological allies. This is playing out as a continuous shifting of the financial burden of health care costs away from insurers and employers and onto the backs of individuals. As a result, more and more sick people are not going to the doctor or picking up their prescriptions because of costs. If they are unfortunate enough to become seriously ill or injured, many people enrolled in these plans find themselves on the hook for such high medical bills that they are losing their homes to foreclosure or being forced into bankruptcy.
As an industry spokesman, I was expected to put a positive spin on this trend that the industry created and euphemistically refers to as "consumerism" and to promote so-called "consumer-driven" health plans. I ultimately reached the point of feeling like a huckster.
I thought I could live with being a well-paid huckster and hang in there a few more years until I could retire. I probably would have if I hadn't made a completely spur-of-the-moment decision a couple of years ago that changed the direction of my life. While visiting my folks in northeast Tennessee where I grew up, I read in the local paper about a health "expedition" being held that weekend a few miles up U.S. 23 in Wise, Va. Doctors, nurses and other medical professionals were volunteering their time to provide free medical care to people who lived in the area. What intrigued me most was that Remote Area Medical, a non-profit group whose original mission was to provide free care to people in remote villages in South America, was organizing the expedition. I decided to check it out.
That 50-mile stretch of U.S. 23, which twists through the mountains where thousands of men have made their living working in the coalmines, turned out to be my "road to Damascus."
Nothing could have prepared me for what I saw when I reached the Wise County Fairgrounds, where the expedition was being held. Hundreds of people had camped out all night in the parking lot to be assured of seeing a doctor or dentist when the gates opened. By the time I got there, long lines of people stretched from every animal stall and tent where the volunteers were treating patients.
That scene was so visually and emotionally stunning it was all I could do to hold back tears. How could it be that citizens of the richest nation in the world were being treated this way?
A couple of weeks later I was boarding a corporate jet to fly from Philadelphia to a meeting in Connecticut. When the flight attendant served my lunch on gold-rimmed china and gave me a gold-plated knife and fork to eat it with, I realized for the first time that someone's insurance premiums were paying for me to travel in such luxury. I also realized that one of the reasons those people in Wise County had to wait in long lines to be treated in animal stalls was because our Wall Street-driven health care system has created one of the most inequitable health care systems on the planet.
Although I quit my job last year, I did not make a final decision to speak out as a former insider until recently when it became clear to me that the insurance industry and its allies (often including drug and medical device makers, business groups and even the American Medical Association) were succeeding in shaping the current debate on health care reform. While the thought of speaking out had crossed my mind during the months leading up to the day I gave notice, I initially decided instead to hang out my shingle as a consultant to small businesses and nonprofit organizations.
I decided to take the shingle down, though, at least for a while, when I heard members of Congress reciting talking points like the ones I used to write to scare people away from real reform. I'll have more to say about that over the coming weeks and months, but, for now, remember this: whenever you hear a politician or pundit use the term "government-run health care" and warn that the creation of a public health insurance option that would compete with private insurers (or heaven forbid, a single-payer system like the one Canada has) will "lead us down the path to socialism," know that the original source of the sound bite most likely was some flack like I used to be.
Bottom line: I ultimately decided the stakes are too high for me to just sit on the sidelines and let the special interests win again. So I have joined forces with thousands of other Americans who are trying to persuade our lawmakers to listen to us for a change, not just to the insurance and drug company executives who are spending millions to shape reform to benefit them and the Wall Street hedge fund managers they are beholden to.
Take it from me, a former insider, who knows what really motivates those folks. You need to know where the hard-earned money you pay in health insurance premiums -- if you lucky enough to have coverage at all -- really goes.
I decided to speak out knowing that some people will not like what I have to say and will do all they can to discredit me. In anticipation of that, here are some facts:
* I am not doing this because my former employer was pushing me out the door or because I had become a disgruntled employee. I had not been passed over for a promotion or anything like that. As I noted earlier, I had a financially rewarding career in the industry, and I'm very grateful for that. I had numerous promotions, raises, bonuses, stock options and stock grants over the years. When I left my last job, I was as close on the corporate ladder to the CEO as any PR person has ever climbed at the company. I reported to the general counsel, the company's top lawyer, whose boss is the chairman and CEO, a man I like and worked closely with over many years.
* The decision to leave was entirely my own, and I left on good terms with everybody at the company. In fact, I agreed to postpone my last day at work by more than two months at the company's request. My coworkers gave me a terrific going-away party, and I received dozens of kind notes from people all across the country including friends at other companies and at America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade association.
I still consider all of them my friends. In fact, the thing I have missed most since I left is working as part of a team, even though I eventually came to the conclusion that I was playing for the wrong side. Being a consultant has its advantages, but I have missed the camaraderie. After a few months, I thought that maybe I should consider working for another company again. At one point, a former boss told me that another insurer had posted a PR job and encouraged me to contact a former CIGNA executive who worked there about it. Against my better judgment, I did, but I immediately decided not to pursue it. The last thing I wanted to do was to go from one big insurer to another one. What the hell was I thinking?
I'm writing this because, knowing how things work, I'm fully expecting insurers' PR firms to quietly feed friends of the industry (which include a roster of editorial writers and pundits, lawmakers and many others who fall under the broad category of "third-party advocates,") with anything they can think of to discredit me and what I say. This will go on behind the scenes because the insurers will want to preserve the image they are working so hard to cultivate -- as a group of kind and caring folks who think only of you and your health and are working hard as real partners to Congress and the White House to find "a uniquely American solution" to what ails our system.
I expect this because I have worked closely with the industry's PR firms over many years whenever the insurers were being threatened with bad publicity, litigation or legislation that might hinder profits.
One of the reasons I chose to become affiliated with the Center for Media and Democracy is because of the important work the organization does to expose often devious, dishonest and unethical PR practices that further the self interests of big corporations and special interest groups at the expense of the American people and the democratic principles this country was founded on.
After a long career in PR, I am looking forward to providing an insider's perspective as a senior fellow at CMD, and I am very grateful for the opportunity to speak out for the rights and dignity of ordinary people. The people of Wise County and every county deserve much better than to be left behind to suffer or die ahead of their time due to Wall Street's efforts to keep our government from ensuring that all Americans have real access to first-class health care.
Wendell Potter is the Senior Fellow on Health Care for the Center for Media and Democracy in Madison, Wisconsin.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Deceptive Practices: How Insurance Companies Hurt Employees (abcnews.go.com)
• Former Health Insurance Insider to Testify Before Senate Commerce Committee (ducknetweb.blogspot.com)
• Health care is a right, not a privilege (middletownmike.blogspot.com)
• Support for a Public Plan: Depends on How You Ask (swampland.blogs.time.com)

As multiple-death shootings surge, Congress looks away

Image via Wikipedia

Minnesota Independent

Last month in Southern Alabama, an unemployed twenty-something sheet-metal worker armed himself with two semi-automatic rifles, a shotgun and a pistol. He shot his mother and the four family dogs, and then drove to a neighboring town where he killed four more relatives, four passersby, and then himself. All in all, he sprayed more than 200 bullets across two Alabama counties. The ages of the victims ranged from 74 years to 18 months. It was the worst killing spree in state history.
Since then other parts of the country have suffered similar nightmares. Indeed, in recent weeks more than 60 people -- including seven police officers -- have been killed in multiple-death shootings from coast to coast. It's just the type of headline-grabbing trend that might usually get congressional lawmakers screaming from the rafters for policy reforms, like banning military-style assault weapons and forcing gun-show vendors to do background checks on prospective buyers. Gun control advocates argue that such steps would help stem the more than 30,000 gun deaths that plague the United States each year.
But that hasn't been the case. Instead, the reaction from congressional leaders -- even the most vocal gun-reform proponents -- has been a long, strange silence.
It wasn't always this way. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was the author of the successful 1994 effort to install an assault weapons ban, which expired five years ago. Yet last week, less than a month after four police officers were killed in a shooting spree in Oakland, Feinstein told "60 Minutes" that, while she hopes to reintroduce the measure, "I wouldn't bring it up now."
Similarly, President Obama -- who campaigned on a platform of renewing the assault weapons ban -- reiterated his support for that prohibition during a visit to Mexico last week, but added that that he's not "under any illusions that reinstating that ban would be easy."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is another long-time advocate for tightening gun laws. Yet pressed this month about the absence of any gun reform push in Congress, she offered only a vague explanation about the need "to find some level of compromise."
Spokespersons for both Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said there's no plan on the horizon for gun reform legislation this year.
The reason is no mystery. Although Democrats expanded their majorities in both chambers of Congress last year, they owe those gains largely to more moderate members, who picked up seats in a number of conservative-leaning states that have historically gone Republican. Indeed, when Attorney General Eric Holder in February announced his support for renewal of the assault weapons ban, 65 House Democrats wrote to the White House attacking the proposal.
"Law-abiding Americans use these guns for all the same reasons they use any other kind of gun - competitive shooting, hunting and defending their homes and families," the Democrats wrote.
Not only do those members not want to be seen threatening their constituents' Second Amendment rights, but Pelosi and other Democratic leaders are bending over backwards to ensure that those seats remain Democratic in elections to come. In this political environment, congressional aids say, even a gun reform push from liberal Democrats would only divide the party and undermine other legislative priorities.
"What's the sense in expending a good amount of political capital?" asked a House Democratic aide, who asked to remain anonymous due to the political nature of the topic. "You know you're going to lose. You know you don't have the votes ... It's never good when leadership loses a vote, and this is a vote they'll lose."
Then there's the issue of lobbying. The pro-gun National Rifle Association is among the most powerful forces in all of Washington. In the 2008 election cycle alone, the NRA's political action committee spent $15.6 million on campaign activities, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. And the group keeps tabs on every vote even remotely related to gun reform, threatening lawmakers with poor NRA rankings if they vote against the lobby's agenda.
The NRA did not reply to a call requesting comment, but the prowess of the gun lobby was in full display earlier this year during congressional debate on legislation to grant a voting representative to the residents of Washington, DC. That bill passed the Senate in February, but not before the NRA swayed lawmakers to attach language all but scrapping Washington's gun control laws, which are among the strictest in the nation. Faced with the gun-policy wildcard, stymied House Democrats have refused to bring the bill to the floor.
The reason is simple. The combination of support from Republicans and moderate Democrats all but ensures that the bill would pass. "On this issue, the NRA controls the House," said the Democratic aide. "It's that simple. We're in a political environment in which not much can be done because of the levels of power."
That's bad news for gun control advocates, who are pushing a series of reforms to tighten the nation's gun laws. Aside from reinstating the assault weapons ban, advocates want to force all gun-show vendors, even those unlicensed, to conduct background checks on potential customers to prevent felons and other violent criminals from obtaining weapons -- the same requirements currently in place for licensed gun sellers. A Senate bill, sponsored in the last Congress by Sens. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and Jack Reed (D-Del.), would do just that, but it hasn't resurfaced this year.
Another proposed reform would force gun makers to adopt a new technology that engraves weapons microscopically with their make, model and serial number -- information that would be left imprinted on the bullet casing after the gun is fired. Such a proposal was pushed by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) in the last Congress, but it as well has yet to appear this year. All three reforms are supported by public service groups, like the International Association of Chiefs of Police, but have been assailed by the gun lobby as initial steps toward an all-out gun ban.
Lawmakers are insisting that gun reform hasn't fallen off their radar, but some gun control advocates are growing impatient. "There are a lot of politicians," said Doug Pennington, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, "even in the face of the mass shootings over the past six weeks, who aren't exactly sure how stiff their backbones are."
The debate arrives as a wave of high-profile gun violence has swept across the country in recent weeks. On March 29, a heavily armed gunman killed eight in a North Carolina nursing home. A day later, an IT professional opened fire on his family in Santa Clara, killing six people, including himself. In Binghampton, N.Y., on April 3, a gunman walked into a community center and killed 13 immigrants before turning a gun on himself. A day later, a 22-year-old Pittsburgh man barricaded himself in his home with a stash of assault weapons, killing three police officers in the stand-off. The list goes on.
Michael Bailey, political science professor at Georgetown University, pointed out that, despite the gruesome trend, there simply isn't the public outcry to inspire Congress to stick their necks out for something as controversial as gun reform. "As terrible as these tragedies were," Bailey wrote in an email, "there doesn't seem to be any appetite for thinking about them."
Even without the recent spate of gun deaths, the debate would be timely. Last Thursday marked the two-year anniversary of the shootings at Virginia Tech that left 33 people dead, including the gunman. And Tuesday marks the 10-year anniversary of Colorado's Columbine High School massacre, in which two seniors killed 12 students and a teacher before turning the guns on themselves.
In the absence of any federal movement, some state and local lawmakers have emerged in an effort to fill the void. Last week, New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg visited Virginia to urge state lawmakers to pass a bill closing the so-called "gun-show loophole."
"Criminals do not have the right to own guns, and the gun shows make it far too easy for them to acquire guns," Bloomberg said. "In fact, it's easier for a criminal to buy a gun at a gun show than it is for a 20-year-old to buy a beer or for anyone to rent a car."
In Pennsylvania, Gov. Ed Rendell (D) has thrust himself into the debate as well, pushing last week for lawmakers to take up the assault weapons ban -- a prickly topic in a blue-collar state where unlimited gun rights are deemed by many to be sacrosanct.
"They're made for only one purpose," Rendell said of assault weapons. "Not for sport, not for hunting, nobody uses them in a duck blind, nobody uses them at the Olympics. They are used to kill and maim."
Advocates for gun reforms are quick to concede that the proposed reforms wouldn't prevent many of the gun-related deaths that torment the United States. Only one of the guns used by the Alabama shooter, for example, would have been prohibited under the 1994 assault weapons ban. Still, they maintain, taking some steps to keep military-grade weapons off the streets -- and all weapons out of the hands of violent criminals -- would go a long way toward improving safety in a country where firearms kill more than 80 people every day.
"That's not normal," Pennington said of the enormous number of domestic gun deaths. "We shouldn't treat that as just the cost of living in America."
Mike Lillis is Congress reporter for the Washington Independent.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Mass Murder at Dare To Dream Blog
• Alabama gunman kills ten including his mother and grandparents (telegraph.co.uk)
• Mayors say towns in shock over slaying spree (cnn.com)
• German Massacre Raises Issue of Gun-Control in Europe (time.com)
• RCMP seize loaded firearms, assault rifles during Alberta raid (cbc.ca)

Republicans: What's This World Coming To?

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

McClatchy
Related articles by Zemanta

• Barack Obama to scale back economic plans to win Republican support (telegraph.co.uk)
• John McCain still really hates science (blogs.discovermagazine.com)
• Rush Limbaugh: the Rightwing talk show host Barack Obama has told Republicans to ignore (telegraph.co.uk)
• Barack Obama: stimulus package will stop young Americans missing college (telegraph.co.uk)

Top Obama Bank Watchdog to Call for CEO Heads to Roll, Attacks Geithner-Summers Plan

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

AlterNet

Elizabeth Warren, chief watchdog of America's $700bn bank bailout plan, will this week call for the removal of top executives from Citigroup, AIG and other institutions that have received government funds in a damning report that will question the administration's approach to saving the financial system from collapse.
Warren, a Harvard law professor and chair of the congressional oversight committee monitoring the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), is also set to call for shareholders in those institutions to be "wiped out." "It is crucial for these things to happen," she said. "Japan tried to avoid them and just offered subsidy with little or no consequences for management or equity investors, and this is why Japan suffered a lost decade." She declined to give more detail but confirmed that she would refer to insurance group AIG, which has received $173bn in bailout money, and banking giant Citigroup, which has had $45bn in funds and more than $316bn of loan guarantees.
Warren also believes there are "dangers inherent" in the approach taken by treasury secretary Tim Geithner, who she says has offered "open-ended subsidies" to some of the world's biggest financial institutions without adequately weighing potential pitfalls. "We want to ensure that the treasury gives the public an alternative approach," she said, adding that she was worried that banks would not recover while they were being fed subsidies. "When are they going to say, enough?" she said.
She said she did not want to be too hard on Geithner but that he must address the issues in the report. "The very notion that anyone would infuse money into a financially troubled entity without demanding changes in management is preposterous."
The report will also look at how earlier crises were overcome -- the Swedish and Japanese problems of the 1990s, the US savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and the 30s Depression. "Three things had to happen," Warren said. "Firstly, the banks must have confidence that the valuation of the troubled assets in question is accurate; then the management of the institutions receiving subsidies from the government must be replaced; and thirdly, the equity investors are always wiped out."

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Bailout Tab Is Rising for Taxpayers (hsh.com)
• Bush Overpaid Banks in Bailout, Study Says (abcnews.go.com)
• Treasury Under Fire For Handling of TARP (abcnews.go.com)

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow: Congress Meets Wall Street

MoveOn.org

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow: Congress Meets Wall Street

MoveOn.org

About that deflation risk

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com

There has been a distinct change in tone from the Obama team today, as they seem to have become suddenly aware that there's a real risk that the stimulus plan will either fail to pass, or be emasculated to the point that it doesn't come close to doing the job. Obama himself has warned of catastrophe if we fail to act, and -- finally!- denounced the tax-cut philosophy. Meanwhile, Larry Summers has finally made the point I've been pushing for a while -- that we're at major risk of falling into a deflationary trap.
[..]But deflation is a huge risk -- and getting out of a deflationary trap is very, very hard.
We truly are flirting with disaster.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Pleads on Stimulus: Ailing Economy Faces 'Catastrophe' (abcnews.go.com)

About that deflation risk

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com

There has been a distinct change in tone from the Obama team today, as they seem to have become suddenly aware that there's a real risk that the stimulus plan will either fail to pass, or be emasculated to the point that it doesn't come close to doing the job. Obama himself has warned of catastrophe if we fail to act, and -- finally!- denounced the tax-cut philosophy. Meanwhile, Larry Summers has finally made the point I've been pushing for a while -- that we're at major risk of falling into a deflationary trap.
[..]But deflation is a huge risk -- and getting out of a deflationary trap is very, very hard.
We truly are flirting with disaster.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Pleads on Stimulus: Ailing Economy Faces 'Catastrophe' (abcnews.go.com)

Obama: Amaze us!

Image by BL1961 via Flickr

Global Research
By Michael Carmichael
planetarymovement.com

As Barack Obama approaches the helm of the American ship of state, he is facing many challenges.
Just as she was being born at the dawn of her journey into history, the American nation is poised on the brink of a new beginning. In those revolutionary times, America faced a roiling sea of danger, uncertainty and trepidation. Today, after more than two centuries of venture, America moves forward beyond and away from the final and most tragic acts of the second Bush presidency.
The American journey has been filled with triumph and tragedy. Triumph over the bonds of colonialism transformed into the tragedy of slavery, Manifest Destiny and the genocide of Native Americans followed by Civil War. Abolition began to right the wrongs of slavery, but America careened forward into the excesses of the Gilded Age and the arrogance of her Imperialist Presidency that extended her empire to the islands of the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea.
The Roosevelts expanded the American vision to encompass economic justice, environmental preservation and the duty to deliver peace beyond our borders. At the same time, American philosophers advocated the virtue of selfishness, the goodness of greed and the siren song of supply side trickle down economic miracles, while Martin Luther King, Jr. marched to the beat of a different drummer to demand the fulfillment of civil rights for our black brothers and sisters.
In an ancient scenario, the culture of greed infiltrated the American defense establishment and commandeered the ship of state to instigate conflicts and to impose its will by force. American power came into conflict with competing ideologies promising a better and more just society through cooperation rather than competition. For more than three-quarters of a century, America has moved forward toward its promise of freedom for all her people: freedom of speech; freedom of religion; freedom from want and freedom from fear.
FDRAs Barack Obama approaches the dais to take his oath of office, he is focused on delivering the four freedoms to all Americans. Each of FDR's four freedoms is in danger in America today. Freedom of speech was curtailed in pursuit of solidarity against the Axis of Evil in the War on Terror. Freedom of religion is under threat as Muslims are treated like criminals and terrorists. Freedom from want is on its deathbed, for millions of Americans have been expelled from their homes, banished from their workplaces and shunned by their employers. Freedom from fear has vanished, as Americans are convulsed in a paroxysm of panic apprehensive about their financial security and in fear for their very lives.
Barack Obama faces an insurmountable Himalaya of fear. In its face, Obama brings a message of hope for change. Obama erases fear with the promise of hope. Now he must turn to the people of America and deliver the four freedoms they have been promised.
Obama faces anxiety over the economy. While there are differences of opinion about what must be done and what must not be done, Obama has few choices. Obama's errant predecessor capitulated to the demands of his capitalist coterie for massive federal bailouts of financial institutions. With the bloated banking system now in bankruptcy, the calls for government regulation from Wall Street and the Federal Reserve will herald the beginning of state capitalism, a propagandistic oxymoron for a socialized banking system. While the incomes of financiers, bankers and others will shrivel, the confidence of the American people will be restored. The new American banking system will resemble a vast public utility, where salaries are strictly limited and profits are regulated.
But, the American people fear for their very lives today. Faced with the rapacious appetite for corporate profit that no population of any other industrialized nation faces, Americans spend more than twice what citizens of other democracies spend for their healthcare. In order to restore the freedom from fear, Obama must deliver a better system for healthcare that will be nothing less than revolutionary for it must delete the profitability of illness, injury and disease from the national vocabulary. The people of America are suffering through a stupefying crescendo of ghoulish greed that is pervasive thoughout the healthcare industry. Obama believes that healthcare is a human right that government must deliver to a free people to ensure that they do not experience fears for their own lives.
statue of liberty dark and direBut, Americans fear for more than their financial futures and their health, they fear for their very existence under threat from those who would destroy the fabric of our society - the terrorists. Bush launched his War on Terror to galvanize political support for a Gotterdammerung of Islamist terrorists. In the process, Bush triggered a massive avalanche of fear within America that has led to two immoral and counterproductive wars in Asia. America's standing in the world has been toppled from the top of a tall column. For the world at large, the Statue of Liberty has lost all meaning. America's prestige has morphed into a global loathing of the stars and stripes. In 2008, America has become the most feared and hated nation on earth.
Like no other president before him, Obama faces a global challenge to America's faltering leadership. To address the global challenge, Obama must replace opprobrium with trust and restore equilibrium with peace. American Muslims must be freed from the burdens of ostracism, stereotyping and the prison of Guantanamo. But, the closure of Guantanamo will be only the first step. The American prison population has inflated beyond all sense of reason. Alone among all other nations, America imprisons one out of every one hundred of its citizens. For shame, more American prisoners are from the black and tan minorities rather than from the white majority. The American prison-industrial complex has transformed the land of the free into a police state where minorities are incarcerated for misdemeanors while whites go free for felonies. Obama must right this terrible wrong that tarnishes America's luster in the eyes of the world.
Even more importantly, Obama must forge a new foreign policy that does not genuflect to the Pentagon and resort to military interventions and wars to enforce American power by the simplsitic application of force -- for force has failed America in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. In the Information Age, hard power is indeed outmoded, outdated, obsolete and counterproductive. Soft power is now the only instrument available for forging ahead on the global seas of commerce, ecology and culture.
camp david accords bwObama's global challenges are manifold, but none more difficult than in the Middle East. In recent days, hard power inflicted pain and destruction in the Arab-Israeli conflict. America's involvement in the Middle East has not delivered peace or security of the freedom from fear to the peoples of the Middle East. Since the Camp David Accords and the Oslo Agreement, the Middle East has devolved into conflict and crisis. Under George W. Bush, American policy made the insufferable situation worse by launching the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and unwise favoritism in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Nowhere does Obama face a more difficult challenge than in the Middle East, but in challenge therein resides opportunity - a unique opportunity to redefine America's vision in the eyes of the world.
On Wednesday, the 21st of January 2009, Barack Obama will enter the Oval Office where he will wield the power of the American nation. On that date, the world will judge him for the priorities he engages from the very outset of his presidency.
While he has promised America that he will order the cessation of torture, the withdrawal from Iraq, the final phase of the war in Afghanistan and the restructuring of American involvement with the Arab-Israeli conflict, Obama's global reputation will be cast in the flames of the forge.
In that moment and in the others rapidly to come, we shall learn the extent and the tenor of the change Obama will bring - not only to America but to the tiny planet where he will be the most powerful leader in world history, a leader for all peoples - for better or worse -- and it is indeed quite difficult to imagine how he might be worse than George W. Bush.
obama bwPresident Obama, the time is now ripe. Bring on all the changes you have promised from sea to shining sea and from nation unto nation - you must now bring peace unto all the nations of the earth. We, Americans who summoned and supported you are waiting; the nations are gazing intently upon you. Amaze us.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Michael Carmichael, planetarymovement.com, 2009
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=11908
© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama touches every base for the masses
• Begala: Obama summons ghosts of history
• Obama Inaugural Speech Signaling Unity Era: Good Not Great
• In Final Legal Act, Bush Appeals Spy Ruling

Obama: Amaze us!

Image by BL1961 via Flickr

Global Research
By Michael Carmichael
planetarymovement.com

As Barack Obama approaches the helm of the American ship of state, he is facing many challenges.
Just as she was being born at the dawn of her journey into history, the American nation is poised on the brink of a new beginning. In those revolutionary times, America faced a roiling sea of danger, uncertainty and trepidation. Today, after more than two centuries of venture, America moves forward beyond and away from the final and most tragic acts of the second Bush presidency.
The American journey has been filled with triumph and tragedy. Triumph over the bonds of colonialism transformed into the tragedy of slavery, Manifest Destiny and the genocide of Native Americans followed by Civil War. Abolition began to right the wrongs of slavery, but America careened forward into the excesses of the Gilded Age and the arrogance of her Imperialist Presidency that extended her empire to the islands of the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea.
The Roosevelts expanded the American vision to encompass economic justice, environmental preservation and the duty to deliver peace beyond our borders. At the same time, American philosophers advocated the virtue of selfishness, the goodness of greed and the siren song of supply side trickle down economic miracles, while Martin Luther King, Jr. marched to the beat of a different drummer to demand the fulfillment of civil rights for our black brothers and sisters.
In an ancient scenario, the culture of greed infiltrated the American defense establishment and commandeered the ship of state to instigate conflicts and to impose its will by force. American power came into conflict with competing ideologies promising a better and more just society through cooperation rather than competition. For more than three-quarters of a century, America has moved forward toward its promise of freedom for all her people: freedom of speech; freedom of religion; freedom from want and freedom from fear.
FDRAs Barack Obama approaches the dais to take his oath of office, he is focused on delivering the four freedoms to all Americans. Each of FDR's four freedoms is in danger in America today. Freedom of speech was curtailed in pursuit of solidarity against the Axis of Evil in the War on Terror. Freedom of religion is under threat as Muslims are treated like criminals and terrorists. Freedom from want is on its deathbed, for millions of Americans have been expelled from their homes, banished from their workplaces and shunned by their employers. Freedom from fear has vanished, as Americans are convulsed in a paroxysm of panic apprehensive about their financial security and in fear for their very lives.
Barack Obama faces an insurmountable Himalaya of fear. In its face, Obama brings a message of hope for change. Obama erases fear with the promise of hope. Now he must turn to the people of America and deliver the four freedoms they have been promised.
Obama faces anxiety over the economy. While there are differences of opinion about what must be done and what must not be done, Obama has few choices. Obama's errant predecessor capitulated to the demands of his capitalist coterie for massive federal bailouts of financial institutions. With the bloated banking system now in bankruptcy, the calls for government regulation from Wall Street and the Federal Reserve will herald the beginning of state capitalism, a propagandistic oxymoron for a socialized banking system. While the incomes of financiers, bankers and others will shrivel, the confidence of the American people will be restored. The new American banking system will resemble a vast public utility, where salaries are strictly limited and profits are regulated.
But, the American people fear for their very lives today. Faced with the rapacious appetite for corporate profit that no population of any other industrialized nation faces, Americans spend more than twice what citizens of other democracies spend for their healthcare. In order to restore the freedom from fear, Obama must deliver a better system for healthcare that will be nothing less than revolutionary for it must delete the profitability of illness, injury and disease from the national vocabulary. The people of America are suffering through a stupefying crescendo of ghoulish greed that is pervasive thoughout the healthcare industry. Obama believes that healthcare is a human right that government must deliver to a free people to ensure that they do not experience fears for their own lives.
statue of liberty dark and direBut, Americans fear for more than their financial futures and their health, they fear for their very existence under threat from those who would destroy the fabric of our society - the terrorists. Bush launched his War on Terror to galvanize political support for a Gotterdammerung of Islamist terrorists. In the process, Bush triggered a massive avalanche of fear within America that has led to two immoral and counterproductive wars in Asia. America's standing in the world has been toppled from the top of a tall column. For the world at large, the Statue of Liberty has lost all meaning. America's prestige has morphed into a global loathing of the stars and stripes. In 2008, America has become the most feared and hated nation on earth.
Like no other president before him, Obama faces a global challenge to America's faltering leadership. To address the global challenge, Obama must replace opprobrium with trust and restore equilibrium with peace. American Muslims must be freed from the burdens of ostracism, stereotyping and the prison of Guantanamo. But, the closure of Guantanamo will be only the first step. The American prison population has inflated beyond all sense of reason. Alone among all other nations, America imprisons one out of every one hundred of its citizens. For shame, more American prisoners are from the black and tan minorities rather than from the white majority. The American prison-industrial complex has transformed the land of the free into a police state where minorities are incarcerated for misdemeanors while whites go free for felonies. Obama must right this terrible wrong that tarnishes America's luster in the eyes of the world.
Even more importantly, Obama must forge a new foreign policy that does not genuflect to the Pentagon and resort to military interventions and wars to enforce American power by the simplsitic application of force -- for force has failed America in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. In the Information Age, hard power is indeed outmoded, outdated, obsolete and counterproductive. Soft power is now the only instrument available for forging ahead on the global seas of commerce, ecology and culture.
camp david accords bwObama's global challenges are manifold, but none more difficult than in the Middle East. In recent days, hard power inflicted pain and destruction in the Arab-Israeli conflict. America's involvement in the Middle East has not delivered peace or security of the freedom from fear to the peoples of the Middle East. Since the Camp David Accords and the Oslo Agreement, the Middle East has devolved into conflict and crisis. Under George W. Bush, American policy made the insufferable situation worse by launching the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and unwise favoritism in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Nowhere does Obama face a more difficult challenge than in the Middle East, but in challenge therein resides opportunity - a unique opportunity to redefine America's vision in the eyes of the world.
On Wednesday, the 21st of January 2009, Barack Obama will enter the Oval Office where he will wield the power of the American nation. On that date, the world will judge him for the priorities he engages from the very outset of his presidency.
While he has promised America that he will order the cessation of torture, the withdrawal from Iraq, the final phase of the war in Afghanistan and the restructuring of American involvement with the Arab-Israeli conflict, Obama's global reputation will be cast in the flames of the forge.
In that moment and in the others rapidly to come, we shall learn the extent and the tenor of the change Obama will bring - not only to America but to the tiny planet where he will be the most powerful leader in world history, a leader for all peoples - for better or worse -- and it is indeed quite difficult to imagine how he might be worse than George W. Bush.
obama bwPresident Obama, the time is now ripe. Bring on all the changes you have promised from sea to shining sea and from nation unto nation - you must now bring peace unto all the nations of the earth. We, Americans who summoned and supported you are waiting; the nations are gazing intently upon you. Amaze us.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Michael Carmichael, planetarymovement.com, 2009
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=11908
© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama touches every base for the masses
• Begala: Obama summons ghosts of history
• Obama Inaugural Speech Signaling Unity Era: Good Not Great
• In Final Legal Act, Bush Appeals Spy Ruling