What is President Barrack Obama thinking? He’s spent over a trillion dollars, all in the name of fixing America, and still unemployment is over 9 percent, and the economy is struggling. President Obama says that he wants to help the American people, but the average American continues to feel their standard of living washing away, along with their children’s future. People are hurting. So, why hasn’t the President helped them?

One thing’s certain: it’s sure not from any lack of spending. In fiscal 2009, President Obama eclipsed the first-year spending of any of his predecessors. Racking up a federal government total of $3.52 trillion, President Obama ran a deficit of $1.42 trillion and pumped the federal debt up another notch to nearly $11.9 trillion. And estimates for fiscal 2010, President Obama’s first full fiscal year, are higher still, with total spending of $3.7 trillion and a deficit over $1.5 trillion.

It’s also intuitively obvious that the President’s failure to restore economic prosperity hasn’t been caused by excessive taxation. The facts speak for themselves again on this front. As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, President Obama cut taxes for 95% of working families. At $282 billion over two years, the Obama tax cuts were the largest in history. What’s more, is that he gave the cuts to the middle class, and still managed a small increase in the number of Americans who actually paid taxes (53% compared to 51% for 2008). So, why are things still so bad?

Could it be that Obama is just doing the wrong things? His stimulus plan has followed Keynesian economic theory, which fell from grace amongst many economists during the 1970s.  Possible, I suppose — after all, it is all theory . . . but the global economic crisis of 2007 seems to have forced a major resurgence in Keynesian thought.  The vast majority of economists are actually in support of Presidents Obama’s stimulus plan.  In fact, even noted conservative economist, Martin Feldstein, has concluded that, “While good tax policy can contribute to ending the recession, the heavy lifting will have to be done by increased government spending.”  Now, it seems that only the most devoted fringe libertarian economists believe that the path out of the current recession shouldn’t be paved by government spending.

So, with the economy in the tank, President Obama spends like a fiend, but economists warn that without government spending the recession would be much worse.  We have tax cuts targeting the middle class, where the money will be spent to further stimulate the economy — again precisely what economists say will do the most good.  On the surface, it appears that President Obama is doing the right things, but something must be amiss.  Things just don’t seem to be getting better.  So, what is the problem?

I’ve struggled with this question; I’ve researched the facts; I’ve examined the testimony, even searched my soul. In the end, no matter how I slice it, I keep coming up with only one answer: no matter how hard President Barrack Obama works to restore our economy, no matter how right his actions, he has the grand misfortune of following the most incompetent imbecile to ever lead our nation!

That’s right — I’m talking about the illustrious George W. Bush, mental midget, Decider. Texas George sauntered into DC, like John Wayne (sorry John), with his guns blazing, and he never looked back. Days after the U.S. Supreme Court awarded him the presidency in 2000, the younger Bush shared his perspective on leading the most powerful nation on the planet, “If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.” Of course, King George would never let little things, like separation of powers or democracy get in his way.

Opinion?  I do have mine, but this isn’t about opinion — it’s about the facts: when “W” took the reins of the federal government in 2001, he was handed a $236 billion budget surplus. By the end of his first term in office, he had squandered that surplus and turned it into a deficit of over $400 billion. Oddly enough, he received that surplus from a Democrat president; one who ended nearly 3 decades of deficit spending in 1998. But, following in the Republican “cut AND spend” tradition that started with President Reagan in 1980, “W” wasted no time implementing his “conservative” economic leadership.

The Bush Bust started with tax cutting that was designed before he even took office. His knife was slashing early in his first year as president.  The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 was a $1.6 trillion cut, where half went to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans.  Another huge step in the Republican sponsored divide between the richest of the rich and the average American.

“W” was once again supporting “trickle-down” economics and promising 800,000 new jobs.  But the sad fact is that the new jobs never came, at least not to Americans.  His policies instead resulted in the loss of 2.7 million jobs by May of 2003.  The Bush plan was another mirage of supply-side deceit.  There’s really no doubt who President Bush served; we can take it straight from his own words: spoken at the Al Smith dinner in 2000, “This is an impressive crowd — the haves and the have mores. Some people call you the elite — I call you my base.”

Of course, on their own, the 2001 tax cuts weren’t completely without a logical base.  After all, there was a minor recession, though the economy was coming off its largest period of sustained growth in U.S. history.  But the events that follow soon begin to truly defy all logic.

Americans remember all too well the events of September, 2001, and as tragic as they were, for a brief moment, they brought our nation together.  For that period, I give President Bush credit for presiding over one of the most terrible events in our history.  His initial response was to mobilize against the terrorist groups that committed the heinous acts of 9/11.  He would have U.S. forces waste no time.  The invasion of Afghanistan started on October 7; the War on Terror began, and the American people were in full support.

But unwilling to pass on an opportunity to promote his agenda, King George seized the day.  He cut taxes again in March of 2002.  And then, with reckless abandon, our intrepid leader proceeded to do everything he could to instill fear in the American public.  Positioning himself as the great protector, George the Decider utilized whatever specious claims were necessary to lead us into a second war — a much larger and more costly war.

So, following in Ronald Reagan’s footsteps, George W. Bush cut taxes twice and also ramped up spending.  Supply-side economics was again alive and not so well, and fiscal responsibility was once more missing from the conservative scheme.  As his tax cuts took effect, our Commandeerer-in-Chief had us mobilizing for two military campaigns.  The direct cost for the Bush wars is presently pushing $1 trillion, and the long term costs are expected to exceed $3 trillion.  Cut taxes and spend on war — this was the Bush recipe for success, and he was just getting cooking.

In spite of the extreme cost of the two wars, “W” the Wise pushed for still more tax cuts.  Two scant months after the invasion of Iraq, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act was signed into law.  Estimated by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to increase the deficit by over $60 billion in 2003 alone, the JGTRRA would provide more tax relief for America’s most wealthy.  A sweet mix of another lowering of the top marginal rate, decreasing taxes on capital gains and further elimination of the estate tax — the $350 billion tax reduction would feed two-thirds of its benefit to the top 10 percent of income earners. “W” ignored the advice of 450 economists, including 10 Nobel Laureates who signed a statement concluding that the cuts would deepen the deficit, increase income inequality and still fail to produce economic growth.  George didn’t care — he was just making payments to his “base.”

Three tax cuts and two wars, and George the Great wasn’t even halfway through his third year in office,. Sadly, he was just getting started.  As 2003 came to a close, “W” and the Republicans were looking for some help with the 2004 election.  They found what they needed in the form of the Medicare Prescription Drug Modernization Act.  Never mind that the unfunded extension of the entitlement program would add $8.4 trillion to our unfunded obligations — it would help to buy the senior vote.  “W” was never timid about having things his way: again in HIS OWN WORDS, “I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.”  With program costs that would later be estimated at $1.2 trillion between 2006 and 2015, the “Commander” signed the drug benefit into law in December of 2003.

Unfortunately for America, the ploy worked, and George Bush won reelection in 2004.  His second term started rather quietly compared to the first.  He did try unsuccessfully to privatize Social Security in 2005-2006.  Of course, the wars continued, and he did make progress with the deficit, which reached a Bush low water mark in 2007, when it was taken down to $160 billion.  But all of this was merely the calm before the storm.

The economic growth of the Bush years was the result of the housing bubble.  With equity extraction doubling, from $626 billion in 2001 to $1.4 trillion in 2005, totaling nearly $5 trillion for the period, things seemed pretty good.  But the housing boom was a house of cards, and as predicted as early as 2003 — it came tumbling down, and along with it a large part of the banking system and the U.S. economy.

George “I don’t need to explain” Bush was informed by those in the know about the swelling bubble with ample time to react and curb the disaster, but always faithful to his “base,” George pulled no stops in feeding the frenzy.  In fact, President Bush used his power as president to fight against those who were trying to put an end to predatory mortgage lending.  Dean Baker wrote an article for The Nation entitled “Bush’s House of Cards” in 2004.  His piece speaks to the sheer size of the bubble and the political reasons it was being ignored.  What happened was no surprise.  The writing was on the wall, and unfortunately President Bush would make sure it wasn’t erased.

The Bush administration actually did what they could to help inflate the housing bubble by cutting back on Section-8 rental assistance and at the same time subsidizing low-income family down payments on new mortgages — for loans they could not afford to pay.   In spite of numerous calls to alarm, Genius George and his pals continued to deny the signs until it was too late.  It may not have been the actions of the Bush team that caused the bubble or the bank crash that followed, but they certainly did nothing to stop it and instead added to the magnitude of the calamity.

The federal government is supposed to represent The People, but under the leadership of George Bush it really only represented the wealthiest.  With total disregard for the average American, Egregious George and his cronies fueled the housing crisis, ignored the reckless gambling of the shadow banking industry, and then reached into the taxpayer’s pockets to bailout the very people who already benefitted from the dishonesty.  There are few words to describe the contempt that the American people should have for this group of self-serving scoundrels.  But as “W” himself would say, “I’ll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office.”  I guess he was right.

President Bush left our country in total disarray.  His complete devotion to unbridled, crony capitalism fueled an unprecedented transference of wealth right to the very top and helped create a bubble that took down everyone else when it burst. His blind support of deregulation led to an economic crash, the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression.  His tax policies have saved billions for America’s richest few, while depleting the government of revenue and nearly doubling the federal debt.  He spit on civil liberties, piled money into defense contractor coffers, ignored our need for energy independence, fed international distaste for American imperialism, and relentlessly poured out fear to fuel the fires that divide our good people.  We’ve been Bush-whacked!

Republican or Democrat, there’s really no way to escape the facts.  President George W. Bush was an incompetent, self-serving cowboy whose reckless form of leadership has taken our nation to the brink of economic destruction.  To blame President Obama for the Bush mess is, at the very least, irresponsible.  To rail against his attempts to rebuild and restore prosperity to 99 percent of Americans is nothing short of criminal.

There’s a battle going on right now in America.  The fight is for the very soul of our nation.  The Founding Fathers formed our government based on the principle that all should prosper.  They understood that such prosperity could only be advanced in a system that promotes the general Welfare.  They also understood the power of money and the corruption of power.  So with wisdom and care, our system was created to balance power and to give The People a voice.  That balance, and that voice, are both threatened today.

The power of The People comes only through unity, and We the People have allowed ourselves to be split by the politics of fear.  Americans need not be afraid of the guy who wants to feed his family.  They need not fear those with different beliefs or those who look different.  No — these are the false fears raised by those who benefit from dividing The People.  For divided, The People have no power, and instead the power of money is allowed to prevail.  The only people who Americans really need to fear are those who promote the continued concentration of wealth, big-money ownership of the Congress, and all the corruption that comes along with it.

The real battle for America is between the wealthiest 1 percent and the rest of us. Whose side are you on?

---

It’s like Biblical Egypt all over again, complete with the plague of the frogs, only this time — the frogs are Us. The United States of America is in dire straits, the most dire in my lifetime. Years of party politics and pandering to special interests has left our country afloat on a sea of rising problems. Pick your issue, be it banks who rob us, insurance companies who only insure for their profits, needless wars that kill our young and stuff the pockets of the defense industry, jobs, energy, taxes, it doesn’t matter; rudderless and without a destination, America continues to sail on troubled waters. The issues are many, the stakes historical, the arguments heated near a boil, and still too many Americans don’t fully comprehend that gravity of the situation — it truly is a slow burn, and We the People ARE the frogs in the kettle.

Witness the raging debate over healthcare. Are we any better off now that the “reform” bill has passed? Are we any worse? Democrats are optimistic that we’ve moved forward on the need to provide care for more Americans, and that we’ve done so in a fiscally responsible way. Republicans insists that the bill was forced down the people’s throat; that it’s a drastic move toward socialism that will surely trigger Armageddon. Who’s correct? Left? Right?

The truth that America can’t seem to handle is that they’re both right . . . and they’re both wrong. This is a dibilitating core problem in American politics. Our present political system functions more and more like a sporting event. Sides are chosen, and it’s winner take all. This is great for entertainment value, but it totally sucks for addressing the complex issues that face our nation. Our democracy has become completely dysfunctional.

The healthcare legislation is just one example; one for which I’ve already shared my opinion. I sincerely wish it was the only example, but that’s far from the case. The process witnessed during the healthcare debate is simply the latest instance of partisan bickering and diametric opposition to exemplify our broken government. This slam dance is now standard operating procedure, and it guarantees that the real issues will never be addressed.

There is no doubt that this dynamic has crippled our democracy’s ability to serve the needs of the people. But of even greater concern is the irresponsible outcome insured by the marriage of the two warring factions. The net result of the Democrat push for increased social benefits, coupled with the Republican mantra of tax reduction, not only ensures that effective solutions are never instituted, but also serves to keep the public’s attention trained on the diversion and away from the elephant in the room.

This is nothing new for Washington politics, but the gravity of the consequences hits new levels with every passing day. The “more services/less revenue” tango has left America in denial. Little conversation occurs regarding our economic elephant. This Godzilla like beast to which I refer is the deep dark financial hole our illustrious leaders so zealously feed — a hole totaling some $56 trillion dollars as of September 30, 2008, and growing.

That’s right, $56 trillion, with a “T.” That’s nearly a half million dollars for every American household. In the words of David M. Walker, former Comptroller General of the U.S., this is like having, “a huge second or possibly third mortgage, amounting to almost ten times your annual household income.” For the moment, we do still have the World’s largest economy, but even our $14 trillion GDP pales when compared to this mounting debt and liabilities. And when you consider that the budget deficit was $1.42 trillion for fiscal 2009, a full 9.9 percent of that GDP, you get a feel for how we’re feeding our giant reptile.

Recent bailouts and the new healthcare legislation certainly add to the problem, but they alone are not the culprits. The real core issue is complete fiscal irresponsibility on the part of conservatives and liberals alike, and the bottom line is that neither side has the courage to face the music. Though, I guess this is somewhat understandable, since the song they need to play is a dirge, and the lyrics should go something like, “We’re so sorry we sold you down the river for our own personal gain.”

Yes, my fellow Americans, regardless of political affiliations, we’ve all been sold a bad bill of goods. It’s time to stop playing like ostriches, pull our heads out of the sand and take a serious look at our financial mess. Like teenagers with a new credit card, our elected officials have strapped us with a federal debt now over $12 trillion dollars, and that’s not the worst of it. It’s actually more like the tip of the iceberg. The plot sickens much further when you take a look at our unfunded obligations.

As of September 30, 2008, our unfunded obligations, consisting of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security totaled nearly $43 trillion. And since the Congress refuses to address the issue and instead continues to add to the balance, the $56 trillion hole (federal debt plus unfunded obligations) for 2008 is expected to bulge to $63 trillion for 2009.

Just in case these numbers don’t grab your attention, you might want to consider that when George W. Bush took office, the hole was a comparatively manageable $20 trillion. During his two terms as President, we had three tax cuts, started two wars, bolstered homeland security and added an extremely expensive prescription drug benefit to Medicare. The combined result of this wisdom enlarged the hole by 176 percent to the $56 trillion number that President Obama stepped into. This is what’s commonly referred to as a snowball effect, and the really scary part is that it’s just getting going.

Indeed, if left unaddressed, the GAO (Government Accountability Office) forecasts that within the next 12 years, interest payments on the federal debt will become the single largest line item in the federal budget. If left until 2040, all federal revenues would cover only the payment of said interest and Medicare/Medicaid. We’d have nothing left for defense, much less Social Security or anything else. Put another way, in order to cover the bills in 2030, our average federal tax rate of 21 percent will have to swell to as much as 45 percent. By 2040, it would be 53 percent, and that’s only the federal slice.

Needless to say, this paints a sorry picture for all of us, but left unchecked it could prove devastating to our children and grand children. All Americans should be absolutely ashamed that we’ve allowed the situation to grow so very bleak. Everybody knows that we’ve been building a house of cards, that you can’t continually reduce federal revenues (cut taxes) and at the same time increase spending (wars and services) and expect things to balance. Our elected official’s intentional obfuscation of the facts may have clouded issues, but in the end, it’s really every American who’s responsible. We’ve spent 30 years in denial and it’s high time to stand straight and face the facts.

The facts are that, contrary to common assertions, we can’t grow or inflate our way out of this big ugly. Yet, unless we want to just subscribe to the contemporary American IBG (I’ll Be Gone) ethic, we need to do our best to address the issues and to do so with some haste. Things will only get worse until we do.

Resolution obviously won’t be easy, but the good news is that we can make it happen, and we’ll all be stronger for the wear. Real patriots will take this challenge in the spirit that created our great nation. They will demand that our politicians immediately stop the destructive rhetoric, cease their incessant partisan bickering, and open a meaningful dialog to address this real and pertinent issue. And they will also accept that the way out will require that we all make sacrifices.

Thankfully, I’m not a politician, and I don’t have to worry about getting reelected, so I can tell it like it is. The fact is that big holes need big shovels, and we’ve done a lot of digging. Our way out is going to be painful. So conservatives, suck it up, because we’re going to need to raise taxes, and liberals, bite your tongues, because social programs will have to see cuts. Social Security and Medicare have to be reformed and the defense budget will need a serious overhaul. It’s time for transformational change, change that will require nonpartisan solutions. I’m sure that recovery will provide plenty to piss off every American, but the only alternative to some scorched buttocks is to just sit in the kettle and be cooked. You’ll have to make your choice. I’ve already made mine.

If you’re interested in more information, please take the time to watch I.O.U.S.A. And when you’re finished, please do get involved. You can start by taking action and writing Congress.

---

Do you believe that all Americans should have access to healthcare? Can you answer this question with a simple “yes or no?” Do you think the inquiry immediately begs other questions? Is cost an issue in your mind? These and many other questions are at the heart of the heated debate over healthcare in America. But the raging arguments never seem to address the core issues, at least not in a substantive manner. Instead, hyperbole has become the rule of the day.

Real leadership would require that the debate be taken back to its root, at the point where we, as a nation, must answer the values question, the question regarding access for all Americans. This question is essentially ethical in nature and should be addressed in that isolated context. Whether or not we can afford the corresponding solution is a practical matter that also demands attention, but it shouldn’t be allowed to impact our basic ethical decision.

Personally, I cannot fathom the rationale supporting a negative response to the primary question. My answer is, “Absolutely yes!” I have no doubt that the only legitimate response is acknowledgement; the only appropriate ethical position is that healthcare is a right, not an entitlement. So, does this make me a supporter of the healthcare “reform” that President Obama just signed into law?

Ignoring the bitter taste left in my mouth from the way in which our Congress passed the healthcare legislation, I will admit that it does address some serious issues. An unbiased analysis of the Democratic position must acknowledge that the bill does indeed promise to provide healthcare to some 32 million nonelderly Americans who would otherwise not have coverage. But that same analysis might not be so pro-Democrat when investigating the legitimacy of their claims of fiscal responsibility.

It is true that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the combined bill (H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, and the reconciliation proposal) will reduce the federal budget deficit by $143 billion over the next 10 years. This is the fact upon which the Democrats rest their claim of fiscal soundness. But how credible is this assertion?

A close look at the CBO report reveals that, while the basic analysis reflects such a savings, the likelihood of that outcome is not so substantial. The problem is that the analysis is rife with potential holes and assumptions. For example, taking only the probable discretionary costs into account (IRS enforcement, DHHS administration, and explicit authorization for grant and other programs), which the CBO projects to be as much as an additional $70 billion over that same 10 years, the actual deficit reduction would be nearly cut in half.

Discretionary costs aside, the $143 billion estimate is based only on changes in direct spending and revenue, but even within this category there are some line items that give cause for concern. One such item is the reduction in Medicare FFS (fee for service) costs. Identified as a $196 billion cost reduction in the CBO estimate, the savings is wholly dependent upon Congress staying the course with regard to physician payment rates. Should they decide instead to approve legislation that increases said payments, all bets may be off.  In fact, the CBO estimates that if H.R. 3961 were passed, which it already was by the House in the fall of 2009, the budget deficit would be increased by $59 billion. So much for the reduction and fiscal responsibility.

To be fair, maybe there is some small chance that Congress could stay their hand and resist raising Medicare payment rates, even in the face of doctors refusing to provide services at the 21 percent rate reduction scheduled for this April. So, let’s for a moment put on our rose colored glasses and assume it’s so — does that seal the deal for sound fiscal practices? I’m sorry, but “no.” We’re still left with some serious potential issues that give reason for skepticism.

One such issue is the validity of the estimate of the funding required to subsidize health insurance purchases. The CBO sets this number at $350 billion over that 10-year window.  This projection may be high, and it may be low.  The CBO states that chances are about equal, either way, and I certainly don’t have a crystal ball, but in the absence of any real reform, I think most people would agree on where the smart money would be. I mean, how many unscrupulous rate increases, like the 39 percent recently levied by Anthem Blue Cross in California, did the CBO include in their analysis?

Taken together, these issues definitely cast some doubt on the fiscal character of the healthcare legislation. Add to the mess, the intentional skewing of the numbers related to reductions projected from the CLASS (Community Living Assistance Services and Support) program and your doubt will likely turn to dismay. CLASS accounts for $70 billion of savings in the CBO estimates. It does this through the miracle of advanced premiums being collected for 5 years prior to any benefits being paid. Sound a little like sleight of hand? I think we can agree that the practice is dubious at best.

As much as I’m in favor of providing healthcare for ALL Americans, in the end, I’m afraid I have to call it straight up — the great Democrat healthcare victory is really just a sham. It is nothing more than the latest round of underfunded legislation adding to the $56 trillion black hole that is our national debt and entitlement liability.

America is in desperate need of real healthcare reform, and what was just written into law is not it. Real reform will address the issues that cause healthcare services to be so costly. It will remedy medical malpractice, include provisions to encourage healthier lifestyles, replace fee-for-service payments with a manageable system, and likely establish a central program that provides basic healthcare for one and all.

I’m not in the Republican, “Repeal and Replace” camp, but I can certainly see that we’re a very long way from real reform. With the Baby Boomers coming into retirement age, the time to act is now. That Black Hole isn’t getting any smaller.

---