Visit US Friday December 6 & 13 on the Square in Greencastle.

     We will set up on the square at the side of the Susquehanna Bank building between 5:15 and 5:30 to hand out hot chocolate, cookies and brownies.  If you would like to donate some goodies, oar just meet some of our leaders, we will see you then.  We will be there until we run out of food and drink, or it gets too cold ---

Take action against Sen Alloway's "Private School" Bill

In a message dated 11/21/2013 10:08:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, spicka@pa.net writes:

Hi Sheri, Pete, Garrett, and Sheldon,

I hope that you’re all doing well. Would you be willing to share this op-ed from the PO with your email groups? Alloway has co-sponsored charter school legislation that would allow a university to authorize a charter school, that would then be able to set up shop in our community and send us the bill. Brick-and-mortar charter schools would not need the approval of local taxpayers or school boards and they would be opening in Franklin County in no time if this legislation passes.

If this charter school legislation passes, it will be the end of any child in Franklin County having a chance to go to a good traditional public school. It will also mean never ending property tax increases as taxpayer fund even more schools.

The charter lobby, which has funded Corbett’s campaign, wants to get this through because they know their time is running out. Would you please ask people to call Alloway’s office and just say, “Oppose Senate Bill 1085. We can’t afford to pay for charter schools that are authorized by a private entity that isn’t even in our community.” His phone number is 264-6100. Please share far and wide.

http://www.publicopiniononline.com/opinion/ci_24575352/alloway-charter-school-bill-bad-time-terrible-idea

Thank you!

Susan

Now Search for Us Using #GAPADEMS

As we try to keep up with web technology, we have created the hashtag #GAPADEMS to enable you to find us easily from your computer or smart phone.

2014 Senate Elections

     The Republicans keep talking about a huge Senate landslide in 2014.  The Democrats are allegedly overleveraged with too many seats that they picked up with the 2008 Obama swing year.  That's actually really humorous.  The reason is because they were saying the exact same thing in 2012.  I remember about a year ago I was watching FOX News (a horrible habit I find myself doing every once and again, you'll have to forgive me) and Karl Rove was going on and on, (practically taking a victory lap six months before the polls opened) about how bad the Democrats were going to lose the Senate, and how Romney was going to come in with a landslide and pick up every swing state and Senate seat in that state.  But that's not what happened. 

     Except for Nevada, every swing state sent a Democrat to the United States Senate.  Even some Republican states like North Dakota and Montana that were supposed to send Reds to Washington sent Dems.  Now the exact same pollsters are saying the exact same thing again.  "Too many seats.  Huge Republican year." say the strategists.  But this doesn't line up with the facts.  The four southern states with Dem senators are likely to retain them due to a combination of weak challengers, moderate records, and unpopular Republican policies from their state legislators and Governors. 
     Alaska is likely to keep Senator Begich.  His challengers include the failed 2010 candidate, the Lieutenant Governor, and Sarah Palin, all of which he beats in the polls.  It does look like Montana and South Dakota will be lost as Senators Baucus and Johnson retire and don't look like the nominees will be strong enough to win.  I'm somewhat optimistic.  I believe that with enough funding, good messaging and a strong campaign a good Democrat can win anywhere in the country. 

     There is still a possibility the Democratic Party can pick up any seats that are lost and call the whole cycle a wash.  Georgia is looking like it is going to have what I call a “Tea Party Primary,” or a TPP.  The TPP has one and only one rule.  Out-crazy your opponent.  And wow, do the three main Republicans running have that!  On the other hand the likely Democratic nominee will be Michelle Nunn, a non-for-profit founder (not as prestigious as Bain Capital, but still a good job) and the daughter of a popular former Senator.  The statements the likely GOP nominee will have to say to win a midterm primary will have to be so outrageous that they’ll turn-off thousands of people who would have  otherwise voted  for them.  That coupled with the nominee will be a sitting member of the Congress with a 10% approval rating will bring along the baggage that they are part of problem with Washington, and moving them across the Capitol building probably won’t do much.

     Kentucky may even drop Mitch McConnell in exchange for his Democratic opponent.  Minority leaders have been defeated before.  It can be done again.

They Don't Care

          Republican’s don’t care about the deficit.  They've proven this time and time again.  Yet for whatever reason, they refuse to see it, and the people that vote for them refuse to see it.  Whether you look at spending or revenue, nothing they believe delivers serious reductions in deficits, and nearly everything exacerbates it.  Whether it is tax policy or fiscal policy, they manage to run on deficit “reduction” policies that actually increase the deficit. 

There are two schools of Conservative thought on tax policy.  One says that rates should be cut, and to compensate for this loss of revenue by closing tax loopholes.  Sounds wonderful, even I think that is a good idea.  However they never state which loopholes they will close…ever.  This was a problem for Governor Romney in the last campaign.  A $5 Trillion dollar tax cut probably should have mentioned some way to pay for it.  It’s not even like it is difficult to find loopholes.  A recent CBO report found that there is $900 billion in tax expenditures in the Individual Income tax system alone.  The House Republicans on the Budget Committee (I presume not wanting to be upstaged by Governor Romney) has put forward a plan to drain nearly $6 Trillion in revenue.  Surprisingly, they have not put forward any way to pay for it, either though closing loopholes or reducing spending.  It is nothing more than a talking-point they use to trick simple-minded people into voting for them.  “Reduce rates!” “Close loopholes!” “Tax simplification!”  Those terms do poll very well and sound nice in 30-second ads.  However, their talking points are never translated into policy, and they have no intention of ever translating them into policy.  It is a quick way to add some more debt, and nothing more. 

The second idea is a flat tax.  A fairly basic principle, all people should pay the same percentage of their income.  Whether you are a member of the Walton family and hold more wealth than the bottom 40% of Americans, or you work at Wal-Mart and need food stamps to feed your child, you will pay the same “X”% of your income.  The idea of a flat tax sounds wonderful to them.  Pry a little deeper.  What rate do they want to set it at?  They really don’t know.  Steve Forbes' Presidential campaign was well known for his proposed rate of 17%.  The conservative Heritage Foundation has recently proposed a rate of 28%.  I've had someone tell me the comically low rate of 6% to replace all Federal revenue.  There are only two real places to set the rate.  Either so low that large sums of revenue from wealthy and well-off people is lost, and permanent deficits are created.  Or, a rate that is so high that it discourages economic activity and consumption due to middle and lower class people having a tax bill increased so immensely that it hinders their ability to purchase, invest, and save. Either way, everyone else in the country is giving up something so the wealthiest can have more.  If the rate is low, a debt crisis becomes more likely and more imminent from the lack of revenue.  If it is too high, the rich will still most likely see a tax cut, and everyone else in the country will end up having to pay more for their tax cuts.  This has already begun to happen in nations with a flat tax, which have adopted regressive Value-Added Taxes  (VAT) on the people.  

The Republicans have long painted themselves as the proponents of a smaller government and cuts in government spending.  It is true that the incumbent Republican Governors have been practicing a miniature American austerity; however, at the federal level they consistently fail to deliver.  When the Republicans held complete control in Washington from 2003-2006, federal spending increased by nearly $600 billion dollars, or by about 26%.  Even if you ignore the increase in defense spending (there was a war after all) you still have a federal government that grew by 24%.  They never have any way to cut federal spending because the dirty secret is that Republicans actually don’t know what they want to cut.  Ask them.  Do they want to cut education? Defense? Veteran’s benefits? Social security? Medicare? Infrastructure?  Anything?  They only want to cut social welfare spending.  With a 10-year deficit of $6.3 Trillion dollars, they want to cut that, and almost nothing else.  Even if all income security programs were to be cut in half, the savings over 10-years would be $1.6 Trillion, which wouldn't even cover the multi-trillion dollar tax cuts that they want. 

The Worst Socialist Ever

     Since 2009…The Dow Jones is up 68%. S&P is up 120%. The NASDAQ is up 145%. Private health insurance companies will be gaining 22,000,000 million new customers.  The people that advocated for single-payer during the healthcare reform debates were arrested.  Corporate profits rose 72% and are currently at a record high, while federal revenue from corporations is at a record low.  Federal revenue as a size of the economy in general is at a 50-year low.  There are a record number of Millionaires.  The wealthiest 1% gained 93% of all the income growth.  Government employment is down 651,000 (compare that to the first-term average of the last three Republican presidents, which was 628,000 new government employees). The number of industries nationalized has been 0.  Federal spending has gone flat, and Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid have all been put on the table numerous times…
This means one of two things…

 1)  Barack Obama is NOT a Socialist and Republicans simply call him one because they don’t know what socialism is, or choose to manipulate the blind fear of an ideology that is not very well understood by the general populace, and their base. OR

 2)  Barack Obama is the worst Socialist EVER. 

Serious Question

            What makes a cult?  Isn’t the only thing that requires fanaticism a rejection of reality and a stringent line on ideological positions to the point that it alienates people?  I only ask because if that’s all it takes could you think of anything more exemplary of the modern Conservative Movement?  It is one thing to have legitimate differences in policy, in any successful democratic-republic differences in ideology and different ideas are bound to happen and should be accepted and debated.  However, they do not merely disagree; they flat out don’t care about the facts.  Climate Change?  Despite all of the objective research, it is a hoax, and a plot by environmentalists to attack the poor and long oppressed oil companies.  Tax cuts?  Obviously increase revenue every single time, despite the ones of 2001 and 2003 failing to.  Tax increases on the rich?  They kill jobs, ignoring of course that one tax increase President Clinton enacted and those 20 Million jobs that were created afterward.  What about that Weimar/Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation that was bound to happen after the Stimulus was enacted like Glenn Beck was shouting about?  Does it matter that the annual inflation rates in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 have all been consistent with the historic average, if not lower?  Not if you’re a conservative.  I honestly should begin consider this political philosophy for myself.  Doing actual research is one thing, but is just so damn time consuming.  Wouldn’t it be much easier if I could just sit back, relax, and let Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity shout at me what to think?  Maybe.  But I’ll continue to think for myself.

Republicans

     Republicans don't hate government.  They use the same services.  They drive the same roads.  They send their kids to the same schools.  They drink the same none contaminated water & air.  They draw from and have relatives that draw from Social Security and Medicare.  No they don't hate government.  Instead they hate things that the government does for other people.  If someone else gets sick, it's not the government's responsibility to ensure that they have access to adequate medical care.  If someone doesn't have a job, they are a lazy dependent if they seek to draw unemployment insurance, but when they are unemployed, government assistance is a critical.  I could go on but every single Republican position on every single issue can be summed up in one sentence.

                                                              I've got mine.  Forget You.