Psyche, Science, and Society

Schakowsky proposes progressive deficit reduction plan

Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a member of the Deficit Commission, has issued a plan [pdf] that poses a progressive alternative to that the the Commission Co-chairs. In a press release, she summarizes the central elements:

1) Increased economic stimulus to spur growth in the immediate term

· Provide $200 billion to invest over the next two years in measures to create jobs and spur economic growth, including passing the Local Jobs for America Act; and funding for education and law enforcement; Unemployment Insurance, Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAP) and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program extensions; and infrastructure. 

· Adopt the President’s proposals to eliminate overseas tax havens and incentives for outsourcing

2) Smart, targeted spending cuts

· Non-Defense Discretionary – $8.55 billion in savings through increased efficiency and cuts to programs that benefit large corporations that don’t need assistance.

· Defense Discretionary – $110.7 billion in cuts from the 2015 defense budget, including efficiency savings, reducing our troop levels, cutting weapons systems we don’t need, and scaling back the wartime increases in the size of the military.

3) Mandatory spending cuts

• Health Care – at least $17.2 billion in savings by implementing measures to bring down the cost of health care to the federal government and lower health care inflation overall.
• Other – $7.5 billion in savings by cutting agriculture subsidies in half, and redistributing federal support to offer greater benefits to small family farms reduce subsidies to large corporate agribusiness.

4) Reductions in tax expenditures

• Raise $132.2 billion by closing tax subsidies for companies that ship American jobs overseas.

5) Increases in revenues

• Raise $144.6 billion in revenue through progressive reforms to the estate tax, treating capital gains and dividends as regular income, and enacting a cap and trade proposal that includes protections for lower-income people.
• Enact President Obama’s budget proposal to let the Bush tax cuts for the top 2 brackets expire and return to 2009 estate tax levels.
• Non-tax revenue – raise $7 billion by addressing places where the private sector is currently under-paying.

Schakowsky also denounces the idea of cuts in social security for the bait-and-switch that it is:

“There is a better way than the Simpson-Bowles proposal – which relies heavily on benefit cuts instead of revenue increases.

“Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Addressing the Social Security issue as part of the deficit question is like attacking Iraq to retaliate for the 9/11 attacks – there is simply no relationship between the two and attempting to conflate them does a grave disservice to America’s seniors.

“Taking money from Social Security retirees whose average total income is $18,000 per year and average benefit is $14,000 ($12,000 for women) is simply wrong. It places them at fiscal risk and hurts the economy because they will be unable to purchase the goods they need.  Americans in poll after poll have indicated their opposition to benefit cuts – particularly at a time when Wall Street bankers are making record bonuses.

The Schakowsky alternative does not contain any cuts to Social Security.

• It ensures long-term solvency to Social Security by eliminating the wage cap on the employer side and raising it to 90% on the employee side, applying FICA to all wage income below the cap, and establishing a modest legacy tax on wealthier Americans.
• Surplus funding that can be used to improve the extremely-modest benefits that are now provided.

This plan seems like a sensible place to begin a discussion. That isn’t likely to happen on the Commission, as Schakowsky’s plan doesn’t gouge the poor and middle class to enrich the wealthy. Of course, Obama will likely ignore or undercut it as he seeks his holy grail of “bipartisanship,” aka, caving.

November 16th, 2010

TSA training people for police state?

digby discusses the new whole body scanners from the TSA, and the man, John Tyner, who refused a scan, was ordered to leave the secure area, was escorted out by TSA thugs, and is now under investigation for “leaving a secure area!” digby believes that this nonsense is part of a strategy to create a police state and get citizens used to unquestioningly follow ridiculous orders:

When I wrote about it over the week-end, I pointed out that this was the latest in a series of steps leading to a police state — the building of a police bureaucracy and the intimidation and the incoherence of security theatre designed to confuse citizens and indoctrinate them to the idea that they should unquestioningly submit to absurd directives from authorities. It’s how you control a populace.

She goes on to point out the total irrationality of the TSA’s policies:

For instance, the body scanners are designed to see things that the metal detectors cannot see, including things hidden inside the body. But you are allowed to opt out of that to get a pat down — which doesn’t include a cavity search (yet.) This makes no sense unless you think that terrorists are so stupid that they can’t figure out where their bodily orifices are. In other words, the only way this could be construed as rational is if they required everyone to go through the scanner or get a full strip and cavity search.

One people routinely allow government officials to view or fondle their genitals in a sexual assault, what else is left? Is there a limit to what people will put up with in order to pretend to be “safe?’

UPDATE: Firedoglake has initiated a petition to stop the TSA’s “Porn or Grope” policy:

The TSA’s “porno scanners” are a gross invasion of privacy. After the House voted down invasive porno scanners, the TSA ignored the will of Congress and bought the machines anyway, wasting $25 million in stimulus funds to create just a single job.

The TSA’s new aggressive “pat downs” are clearly designed to punish people like John Tyner who refuse to go through the porno scanners. Neither the scanners nor the aggressive pat-downs make us any safer. Now the TSA is further abusing its power, threatening a citizen’s most basic rights to intimidate the rest of us.

It’s clear that the TSA is out of control. Congress should investigate the TSA’s abuse of power, and then pull the plug on the invasion of our privacy.

Sign it here.

November 16th, 2010

Britain to compensate torture victims

Britain is light years ahead of the US in coming to terms with its government’s involvement in torture. In the latest development, the British government has agreed to pay millions of pounds compensation to 12 men, a number of whom were Guantanamo prisoners, who claim British government collusion in their torture. The BBC reports:

Government to compensate ex-Guantanamo Bay detainees

Around a dozen men who accused British security forces of colluding in their torture overseas are to get millions in compensation from the UK government.

Some of the men, who are all British citizens or residents, were detained at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba.

At least six of them alleged UK forces were complicit in their torture before they arrived at Guantanamo.

The Commons will debate the payout when Justice Secretary Ken Clarke makes a statement on Tuesday afternoon.

A written ministerial statement on the out-of-court settlement, which had been expected to be released on Tuesday morning, was withdrawn by the Ministry of Justice.

BBC chief political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg explained there was some concern whether a written statement was sufficient for an issue that was causing so much concern.

Lengthy negotiations

It is believed the government wanted to avoid a lengthy and costly court case which would also have put the British secret intelligence services under the spotlight.

Bisher al-Rawi, Jamil el Banna, Richard Belmar, Omar Deghayes, Binyam Mohamed and Martin Mubanga were among those who had begun High Court cases against the government.

They had claimed that UK intelligence agencies and three government departments were complicit in their torture and should have prevented it.

In May, the Court of Appeal ruled that the government was unable to rely on “secret evidence” to defend itself against the six cases.

Then, in July, the High Court ordered the release of some of the 500,000 documents relating to the case.

At least 60 government lawyers and officials have been working through the documents.

The settlement was believed to have been agreed after lengthy negotiations.

BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins said the Intelligence and Security Committee and the National Audit Office would be briefed about the payments.

He said the government would now be able to move forward with plans for an inquiry, led by Sir Peter Gibson, into claims that UK security services were complicit in the torture of terror suspects.

Mr Mohamed’s solicitor, Sapna Malik, refused to comment on reports that her client will receive more than £1m in compenstation

She told the BBC: “I can’t confirm any details about the settlement package. All I can say is that the claims have been settled and the terms are confidential.”

She added: “Our client was horrendously treated over a period of almost seven years, with a significant degree of collusion from the security services in the UK.”

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said of the payments: “It’s not very palatable but there is a price to be paid for lawlessness and torture in freedom’s name. There are torture victims who were entitled to expect protection from their country.

“The government now accepts that torture is never justified and we were all let down – let’s learn all the lessons and move on.”

Severely tortured

The Cabinet Office said: “The prime minister set out clearly in his statement to the House (of Commons) on July 6 that we need to deal with the totally unsatisfactory situation where for ‘the past few years, the reputation of our security services has been overshadowed by allegations about their involvement in the treatment of detainees held by other countries’.”

The UK security services have always denied any claims that they have used or condoned the use of torture.

Last month, the head of MI6, Sir John Sawers described torture as “illegal and abhorrent” and defended the service’s need for secrecy.

Mr Mohamed, from west London, was held in Pakistan in 2002 before US agencies moved him to Morocco, where he was severely tortured, before he was sent on to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

It later emerged that a British intelligence officer visited him in detention in Pakistan and that the CIA had told London what mistreatment he had suffered.

Mr Mohamed, 32, had alleged that his torturers in Morocco had asked questions supplied by MI5.

He was released in 2009, when allegations of British involvement in torture returned to prominence.

November 16th, 2010

Scots gang emulate CIA, waterboard rival

As President Bush brags about authorizing waterboarding torture and gets away with it, the torture tactic is spreading in the popular culture. The Daily Record brings news that a Scots drug gang waterboarded a rival. They apparently were inspired by US government torturers:

Waterboarding was virtually unheard of until the US declared its global war on terror following the September 11 attacks.

Carried out in secret by mysterious CIA operatives, it is widely regarded as torture and was banned last year by president Barack Obama.

The gang heard of it in the media and decided it was just the thing they needed:

“This mob are not to be messed with. They’ve obviously seen all the stuff on the news about waterboarding terrorists and thought it would work for drug dealers.”

Like most torturers, they claim it worked:

“They locked him in a flat in Whitevale Street last Wednesday and tried out this waterboarding torture.

“Apparently he was pinned down, they put some cloth or something over his face and poured the water over him.

“The flat was empty and the only thing lying about was a scaffolding board so he was tied on to that and tilted back before the water was poured .

“It sounds pretty horrendous – he told pals he collapsed after it and nearly drowned.

“But he handed back 750 pills. He wasn’t taking anymore of that torture. From their point of view it worked.”

Who’s next?

Heck of a job, Bushie.

November 16th, 2010