(Click here and volunteer a portion of your time to help Martha Coakley's campaign in Massachusetts. - promoted by ctblogger)
I'm a Fairfielder who goes to college in Massachusetts.
I don't need to remind everyone of the importance of tomorrow's election. Polls are even between Democrat Martha Coakley and Republican Scott Brown. Thousands have offered support from across the country for this important race.
But I want to stress that Martha is not just the anti-conservative candidate, but also has a stellar record of her own.
Here are the FDL Action health care reform highlights for Thursday, November 12.
1. Jane Hamsher writes that "Harry Reid says he has a wonderful relationship with the albatross hanging around his neck," aka Joe Lieberman. Personally, I still can't comprehend how Lieberman wasn't booted from the caucus when he not only endorsed John McCain, but campaigned with McCain and Sarah "Wolf Killer" Palin against Barack Obama and Joe Biden in 2008. Argh.
2. Jon Walker blogs about a Washington Post story "that Harry Reid is looking into possibly raising the Medicare payroll tax for those making above $250,000 a year." Walker believes that "[i]f Reid can get the Senate bill to more heavily rely on taxing the wealthy, and less on taxing employer-provided health insurance benefits, it could reduce the number of contentious issues needed to be settled in conference." Not that there are any contentious issues that need to be settled in conference. Ha.
3. Jon Walker writes that "[w]hile health reform does not directly address many GLBT issues, it does try to fix many of the problems with our current system that do strongly disadvantage the community." Let's hope so, it's about time this issue is addressed!
5. I report on a new poll by Quinnipiac University that indicates the public option is highly popular in Connecticut, and on balance it's a political loser for Joe Lieberman to oppose it. Not that he gives a rat's hindquarters.
6. Jon Walker writes that this is "only one important battle for health care reform," that even if "a health care reform bill passes this year, there will be at least two more legislative battles before progressives could turn it into a quality universal health care system." Something to look forward to.
7. Jon Walker believes that Rep. Bart Stupak has no plans to "fold," and also that if "the pro-choice block in the House is not serious with their threat, the Stupak amendment will be in final bill." That's an outcome we don't want, so let's hope pro-choice representatives get "serious." Fast.
8. Jon Walker says that Senator Harry Reid "may pay for reform with Medicare payroll tax on capital gains." Walker believes that this is "a smart way to raise money and should be a relatively easier sell, as tax increase[s] go."
Here are the FDL Action health care reform highlights for Wednesday, November 11.
1. Jane Hamsher points us to Kagro's "excellent rundown of what happened on the public option fight," and also why abortion rights activists, with "an existing network of professional lobbyists and policy analysts, plus a multi-million dollar funding base," didn't see the Stupak amendment coming and work effectively to head it off. Simply bizarre.
2. Jon Walker reports on Sen. Tom Carper's "no good, super terrible, completely awful, new new new 'alternative' to the public option," namely "to take Olympia Snowe's worthless trigger idea (which already should have 60 votes if no liberal Democratic senators bolt), and weaken it further for no reason." Brilliant!
3. Jon Walker writes that "if Harry Reid tries to go this route [e.g., "accept some worthless fig leaf like the Snowe's trigger or Carper's Plan B"] to get a watered-down compromise, it will not 'show the left that he did everything he could do.'" In the end, Walker concludes, "The left will not be 'placated' by a big show and half hearted measures." Sorry, but that's not what we've worked so hard for the last several years.
4. Jane Hamsher writes that "the absolute best, most optimistic outlook for passing a bill in the House without a public option means that 13 or fewer progressive votes could stop it." She then proceeds to list 16 progressives who have pledged that they'll vote against any bill without a public option. The result of this analysis is powerful: "no health care bill will pass without a public option. Period." Now that we've got that out of the way, how about the Senate stops wasting time and gets this thing done already?
5. Jon Walker says that "PolitiFact Is Wrong About Nita Lowey: Abortion Coverage Could Become Rare With Stupak Amendment." What's weird is that even after Walker contacted PolitiFact and told them exactly why they were wrong, they still would not correct their story, arguing that the possibility of abortion coverage becoming rare "seems remote." Based on this, Walker remarks, snarkily, "PolitiFact claims to be a 'fact checker,' not a 'in my opinion it seems like an unlikely outcome' checker." Heh.
6. Finally, Jon Walker reports that "since the House agreed to decouple the public option from Medicare rates, [Sen. Kent] Conrad has expressed some tepid openness to the public plan." True, it may not be a "ringing endorsement" of the public option by Conrad, but on the bright side he "does not sound like a man who is about to threaten to bring the whole bill down if it includes one." Hey, that almost makes me tepidly optimistic! LOL
Here are the FDL Action health care reform highlights for Friday, November 6.
1. Jon Walker asks, "Does Landrieu Not Know That All Her Demands Regarding The Public Option Have Already Been Addressed?" Specifically, Walker wonders if Landrieu is aware that "House Democrats adopted [Chuck] Schumer's idea of a 'level playing field' public option," one that is supported by premiums (not "government-run, taxpayer subsidized" as Landrieu seems to think). Very strange.
3. Jon Walker says that, "[a]s it stands, I can't say I'm 100% confident in the success of a negotiated rates public option limited to only the new exchange." Walker explains in detail how "the public option will reach several important tipping points in the first few years that will determine its long term success or failure." Fascinating stuff.
4. Jane Hamsher writes about the AFL-CIO threatening to "reduce its contributions to Democrats who don't side with them on the [health care] issue." Hardball.
5. Jon Walker asks if the Republican strategy of "[d]ragging their heels, endless delaying, obstructing everything, screaming about overreach and government takeovers" has "succeeded in paralyzing enough conservative Democrats at just the wrong moment." Walker worries that Democrats could end up "facing two opponents in 2010...Republicans, and staying home." As someone who just observed exactly that in Virginia, I can say that this is not farfetched at all.
7. An incredibly busy Jon Walker writes about a "new CBO analysis of the House bill [that] demonstrates how weak the CBO believes the new risk adjustment mechanism will be."
Finally, keep an eye on the House over the next few days, keep the pressure on your representatives for the best possible health care reform, and have a great weekend!
Here are the FDL Action health care reform highlights for Thursday, November 5.
1. Jon Walker reports on what he correctly calls a "cruel sick joke" - the Republican "health care reform "alternative." Among other things, "It does not ban insurance companies from refusing to cover pre-existing conditions. It guts state health insurance regulations, and lets insurance companies charge sicker people more." That's why I like to call the GOP the "I've got mine so @#@$@ you" party.
2. Jon Walker blogs about DCCC chair Rep. Chris Van Hollen telling "members in a closed-door meeting that Democrats win by supporting the core Democratic agenda." Both Van Hollen and Nancy Pelosi emphasized that "Republicans attacked New York Democrat Bill Owens on health care during his own victorious special election campaign, but Owens still won." In short, Democrats stand the best chance of winning when they give voters a clear alternative to Republicans.
3. Jon Walker says that endorsements of HR 3962 (the "Affordable Health Care for America Act") by the AMA, AARP, American Cancer Society and Consumers Union "should help ensure that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be able to whip the votes to pass the bill on Saturday." Let's hope they more than counteract the Bachmann tea partiers who showed up en masse today on Capitol Hill!
5. Last but not least, Jon Walker reports that Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) has been disinvited as keynote speaker for the Palm Beach County, Florida Democratic Party's annual fundraiser "because she has not yet decide to support cloture on health care reform." Sorta like your mother saying, "you won't get any dinner if you don't stop hitting your brother?" :)
Here are the FDL Action health care reform highlights for Tuesday, November 3.
1. Ben Tribbett explains "What Happened in Virginia?" In part, Tribbett blames it on Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds "bashing federal Democratic priorities like "Cap and Trade" and health care reform to appeal to the conservatives that were headed to the polls." Brilliant.
2. Jane Hamsher blogs about Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), who "seems to think that if Democrats get their asses kicked [in elections] today, it just proves he's right about everything." Specifically, Altmire seems to think that "if the results show Republicans have a pretty good night, that probably is going to lead some Democrats to think that, going into next year, we need to take a second look at the way that we've done a lot of bills we've addressed up to this point." Hamsher responds, "Give me a minute while I clean my keyboard of all the coffee that just came out my nose." Heh.
3. Jon Walker comments on the "Failure Of Blue Dogging" in New York's 23rd District, writings that Bill Owens "was selected because he fit the Rahm Emanuel philosophy that the only way for Democrats to win right-leaning districts is with conservative Democratic candidates." Walker concludes, "If [Democrats] want to remain in power, they need to show the regular people that they are working to make their lives better." Like on health care reform, including a robust public option, perhaps? :)
4. Jon Walker wonders if "Majority Leader Harry Reid has reached some sort of secret deal with Joe Lieberman (I-CT)," adding that "[i]f Reid sells out the base again to appease Lieberman, he has much more to worry about than trying to get 60 votes for cloture." You can say that again.
5. Jon Walker reports that "[t]wo new polls released yesterday show plurality support for the public option in both Nebraska and North Carolina." What's particularly striking is that " Nebraska is one of the most conservative states in the country and is represented by the most conservative Democratic senator, Ben Nelson" - who does not support the public option. Apparently, Ben Nelson isn't listening very well to the voters of his state (or he simply doesn't care?).
6. Jon Walker comments on the Republican "alternative" health care bill, which he calls "a meaningless, very long press release, filled with some really bad ideas." I don't know about you, but I'm personally shocked - SHOCKED, I tell you! - that John Boehner and Eric Cantor would have come up with anything "meaningless" or with "really bad ideas" in it. (extreme snark and eye rolls)
Here are the FDL Action health care reform highlights for Wednesday, October 28.
1. Jon Walker reports that the merged House health care reform bill is scheduled to be announced tomorrow (Thursday) around 10:00 AM EDT. According to Walker, "it will likely not have the robust public option, which is a double slap in the face." Ouch, that sounds painful! :)
2. Walker writes that even if Harry Reid doesn't realize it, on Monday, he "crossed the Rubicon" by saying he would put the public option opt-out in the Senate bill. Walker believes that having done so, Reid "can't back down and expect to be cheered for trying his best," and that if he fails now, it "would prove him a weak, worthless, ineffectual leader." Just a guess here, but omething tells me that Harry Reid - or any politician in Washington, DC, for that matter - doesn't want to be seen as "weak, worthless, ineffectual."
3. Jane Hamsher, on the Rachel Maddow show last night, "dared Blanche Lincoln to filibuster the public option, and said that there were credible people sitting on the sidelines in Arkansas, waiting for an entry point to launch a primary challenge." Hamsher adds that Senator Lincoln "strongly supports a public option for crops, but not for people." Priorities, priorities...
4. Finally, Jon Walker writes about that Joe Lieberman is demanding the public option be completely taken off the table. By some convoluted process of "reasoning," one that seems to occur only in places like the nation's capital, Chris Dodd appears to believe that any reprimand of Lieberman for trying to kill a top priority of his president and his party would be "ridiculous." Which, of course, is in and of itself utterly "ridiculous." Not to mention, "weak, worthless, ineffectual." Heh.
It is election season in South Windsor! How do I know?
Yet another Republican is in hot water. Today, it's Rachna Khanna, the endorsed Republican candidate for South Windsor Town Council.
Check out coverage by Kory Loucks in the Journal Inquirer (password required), but excerpted below:
SOUTH WINDSOR — Allegations that Rachna Khanna, a Republican newcomer running for a seat on the Town Council, is planning to move to Glastonbury and resign after being elected are false, she said this week.
Khanna is listed with the Glastonbury assessor’s office as the sole owner of a 19-room, 9,700-square-foot, custom-built home with an indoor pool and an elevator, on almost 29 acres in Glastonbury.
According to the Glastonbury assessor’s office, the home at 298 Woodland St. has photovoltaic solar panels, geothermal heating, a 16-by-40-foot indoor pool, a sauna, and an elevator with four stops...
The land was purchased in 2004 for $500,000 with Khanna, who lives at 95 Bramblebrae in South Windsor, listed as the property’s owner.
According to online real estate records.. It is assessed at $1.51 million.
She also states she has investment property "around the world". Sound like another Republican you may know?
Next week, I'll sit down with Majority Leader Reid, Finance Committee Chairman Baucus, and the White House to merge together the provisions of the two health care bills that have been passed by Senate committees.
...
I understand that many of you are worried about what that bill will look like. I know first-hand how frustrating it has been to watch good ideas clash with political realities, especially on such an important issue.
...
But we have come too far, and worked too hard, to settle for "pretty good." And that's why I plan to take a stand.
First, and let me be very clear about this: I am going to fight for a strong public option. The simple, undeniable fact is that a public option will save money - and it will introduce more choice and competition into an industry that badly needs both. It is the single best way to keep costs low for middle class families - and keep the insurance companies honest. And I am by no means ready to back down on making that argument.
I watched President Obama's stirring address to a joint session of Congress on the urgent need to deliver on the American people's long-standing demand for real health care reform. The full video is here. At the beginning I was excited, hopeful and impressed. At the end I was moved to tears, knowing just how long and hard the battle has been for the moral and economic necessity of health care reform -- and how close we may be now.
But in between, as the President forcefully knocked down the most bogus claims of right-wing reform opponents, hearing a group of Congressional Republicans booing and heckling the President, followed by Republican Congressman Joe Wilson shouting "You lie" -- video of that segment is here -- it was all too clear that for a certain segment of Republicans, the extremes of their ideology have led them to emulate the sociopaths who tried to disrupt Democratic town hall health care forums this summer.
Netroots Nation is just around the corner and Credo Mobile has announced a contest to give away a BlackBerry Curve smartphone and one year's unlimited service to the best National, Local, and Activist bloggers. While there are a lot of great bloggers to choose from, the pick for Best Local Blogger is an easy one for me: MLN's own tparty.
(Ironic that Republicans who called previous voters against supplementals traitors or defeatist now vote against it, and Democrats vote for it. - promoted by Jon Kantrowitz)
When it comes to a major opportunity to stop the wars, as Edwin Starr would sing, Absolutely nothing!
All the members of the Connecticut Congressional delegation--Rosa DeLauro, Chris Murphy, Joe Courtney, Jim Himes, John Larson--voted for the war supplemental. Several of these pols have presented themselves in their campaigns as being committed to a less warlike foreign policy. But when the chips were down and there was an opportunity to stand up and really cut the funding that fuels this bloody mayhem, they voted for war.
Back from her trip to Italy and Afghanistan, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro offered her thoughts on her trip oversees for the MLN community.
Congresswoman DeLauro, the floor is yours...
-ctblogger
Last week, I went to Afghanistan to get a first-hand look at conditions on the ground. During my time there - and in Italy, where I travelled first to be briefed by American, European, and NATO leaders - I met with countless brave men and women in uniform.
I met with Major General Richard Formica from Cheshire who, as Commander of the Combined Security Transition Command, leads our efforts to build a professional Afghan National Security Force. And at the Aviano Air Force Base, I talked with Airman First Class Wilvier Medrano from Ansonia who is part of our work everyday to stabilize the region.
I asked all the soldiers I met for their perspective - how they saw America's role in the region and what it was going to take to turn things around. We talked about some of their toughest experiences living and fighting a war zone. We joked around, took pictures, and shared stories to bring home.
I came back from those meetings thinking about the path ahead: We cannot follow the same broken approach that the Bush Administration used to define its own foreign policy around the world. We cannot let Afghanistan and Pakistan become a safe haven for terrorists. And we cannot go it alone.
This represents a true test of the NATO alliance and a defining moment for the United States and its allies. It is time to recognize that this is a regional problem requiring a regional response. The United States and its allies must engage Pakistan, work to improve India-Pakistan relations - such as mediating the conflict over Kashmir - and find common ground with China, Russia, and Iran to bring lasting stability to the region.
No doubt: this is the pivotal moment. A military solution alone will not end the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We need to use every tool we have - military, economic, diplomatic and political - to bring stability to the region.
Which is why I keep thinking back to our soldiers: Everywhere I went in Afghanistan, it was clear that our courageous armed forces can do anything we ask of them. Our responsibility is to define the mission - to lay out a clear strategy going forward and give our soldiers the tools to pursue it.
President Obama does not have any simple choices in the weeks and months ahead. But with our national security at stake, we cannot afford to get them wrong. We nearly lost Afghanistan - this is our chance to get it right.
Over the past several days, the Republican National Committee (RNC) has started an aggressive campaign against the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). "ACORN is the nation's largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people." Recently, together with Project Vote Smart, they registered more than 1.3 million voters in 21 states.
Low- and moderate-income people have a tendency to vote Democratic and the RNC appears very concerned about how these new voters will affect the elections in November.
Last Thursday, the RNC had a conference call on ACORN in Wisconsin. Huffington Post reports that RNC discussed 'allegations that a voter registration group, ACORN, had hired seven workers with felony criminal records to gather voter registrations' and warned 'that doing so poses a risk to voters who provide registrars with personal information.'
Today, I received an email that the RNC was holding another conference call today about ACORN in Indiana. However, I didn't expect to see the RNC trying to suppress voter registration in Connecticut.
Less than 60 days out from the biggest election turnout of my lifetime, and less than 60 days from the election in which many CT towns will be electing Registrars of Voters, a statutorily required report on the post-election audit is completely missing in action. Why is 60 days important?
Because if you -- or the SOTS -- were to file a complaint with SEEC (State Election Enforcement Commission) due to findings in that report, SEEC would require 60 days for an investigation. Delaying release of the report denies the public -- and perhaps the SEEC- the opportunity to investigate further.
There's another number that's important, and that number is 180 days. Although the February election was a federal election and ballots are stored for 22 months, in a state election, ballots are only required by law to be retained for 180 days. The audit report for the November 2006 election was released in September 2007. In other words, the report would have been released AFTER the date on which the towns would have had a right to destroy the ballots. What kind of enforcement could that allow?
In a word, it would have allowed none. , so clearly there is not a sensitivity on UCONN's part or SOTS's part about timeliness.
The missing report points out shortcomings in the law, and shortcomings in the definition of the relationship between UCONN and SOTS as would be evidenced by a signed and dated contract or memorandum of understanding -- if such a thing existed.
Here's what the law, PA07-194 (passed in 2007 but relying in part on existing paper ballot laws defining retention periods), says:
43 . . . The results of the manual tabulation shall be reported on a
44 form prescribed by the Secretary of the State which shall include the
45 . . . Such [post-election audit report from registrars] report shall be filed
50 with the Secretary of the State who shall immediately forward such
51 report to The University of Connecticut for analysis. The University of
52 Connecticut shall file a written report with the Secretary of the State
53 regarding such analysis that describes any discrepancies identified.
54 After receipt of such report, the Secretary of the State shall file such
55 report with the State Elections Enforcement Commission.
Since her meteoric rise to the Republican Vice-Presidential nomination, Sarah Palin has tried to portray herself as a "fiscal conservative", opposed to "earmarks", who vetoes wasteful spending and cuts taxes. Her record denies it.
Regressive taxes During her six years (1996-2002) as mayor of Wasilla, AL (population 5000 and growing), Palin increased general government expenditures by more than 33 percent. During those same six years, the amount of taxes collected by the city increased by 38 percent. She cut taxes on large corporate property more than on residents, and increased a regressive sales tax, which taxed even food.
Big Debt Increases She inherited a city with zero debt but left it with indebtedness of more than $22 million.
Instead of spending the borrowed money on infrastructure, such as the sewage treatment plant that the city lacked, she spent most of it ($15 million-plus) for construction of a money-losing multi-use sports complex, which she rushed through, on a piece of property that the city didn't even have clear title to. She also supported bonds for $5.5 million for road projects that could have been done in five to seven years without any borrowing.
As governor, Sarah Palin has continued to favor government debt. The high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in infrastructure or renewable energy technology, Governor Palin proposed and the state is now distributing $1200 to every resident of Alaska. At the same time she recommended that the state borrow money for road projects. http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/17341
As Mayor, Palin Favored Earmarks Before Palin was mayor, Wasilla had not received any earmarked federal funds. Beginning in the year 2000, Palin employed a lobbying firm to secure almost $27 million in federal earmarks for Wasilla (a town which grew to 6,700 residents while she was its mayor), according to an analysis by an independent government watchdog group "Taxpayers for Common Sense". The chief lobbyist for Wasilla was Steven W. Silver, former chief of staff to Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, who was indicted in July on charges of accepting illegal gifts.
In the winter of 2000, Palin appeared before congressional appropriations committees to seek earmarks, according to a report in the Anchorage Daily News. Senate records show that Palin and the Wasilla City Council increased Silver's fee from $24,000 to $36,000 a year by 2001, Senate records show. Soon after, the city benefited from additional earmarks, including $1.9 million for the Wasilla Intermodal Transit Project, to realign rail and bus routes to increase use of public transit in the region, $500,000 for the purchase of federal land and $450,000 to rehabilitate an agricultural processing facility. Finally, she got a $15 million earmark for rail project, which was intended to connect Wasilla with the town of Girdwood, where Stevens has a house.
As governor, Sarah Palin favored a large earmark that became so infamous she had to reverse course and say "No thanks". After initially supporting the $223 million bridge that was to connect the town of Ketchikan with a remote island, she canceled the project because of cost overruns. Critics have dubbed the project the "Bridge to Nowhere." However, she kept the federal money that had been allocated for the bridge, and used the money for other state projects.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090103148.html
Monday begins the 2008 Democratic Convention and it is a critical time in our nation's history. I am pleased to share my experiences with you at MyLeftNutmeg. At this convention we will talk about Barack Obama and his plans to turn the economy around, provide real relief to the middle class, responsibly end the Iraq war and change our foreign policy to make our country safer. The country will see the very real differences between Barack Obama - who wants to lead this country in a new direction - and John McCain - who will continue the failed policies of the Bush Adminstration. One of the most glaring differences is on advancing women's issues, and importantly, working to close the wage gap between men and women - an issue I recently wrote about on HuffingtonPost.
The Paycheck Fairness Act: A Victory in Closing the Wage Gap
This is Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro. I have had the honor of serving the people of the Third Congressional District of Connecticut for the past 18 years.
In the coming months I hope to engage in conversations with you about issues facing our country and what we are doing in Washington to help improve our country. Before I talk about the Paycheck Fairness Act, I just want to say that I have been blessed to serve the Third Congressional District for the past 18 years. I appreciate your continued support and do not take your support lightly.
For more than a decade, I have been fighting to ensure that women receive equal pay from their employers. When President Kennedy's Equal Pay Act was signed into law in 1963, Women were earning 59 cents for every dollar earned by a man. To this day women are still just earning 77 cents per dollar earned by a man. This wage disparity between men and women costs women anywhere from $400,000 to $2 million over a lifetime.
By now all of you in the blogosphere are familiar with the case of Lilly Ledbetter, -- the woman whose pay discrimination case against Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Roberts Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that Ms. Ledbetter needed to file a complaint within 180 days of her first pay discrepancy to be awarded damages.
In Ms. Ledbetter's testimony before the Education and Labor Committee she said, "Goodyear acknowledged that it was paying me a lot less than the men doing the same work... So, I was actually earning twenty-percent less than the lowest paid male supervisor in the same position... What happened to me is not only an insult to my dignity, but it had real consequences for my ability to care for my family. Every paycheck I received, I got less than what I was entitled under the law."
The Ledbetter case highlighted the loopholes in the current law and the need to close them. On Thursday July 31st, the House of Representatives took the next step to correct this injustice by passing H.R. 1338, the Paycheck Fairness Act by a vote of 247-178. This vote was about ensuring that women who work hard and productively and carry a full range of family responsibilities are paid at a rate they are entitled. So many employers and companies do the right thing as a matter of course, but passing this bill says that this is now a matter of right and wrong, that discrimination is unacceptable anywhere and we are all diminished when we fall short. We have the chance to make all men and women whole and contribute to the richness of America.
Of my 18 years in Congress, this was one of the most rewarding victories I have experienced in this remarkable institution. With your help in electing Barack Obama as our next President, I hope to enjoy many more days like we did when we passed the Paycheck Fairness Act in the years ahead.
For more information on me and my positions, feel free to visit my website www.rosadelauro.com. I look forward to talking with you more in the coming months.
Tim Tagaris is a former U.S. Marine, netroots superstar, and a main character in our book "Netroots Rising." Tim's most recent gig was as netroots coordinator on the Chris Dodd for Senate campaign. According to OpenLeft blogger Matt Stoller, " Tim is a brilliant organizer, a dedicated progressive and a fantastic blogger and visionary...a netroots pioneer." Here are excerpts from an interview that Nate Wilcox and I (Lowell Feld) did with Tim back in June 2007. In this segment, Tim discusses the impact of the Connecticut blogs/netroots on the Ned Lamont for US Senate campaign.
Feld: How effective were the local blogs?
Tagaris: Unbelievably effective. Mark Pazniokas of the Courant said he read the Lamont blog before he read his own newspaper every morning.
Feld: Was MyLeftNutmeg the leading Connecticut progressive blog?
"You came here, you made some money, now please go home" Lee Whitnum Congressional Candidate June 29, 2008 Stamford Times.
Whitnum's mantra in parody of Julius Caesar is more like "Caesar Salad".
Whitnum stated to The Stamford Times that her "career in the software application field dried up in 1999 because of more foreign workers coming to the United States under special visas. That was 1999. One would think that a person with the "intellectual resources" to graduate Harvard would be able to be retrained in some other occupation, if she was ambitious. What has Whitnum been doing to change her situation in the past 9 years? For example Ms. Whitnum could have gone back to school to get an MBA, or gone to law school. She had the opportunity but did not take it. What vision has Whitnum had and what has Whitnum done to make the vision a reality by action on a consistent basis? While not knocking the honorable profession of teaching, she's doing so part time and with a little effort could very easily have transferred her 1999 skills into something more financially productive as a United States taxpayer.
Ms. Whitnum doesn't seem to get the global world reality. Is it passing her by? We are now living in a world of interdependent communities. In 1982, a little more than a quarter of a century ago, at or about the time Ms. Whitnum graduated college one of the top bestsellers was a book by John Naisbitt called Megatrends: 10 New Directions Changing Our Lives. Did Whitnum read it?
Are better or worse being challenged intellectually by immigrant hires? I submit that we ARE better in many ways because of the challenge. Let's learn from them.Think shutting down Visas is going to help? Think again!
These immigrants pay taxes and contribute to our economy. Sure they send money home, but didn't our forefathers from Europe do the same?
As a business person I use Indians in India for software development who have been hired by an American company. My costs are $120 per hour less than they were in 2002 and the work quality is great. Prior to then I was using an American company run by Indians based in the US. $120 per hour is a savings that goes directly to my bottom line for reinvestment in my business and saving for retirement both of which help the United States economy. Hiring India based employees of an American company who are educated, speak fluent English, and whose work day is 10 ahead of ours means that software and server issues can be handled while I sleep with minimal business disruption. I can call a legal transcription company with a US office at 730pm EDT to create a working MS Word version of a 50 page .pdf document that I need by 8:00am EDT the next day and have it done with accuracy using its team of legally trained employees in Bangalore.
What I do for my business is just a thumbnail for what businesses are doing all over the country. Why should a business have to hire someone at high wages and benefits to do mundane tasks when they can hire someone to build a computer program to handle it?
What we do need is to be sure that our children are educated and properly guided in the new world reality as early and repetitively as possible in preparation to enter the work force.
Whitnum's own apparent inability to adapt is a characteristic of poor leadership skills. We need a leader not a shrew.
Here are the 
Monday begins the 2008 Democratic Convention and it is a critical time in our nation's history. I am pleased to share my experiences with you at MyLeftNutmeg. At this convention we will talk about Barack Obama and his plans to turn the economy around, provide real relief to the middle class, responsibly end the Iraq war and change our foreign policy to make our country safer. The country will see the very real differences between Barack Obama - who wants to lead this country in a new direction - and John McCain - who will continue the failed policies of the Bush Adminstration. One of the most glaring differences is on advancing women's issues, and importantly, working to close the wage gap between men and women - an issue I recently wrote about on HuffingtonPost.
Tim Tagaris is a former U.S. Marine, netroots superstar, and a main character in our book 
MLN is powered by