"Back to where we were is a disaster. Where we are is a disaster. Fiscally, it’s a disaster, either way. It’s like false choices."
-8th district Congressman Jim Marshall discussing the health care reform bill that he opposed with constituents at a recent town hall meeting.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Deal & Handel to Meet in Two Debates This Weekend
The two Republican candidates hoping to win their Party's gubernatorial nomination will meet in two debates this weekend live and in HD.
WSB-TV hosts the first debate between Nathan Deal and Karen Handel at 10AM Saturday morning. Sunday, the Atlanta Press Club gets involved in the war to settle the score. Their debate featuring the two GOP candidates governor begins at 7PM.
It's Handel versus Deal. No holds barred. This weekend, the gloves come off and the big boy pants are put on.
WSB-TV hosts the first debate between Nathan Deal and Karen Handel at 10AM Saturday morning. Sunday, the Atlanta Press Club gets involved in the war to settle the score. Their debate featuring the two GOP candidates governor begins at 7PM.
It's Handel versus Deal. No holds barred. This weekend, the gloves come off and the big boy pants are put on.
Barnes, Deal & Handel Agree: No Gay Marriages in Georgia
Following a federal judge's ruling that the California gay marriage ban is unconstitutional, several gay Georgians gathered in midtown Atlanta to celebrate the victory.
The anti-gay marriage positions of Republicans Nathan Deal and Karen Handel are not surprising. A Republican candidate supporting same-sex marriages is political suicide in a primary dominated by socially conservative voters.
However, Democrat Roy Barnes may face some repercussions from the GLBT community for his opposition to same-sex marriages.
Barnes was endorsed by the gay publication The Georgia Voice shortly after his July 20th Democratic primary win [Douglas-Brown, Laura (2010-7-23). Editorial: Roy Barnes for governor. The Georgia Voice. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.]. Barnes also won a straw poll conducted by the GLBT-oriented Atlanta Stonewall Democrats [Project Q Atlanta (2010-2-23). Gay Dems: We want Barnes as Georgia governor. Project Q Atlanta. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.].
If Barnes' support of Georgia's gay marriage ban is seen as evidence of him turning his back on the GLBT community, Barnes could suffer a backlash not unlike the one against 2006 Democratic gubernatorial candidate Cathy Cox [Associated Press (2006-5-29). Gay Voters May Boycott Primary, Hurt Cox Campaign. First Coast News. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.].
Smiles were evident everywhere as people cheered the decision, holding up signs that said “NO H8,” “Honk for Equality,” and even “Will you marry me?”
Why is this important to me as a gay Georgian? Each victory should be celebrated,” [Paul] Schappaugh said Wednesday while standing in front of Outwrite Bookstore & Coffeehouse.
“This is a long road and this is just one more victory in a long road to the Supreme Court,” he added. “Georgia does not have a clear path to victory, so we gay Georgians know it’s the federal government that is going to have to tell our citizens of Georgia to give us equality.”
Bagby, Dyana (2010-8-4). Gay Atlanta celebrates federal victory in favor of gay marriage after Prop 8 ruled unconstitutional. Georgia Voice. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.
The anti-gay marriage positions of Republicans Nathan Deal and Karen Handel are not surprising. A Republican candidate supporting same-sex marriages is political suicide in a primary dominated by socially conservative voters.
However, Democrat Roy Barnes may face some repercussions from the GLBT community for his opposition to same-sex marriages.
Barnes was endorsed by the gay publication The Georgia Voice shortly after his July 20th Democratic primary win [Douglas-Brown, Laura (2010-7-23). Editorial: Roy Barnes for governor. The Georgia Voice. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.]. Barnes also won a straw poll conducted by the GLBT-oriented Atlanta Stonewall Democrats [Project Q Atlanta (2010-2-23). Gay Dems: We want Barnes as Georgia governor. Project Q Atlanta. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.].
If Barnes' support of Georgia's gay marriage ban is seen as evidence of him turning his back on the GLBT community, Barnes could suffer a backlash not unlike the one against 2006 Democratic gubernatorial candidate Cathy Cox [Associated Press (2006-5-29). Gay Voters May Boycott Primary, Hurt Cox Campaign. First Coast News. Retrieved on 2010-8-6.].
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Preston Smith Continues Hammering Sam Olens Over Past Party Affiliation
Former Cobb County Commission Chairman Sam Olens voted in five consecutive Democratic primaries before making the switch to the Republican Party in the summer of 1992. Since then, Olens' record in the voter file shows nothing but loyal support to the GOP.
Still, that hasn't stopped Republican state Senator Preston Smith from making Olens' past partisan affiliation an issue in the GOP primary for attorney general.
The Smith campaign sent over today two articles from the Marietta Daily Journal. One, dated February 25, 1992, lists Olens as a member of the Cobb chapter of the Clinton for President committee. The other, dated November 20, 1990, reports on Olens' election as treasurer of the Cobb County Democratic Party.
Pointing to the two articles as proof, Preston Smith repeated his calls for Sam Olens to "come clean about past work for liberals" like Bill Clinton.
"The real issue is that Sam refuses deal with the consequences,” said Smith. “Avoiding an unpleasant situation isn’t much of a strategy and certainly doesn’t inspire confidence in your willingness to vigorously defend Georgians against an overreaching federal government.”
I'm very curious about the strategy being employed by Preston Smith's campaign.
Why are they making an issue out of the way a man voted twenty years ago? More importantly, what are these consequences that Olens refuses to deal with?
It seems as if the Smith campaign is suggesting that Republican primary voters will not cut Sam Olens some slack for supporting Democrats over two decades ago. Maybe those are the consequences facing Olens in the Republican race for attorney general, but I think GOP primary voters are smarter than that.
"Elections," Bill Clinton says, "are about the future."
So this run-off election is not about Sam Olens' past voting history or past participation in one political party. The August 10th run-off is about the future of Georgia's office of attorney general, and the vision Olens and Smith have for it.
Still, that hasn't stopped Republican state Senator Preston Smith from making Olens' past partisan affiliation an issue in the GOP primary for attorney general.
The Smith campaign sent over today two articles from the Marietta Daily Journal. One, dated February 25, 1992, lists Olens as a member of the Cobb chapter of the Clinton for President committee. The other, dated November 20, 1990, reports on Olens' election as treasurer of the Cobb County Democratic Party.
Pointing to the two articles as proof, Preston Smith repeated his calls for Sam Olens to "come clean about past work for liberals" like Bill Clinton.
"The real issue is that Sam refuses deal with the consequences,” said Smith. “Avoiding an unpleasant situation isn’t much of a strategy and certainly doesn’t inspire confidence in your willingness to vigorously defend Georgians against an overreaching federal government.”
I'm very curious about the strategy being employed by Preston Smith's campaign.
Why are they making an issue out of the way a man voted twenty years ago? More importantly, what are these consequences that Olens refuses to deal with?
It seems as if the Smith campaign is suggesting that Republican primary voters will not cut Sam Olens some slack for supporting Democrats over two decades ago. Maybe those are the consequences facing Olens in the Republican race for attorney general, but I think GOP primary voters are smarter than that.
"Elections," Bill Clinton says, "are about the future."
So this run-off election is not about Sam Olens' past voting history or past participation in one political party. The August 10th run-off is about the future of Georgia's office of attorney general, and the vision Olens and Smith have for it.
Justice Dept. Awards GBI $300,000 to Protect Children from Sexual Exploitation
The U.S. Department of Justice announced Thursday that it awarded the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) $300,000 to support the development of strategies that protect children from commercial and sexual exploitation. These grants are part of the Department's national strategy to prevent and interdict child exploitation announced by Attorney General Eric Holder.
"Protecting our youth remains a priority with the Justice Department," said Laurie Robinson, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs (OJP). "We are determined to have strategies in place that prevent, and if necessary, rescue and help children recover from exploitation. These grants will provide the resources necessary to reach the children and hold the perpetrators accountable."
OJP's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) will administer the awards, which will support selected Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Forces by making available improved training and coordination activities, help in developing policies and procedures to identify child victims, assistance in the investigation and prosecution of adult perpetrators and the identification and adoption of best practices for compassionate victim intervention.
This grant program is authorized under the Providing Resources, Officers, and Technology to Eradicate Cyber Threats to Our Children Act of 2008, (P.L. 110-401, 42 USC 17601, et seq.) ("the PROTECT Act").
"Protecting our youth remains a priority with the Justice Department," said Laurie Robinson, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs (OJP). "We are determined to have strategies in place that prevent, and if necessary, rescue and help children recover from exploitation. These grants will provide the resources necessary to reach the children and hold the perpetrators accountable."
OJP's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) will administer the awards, which will support selected Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Forces by making available improved training and coordination activities, help in developing policies and procedures to identify child victims, assistance in the investigation and prosecution of adult perpetrators and the identification and adoption of best practices for compassionate victim intervention.
This grant program is authorized under the Providing Resources, Officers, and Technology to Eradicate Cyber Threats to Our Children Act of 2008, (P.L. 110-401, 42 USC 17601, et seq.) ("the PROTECT Act").
How Republican of You to Say That, Georgia Liberal
The recent column from former Atlanta Journal Constitution investigations editor Jim Walls scrutinizing the actions of Georgia's Democratic Party in the primary race between Graham Balch and Vincent Fort has touched off a new round of discussion on whether the state Democratic Party violated its governing documents by taking sides in a contested primary election.
The state Democratic Party says that even though the Senate Democratic Caucus is "legally a part of the party," no bylaws were violated because Senate Democrats paid for the mail piece against Graham Balch, not the Democratic Party of Georgia.
As readers of Georgia Politics Unfiltered may know, I am a member of the state Democratic committee. I've been very critical of the Democratic Party, or any entity that is "legally a part" of the Democratic Party, choosing sides in a contested primary election.
The bylaws say, "The State Committee, Executive Committee, County Committees, and Affiliates are explicitly prohibited from supporting a Democratic candidate who has opposition during a primary. . . " If the Senate Democratic Caucus is "legally a part of the party," then how are they not exempt from the non-endorsement provision?
One blogger is now arguing that anyone who wants to be critical of the state Democratic Party should resign their official position within the Party before airing their concerns.
After all, your argument is one that's been used by conservative Republicans in the past.
In November of 2001, President Bush boldly declared, "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror." [Bush says it is time for action. CNN. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.] Two years later, conservative Republicans took those words as carte blanche to criticize anyone opposing the war in Iraq as unpatriotic and un-American [newshounds (2009-4-3). Hannity Denies Calling Bush Critics Unpatriotic. Brave New Films. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.].
The smears from conservative Republicans got so bad that individuals with strong ties to the military were forced to defend their love of the troops and their love of this country.
"You can be against the war, you can disagree with Bush and still be a patriot," said Lietta Ruger, who grew up on a military base and married a Vietnam veteran [Vinh, Tan (2005-3-20). Thousands rally to protest Iraq war. Seattle Times. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.].
My point is this -
That seemingly Republican value of "America: Love it or leave it" has no place in Democratic Party politics.
An individual can be critical of this nation's policies without abdicating their allegiance to the United States of America. And I can be critical of my political party's actions without forfeiting my fealty to the Democratic Party.
Debate and dissent is not un-American. It's not un-patriotic. And it is not un-Democratic.
Criticizing the state Democratic Party contributed to my first election to the state Democratic committee six years ago, and that same criticism (much of it on this very site) contributed to my re-election to the state Democratic committee in 2007.
The state Democratic Party says that even though the Senate Democratic Caucus is "legally a part of the party," no bylaws were violated because Senate Democrats paid for the mail piece against Graham Balch, not the Democratic Party of Georgia.
As readers of Georgia Politics Unfiltered may know, I am a member of the state Democratic committee. I've been very critical of the Democratic Party, or any entity that is "legally a part" of the Democratic Party, choosing sides in a contested primary election.
The bylaws say, "The State Committee, Executive Committee, County Committees, and Affiliates are explicitly prohibited from supporting a Democratic candidate who has opposition during a primary. . . " If the Senate Democratic Caucus is "legally a part of the party," then how are they not exempt from the non-endorsement provision?
One blogger is now arguing that anyone who wants to be critical of the state Democratic Party should resign their official position within the Party before airing their concerns.
What bothers me more is that some members of the State Democratic Committee continue to harp on an issue. If you want to be a critical person (which you have the right to do), you should resign your post and take aim at the party. If one finds it so hypocritical, they should leave the organization. However, so long as you are part of the organization, you should not be tearing it down from the inside – especially when they did nothing wrong.
Dustin (2010-8-5). Democratic Party of Georgia Did Nothing Wrong. Georgia Liberal. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.
After all, your argument is one that's been used by conservative Republicans in the past.
In November of 2001, President Bush boldly declared, "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror." [Bush says it is time for action. CNN. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.] Two years later, conservative Republicans took those words as carte blanche to criticize anyone opposing the war in Iraq as unpatriotic and un-American [newshounds (2009-4-3). Hannity Denies Calling Bush Critics Unpatriotic. Brave New Films. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.].
The smears from conservative Republicans got so bad that individuals with strong ties to the military were forced to defend their love of the troops and their love of this country.
"You can be against the war, you can disagree with Bush and still be a patriot," said Lietta Ruger, who grew up on a military base and married a Vietnam veteran [Vinh, Tan (2005-3-20). Thousands rally to protest Iraq war. Seattle Times. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.].
My point is this -
That seemingly Republican value of "America: Love it or leave it" has no place in Democratic Party politics.
An individual can be critical of this nation's policies without abdicating their allegiance to the United States of America. And I can be critical of my political party's actions without forfeiting my fealty to the Democratic Party.
Debate and dissent is not un-American. It's not un-patriotic. And it is not un-Democratic.
Criticizing the state Democratic Party contributed to my first election to the state Democratic committee six years ago, and that same criticism (much of it on this very site) contributed to my re-election to the state Democratic committee in 2007.
Governing Magazine Says State Legislature To Stay Under GOP Control
Governing magazine, a D.C.-based publication that focuses on state and local politics across the nation, is out with its state House and state Senate race ratings for the 2010 election.
In Georgia, Governing says to expect the GOP to hold on to both chambers of the legislature with ease this fall.
Click here to see how Governing views the races for control of the legislatures in the other states.
In Georgia, Governing says to expect the GOP to hold on to both chambers of the legislature with ease this fall.
Click here to see how Governing views the races for control of the legislatures in the other states.
Lawmaker's Wife Says Secretary of State Made "Tough Decisions" on Education
The wife of Republican state Representative Lee Anderson made some very curious comments to the Augusta Chronicle Wednesday during her endorsement of Nathan Deal for governor.
The Official Code of Georgia Annotated describes the powers and duties generally for the Secretary of State (OCGA 45-13-20 through 45-13-29), and I couldn't find any duties related to schools and education in any of those code sections.
So what is Donna Anderson, an educator, talking about? It seems like Mrs. Anderson needs to educate herself on what the Secretary of State actually does before making statements to the press.
Educator Donna Anderson, the wife of Georgia Rep. Lee Anderson, of Grovetown, said Handel lacked "guts" when she resigned as secretary of state, leaving appointee Brian Kemp to make tough decisions on education.
McCord, Susan (2010-8-4). Women show support for Deal. Augusta Chronicle. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.
The Official Code of Georgia Annotated describes the powers and duties generally for the Secretary of State (OCGA 45-13-20 through 45-13-29), and I couldn't find any duties related to schools and education in any of those code sections.
So what is Donna Anderson, an educator, talking about? It seems like Mrs. Anderson needs to educate herself on what the Secretary of State actually does before making statements to the press.
Democrats Barnes & Brown Differ On Ways To Save HOPE Scholarship
Earlier this week, Georgia Senate Democratic Leader Robert Brown advocated that the popular HOPE scholarship program be limited to families who earn 600% (or less) of the federal poverty level.
Brown said that the original intent of the program was to create a needs-based scholarship for "bright, hard-working Georgia students who could not afford a college education." As such, the Macon Democrat declared, his Party would "restore the original intent" of the HOPE scholarship.
Roy Barnes, the state Democratic Party's nominee for governor, doesn't support Brown's proposal.
Making the HOPE scholarship needs-based doesn't keep with the "original intent" of the program. The original intent of HOPE was to reward Georgia students for their hard work in the classroom, and to keep Georgia's best and brightest in Georgia.
The Democratic and Republican candidates for governor are right to oppose Sen. Brown's plan to move the popular HOPE scholarship away from it's original intent.
Brown said that the original intent of the program was to create a needs-based scholarship for "bright, hard-working Georgia students who could not afford a college education." As such, the Macon Democrat declared, his Party would "restore the original intent" of the HOPE scholarship.
Roy Barnes, the state Democratic Party's nominee for governor, doesn't support Brown's proposal.
To prevent the HOPE Scholarship from running out of money, Georgia Democratic legislators are calling for excluding students from families with high incomes. But the lawmakers are unlikely to get the change past the next governor.
Both Republicans running for governor, Karen Handel and Nathan Deal, told members of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday that they oppose changing the popular scholarship to a needs-based benefit.
Democratic nominee Roy Barnes said Wednesday that he wouldn't go along either.
Jones, Walter (2010-8-4). Lawmakers call for needs-based HOPE. Augusta Chronicle. Retrieved on 2010-8-5.
Making the HOPE scholarship needs-based doesn't keep with the "original intent" of the program. The original intent of HOPE was to reward Georgia students for their hard work in the classroom, and to keep Georgia's best and brightest in Georgia.
The Democratic and Republican candidates for governor are right to oppose Sen. Brown's plan to move the popular HOPE scholarship away from it's original intent.
It's Official: Darryl Hicks Certified As Dems' Labor Commissioner Nominee
Wednesday, Secretary of State Brian Kemp certified the recount results for the Democratic Commissioner of Labor General Primary Election between candidates Darryl Hicks and Terry Coleman.
After finishing 596 votes behind Hicks in the July 20th Democratic primary, Coleman requested a recount based on the slim margin of difference. The recount did not change the election outcome, and Darryl Hicks received the majority of the votes cast.
Several weeks ago, I, in my official capacity as a member of the state Democratic committee, endorsed the Democratic Party's 2010 statewide nominees. Shortly thereafter, I was asked by a Democratic state Representative why I refrained from endorsing Darryl Hicks.
The reason is because the Democratic nomination in that race was still contested.
Now that the Democratic nomination for the office of Commissioner of Labor is no longer contested, I, Andre Walker, in my official capacity as a member of the state Democratic committee, do hereby endorse Darryl Hicks for Labor Commissioner.
And that, my friends, is how an official in the Democratic Party remains neutral until the voters have spoken.
After finishing 596 votes behind Hicks in the July 20th Democratic primary, Coleman requested a recount based on the slim margin of difference. The recount did not change the election outcome, and Darryl Hicks received the majority of the votes cast.
Several weeks ago, I, in my official capacity as a member of the state Democratic committee, endorsed the Democratic Party's 2010 statewide nominees. Shortly thereafter, I was asked by a Democratic state Representative why I refrained from endorsing Darryl Hicks.
The reason is because the Democratic nomination in that race was still contested.
Now that the Democratic nomination for the office of Commissioner of Labor is no longer contested, I, Andre Walker, in my official capacity as a member of the state Democratic committee, do hereby endorse Darryl Hicks for Labor Commissioner.
And that, my friends, is how an official in the Democratic Party remains neutral until the voters have spoken.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
In Clayton County, Private Citizens Step Up After Government Fails Them
Five months ago, the Clayton County Board of Commissioners failed their constituents when they allowed the local transit system to go under, leaving many without a way to work or school.
Since the last day Clayton County Transit, or C-TRAN, operated, private individuals have stepped up and filled the void left by the government. First, Southside Transportation began running two 15-passenger vans for those who needed a ride to nearby locations. Now a new company has emerged in the south metro county that's picking up even more of the slack left by the government.
If these two private services --Southside Transportation and QuickTransit-- are successful, then one starts to wonder what the purpose of all this government we've got.
If private individuals and private enterprise can do it better, then maybe our elected officials should take a serious look at gradually making some government services private. And . . .
. . . Once government has fewer services to fulfill, we can start talking about reducing the overall size of government.
Just saying.
Since the last day Clayton County Transit, or C-TRAN, operated, private individuals have stepped up and filled the void left by the government. First, Southside Transportation began running two 15-passenger vans for those who needed a ride to nearby locations. Now a new company has emerged in the south metro county that's picking up even more of the slack left by the government.
QuickTransit, a local service catering specifically to Clayton residents, began operating on Monday. With a fleet of five buses and six paratransit vans, the service is picking up two of C-TRAN’s busiest routes — the 503 (Riverdale/Mt. Zion Parkway), and the 504 (Riverdale/Ga. Highway 85/Flint River).
“Clayton County is really suffering because there is no transportation,” [QuickTransit owner Tywanna] Albro said. “Businesses are closing, people are losing their jobs, or they are paying lots of money on taxis. We actually took a leap of faith and invested our own money into the service. We bought buses from Virginia and we bought buses from California. We are growing, and we are currently looking for more drivers.”
Hall, Joel (2010-8-3). Quick Transit offers hope to bus riders. Clayton News Daily. Retrieved on 2010-8-4.
If these two private services --Southside Transportation and QuickTransit-- are successful, then one starts to wonder what the purpose of all this government we've got.
If private individuals and private enterprise can do it better, then maybe our elected officials should take a serious look at gradually making some government services private. And . . .
. . . Once government has fewer services to fulfill, we can start talking about reducing the overall size of government.
Just saying.
Fmr. AJC Investigations Editor Questions GA Dems' Incumbent Protection Policy
A few weeks ago, I boldly declared that the Charter & Bylaws of the Democratic Party of Georgia aren't worth the paper they're printed on after the state Democratic Party took sides in a contested primary election.
Now, in the post mortem analysis of the state Senate district 39 Democratic primary contest between Vincent Fort and Graham Balch, it seems that others are beginning to question whether the actions of Georgia's Democratic Party were kosher.
Former Atlanta Journal Constitution investigations editor Jim Walls, who runs the website Atlanta Unfiltered, posted a column that saw state Democratic Party officials defending $30,000-plus in political mailings that urged the defeat of a Democrat in the Democratic primary.
And that is a low-down, dirty shame.
In the Democratic primary, it is up to the voters and not the Party to decide which candidate wins the Democratic nomination. Plain and simple, the Democratic Party needs to butt out of contested primaries.
If the Democratic Party is picking sides, then what exactly is the point of state Democratic Party chairman Jane Kidd sending threatening letters to county Democratic committee chairs demanding that they refrain from criticizing a Democratic member of Congress? What is the point of having a non-endorsement policy in the Democratic Party's governing documents? And, if the Democratic Party is picking sides, then what exactly is the point of having primaries at all?
The Democratic Party might as well save the taxpayers some money by avoiding these expensive primary elections, and just have the good ol' boys gather in the smoke-filled backrooms to pick the Party's nominees.
The Democratic Party might as well save the taxpayers some money by avoiding these expensive primary elections, and just have the good ol' boys gather in the smoke-filled backrooms to pick the Party's nominees.
Now, in the post mortem analysis of the state Senate district 39 Democratic primary contest between Vincent Fort and Graham Balch, it seems that others are beginning to question whether the actions of Georgia's Democratic Party were kosher.
Former Atlanta Journal Constitution investigations editor Jim Walls, who runs the website Atlanta Unfiltered, posted a column that saw state Democratic Party officials defending $30,000-plus in political mailings that urged the defeat of a Democrat in the Democratic primary.
Literature denouncing candidate Graham Balch greeted voters as they opened their mailboxes in recent weeks in Georgia’s 39th Senate District.
The difference: Balch ran as a Democrat, and a state Democratic organization paid for the attack ads.
Balch now says he feels betrayed by party leaders whose bylaws prohibit endorsements of one Democrat over another.
. . . party officials say no bylaws were broken because the Senate Democratic Caucus, not the state Democratic Party, paid for the mailings. The caucus is legally a part of the party, officials say, but it operates independently. Campaign finance records filed with the State Ethics Commission make no such distinction, though.
Walls, Jim (2010-7-30). Ethics Watch. Atlanta Journal Constitution. Retrieved on 2010-8-4.
And that is a low-down, dirty shame.
In the Democratic primary, it is up to the voters and not the Party to decide which candidate wins the Democratic nomination. Plain and simple, the Democratic Party needs to butt out of contested primaries.
If the Democratic Party is picking sides, then what exactly is the point of state Democratic Party chairman Jane Kidd sending threatening letters to county Democratic committee chairs demanding that they refrain from criticizing a Democratic member of Congress? What is the point of having a non-endorsement policy in the Democratic Party's governing documents? And, if the Democratic Party is picking sides, then what exactly is the point of having primaries at all?
The Democratic Party might as well save the taxpayers some money by avoiding these expensive primary elections, and just have the good ol' boys gather in the smoke-filled backrooms to pick the Party's nominees.
Albany Herald: "We Believe The Best Choice Is Handel"
With six days left until the August 10th Republican gubernatorial primary run-off election, former Secretary of State Karen Handel picked up an endorsement from a prominent southwest Georgia newspaper.
In the primary, The Albany Herald endorsed the candidate who finished a close third in the race — former state Sen. Eric Johnson — who did not qualify for the runoff election. So now the question is, of the two GOP candidates who survived, which would be the best choice for Georgia?
We believe the best choice is Handel.
Both Republican candidates would likely do well as the state’s chief executive, but on balance, Handel’s positions are better for the state and our region. She also is in the best position to run against the former governor in November. For those reasons, we think Handel should be the GOP nominee.
Albany Herald Editorial Board (2010-8-4). Handel should be GOP choice. Albany Herald. Retrieved on 2010-8-4.
GA Democratic Leader Pledges To Restore Original Intent of Hope Scholarship
With news reports that demand is exceeding the funds available for the popular Hope Scholarship program, Georgia Senate Democratic Leader Robert Brown is adovcating that the program go back to its original intent.
The original intent of the HOPE scholarship was to make higher education affordable for bright, hard-working Georgia students who could not afford a college education, according to Senator Brown. As such, family income limits of $66,000 per year were used to guarantee that HOPE was granted to deserving Georgia citizens.
Brown says that Democrats will set the family income limit at or below 600% of the federal poverty level, to ensure that the Hope Scholarhship program would remain financially solvent and able to carry out its original mission.
These new limits would be effective July 1, 2011, said Brown.
The original intent of the HOPE scholarship was to make higher education affordable for bright, hard-working Georgia students who could not afford a college education, according to Senator Brown. As such, family income limits of $66,000 per year were used to guarantee that HOPE was granted to deserving Georgia citizens.
Brown says that Democrats will set the family income limit at or below 600% of the federal poverty level, to ensure that the Hope Scholarhship program would remain financially solvent and able to carry out its original mission.
These new limits would be effective July 1, 2011, said Brown.
New Health Care Law Burdens 40 Million Businesses With Additional Paperwork
The Associated Press reported last week that in their rush to pass a health care reform bill, the Democrat-controlled Congress burdened 40 million businesses with a "paperwork nightmare."
Not enough Republicans voted for the bill resulting in House Ways and Means Committee chairman Sander Levin (D - Michigan) saying, "Republicans made clear that they care more about some companies that ship jobs overseas than small businesses that face a potential burden by this reporting requirement." [Needham, Vicki (2010-7-30). House Republicans nix Democrats effort to repeal 1099 requirement. The Hill. Retrieved on 2010-8-4.]
However, I disagree.
Instead of slowing down and getting it right the first time, Congressional Democrats were so desperate for a political victory that they were willing to pass any health care bill by hook and by crook. And now, we're seeing the result of what happens when elected officials legislate for politics rather than legislate for the people.
Tucked into the new health care law is a requirement that could become a paperwork nightmare for nearly 40 million businesses.
They must file tax forms for every vendor that sells them more than $600 in goods.
The goal is to prevent vendors from underreporting their income to the Internal Revenue Service.
The government must think vendors are omitting a lot because the filing requirement is estimated to bring in $19 billion over the next decade.
Business groups say it will swamp their members in paperwork, and Congress is listening. Democrats and Republicans want to repeal it, but getting them to work together on the issue is proving difficult in an election year.
Ohlemacher, Stephen (2010-7-31). Paperwork nightmare: A struggle to fix new law. Associated Press. Retrieved on 2010-8-4.
Not enough Republicans voted for the bill resulting in House Ways and Means Committee chairman Sander Levin (D - Michigan) saying, "Republicans made clear that they care more about some companies that ship jobs overseas than small businesses that face a potential burden by this reporting requirement." [Needham, Vicki (2010-7-30). House Republicans nix Democrats effort to repeal 1099 requirement. The Hill. Retrieved on 2010-8-4.]
However, I disagree.
Instead of slowing down and getting it right the first time, Congressional Democrats were so desperate for a political victory that they were willing to pass any health care bill by hook and by crook. And now, we're seeing the result of what happens when elected officials legislate for politics rather than legislate for the people.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Democrat Roy Barnes Lost Several Votes For Governor Monday Night
Eighteen years ago, my mother introduced me to the world of politics when she took me with her to vote in the 1992 presidential election. I remember standing between my mother's legs as we both turned the pages of the ballot and she let me punch the holes in those old punchcards with the hanging chads. Later on that evening, we watched the election results on television as my mother gave me a lesson on the electoral college and how the President is really elected.
From that point forward, political discussions became the norm in the Walker household. Even to this day, as I've become more conservative in my politics than my mother, we still discuss and debate politics although we disagree more often than not.
Monday night, I spoke with my mother about President Obama's visit to Atlanta. She said she saw the speech, and thought it was good that the President focused on veterans' issues. Then she brought up the campaign of Democratic gubernatorial nominee Roy Barnes. My mother said she wasn't too happy that Barnes "lied on the President" about being invited to either the speech before the Disabled American Veterans or the Democratic National Committee fundraiser. My mother said that while she won't be voting Republican, she will not vote for Barnes. In other words, she's skipping the gubernatorial election and she's encouraging her friends, her family to do the same.
When I heard my mother say that, I started thinking to myself, "Roy Barnes is in trouble." And this is why:
My mother, Betty Walker, is not an "ordinary" voter.
She was a community organizer in Macon, Georgia long before Barack Obama made it popular. I've heard the stories so many times of how, in 1963 and 1964, she took groups of blacks to the Bibb County Courthouse so they could register to vote. I've heard the stories of how she, herself, had to read a section of the Constitution before adding her name to the voter rolls. And more importantly, I've seen the stories in print.
And the reason why I can say that with confidence is because I know my mother's network.
She attended high school with Bibb County Chief Magistrate Judge Bill Randall. She got her first job from Judge Randall's father, William P. Randall. She remembers when state Representative Nikki Randall was born. In addition, my mother knows folks who used to take care of Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed when he was a child.
Do you see the point I'm making here?
If you do, then you now know why I'm suddenly nervous about Roy Barnes' chances of victory in November. If you do, then you now know why I'm wondering how many other black voters like my mother were so put off by Roy Barnes avoiding Obama that they now will not support him at the ballot box.
Suddenly, I'm concerned.
. . . I'm wondering how many other black voters like my mother were so put off by Roy Barnes avoiding Obama that they now will not support him at the ballot box.
From that point forward, political discussions became the norm in the Walker household. Even to this day, as I've become more conservative in my politics than my mother, we still discuss and debate politics although we disagree more often than not.
Monday night, I spoke with my mother about President Obama's visit to Atlanta. She said she saw the speech, and thought it was good that the President focused on veterans' issues. Then she brought up the campaign of Democratic gubernatorial nominee Roy Barnes. My mother said she wasn't too happy that Barnes "lied on the President" about being invited to either the speech before the Disabled American Veterans or the Democratic National Committee fundraiser. My mother said that while she won't be voting Republican, she will not vote for Barnes. In other words, she's skipping the gubernatorial election and she's encouraging her friends, her family to do the same.
When I heard my mother say that, I started thinking to myself, "Roy Barnes is in trouble." And this is why:
My mother, Betty Walker, is not an "ordinary" voter.
She was a community organizer in Macon, Georgia long before Barack Obama made it popular. I've heard the stories so many times of how, in 1963 and 1964, she took groups of blacks to the Bibb County Courthouse so they could register to vote. I've heard the stories of how she, herself, had to read a section of the Constitution before adding her name to the voter rolls. And more importantly, I've seen the stories in print.
Betty Walker. The eleven-year-old child who had her dream of Mercer fulfilled but had not dreamed just what it would be like. She lived it all, and more. "Black and white together" was pivotal for her. When "the Movement" flirted with, and sometimes embraced, separatism and "Whitey has got to go," she harbored transcendence. It was she, along with Ed Bacon, who led the Poor People's March through Macon, braving the most tumultuous day and night of that city's racial history.
Campbell, Will D. The Stem of Jesse: The Costs of Community at a 1960's Southern School. 1st ed. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1994. Print.
And the reason why I can say that with confidence is because I know my mother's network.
She attended high school with Bibb County Chief Magistrate Judge Bill Randall. She got her first job from Judge Randall's father, William P. Randall. She remembers when state Representative Nikki Randall was born. In addition, my mother knows folks who used to take care of Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed when he was a child.
Do you see the point I'm making here?
If you do, then you now know why I'm suddenly nervous about Roy Barnes' chances of victory in November. If you do, then you now know why I'm wondering how many other black voters like my mother were so put off by Roy Barnes avoiding Obama that they now will not support him at the ballot box.
Suddenly, I'm concerned.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Remarks by President Obama at Atlanta DNC Fundraiser
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Everybody, please have a seat. Have a seat.
Well, we have some just extraordinary leaders here today. I want to acknowledge a few of them. First of all, please give another round of applause to your outstanding young mayor, Kasim Reed. (Applause.) Three wonderful members of Congress who are fighting day in, day out, on behalf of the people of Georgia but also on behalf of people all across this country -- Congressman Sanford Bishop -- (applause) -- Congressman David Scott -- (applause) -- and one of the genuine heroes of this country, Congressman John Lewis. (Applause.)
Our Labor Commissioner and U.S. Senate candidate Michael Thurmond is in the house. (Applause.) Attorney General Thurbert Baker -- (applause) -- I think is here. If not, give him a round of applause anyway. Ag Commissioner Tommy Irvin. (Applause.) State party chair Jane Kidd. (Applause.) And the DNC Southern finance chair Daniel Halpern is in the house. (Applause.)
So, Atlanta, it is wonderful to be here, wonderful to be among so many good friends. A lot of people here worked hard on behalf of my campaign. I am reminded of the story President Lincoln told about one of his supporters who came to the White House seeking some patronage, seeking a job. And apparently in the outdoor reception area, he said, look, I want to see Lincoln personally because I’m responsible for him getting that job. Nobody did more than me. It’s payback time. So Lincoln lets him into his office. He says, sir, I understand that you take responsibility for me having this job. The guy says, that’s right. And Lincoln says, you’re forgiven. (Laughter.)
Look, we all know that the last few years have been extraordinarily challenging for the United States. Eighteen months ago, I took office after nearly a decade of economic policies that gave us sluggish growth, falling incomes, and a record deficit, and policies that culminated in the worst financial crisis that we’ve seen since the Great Depression. In the last six months of 2008, three million Americans lost their jobs. The month I was sworn, January of 2009, 750,000 Americans lost their jobs; 600,000 were lost a month later. All told, 8 million jobs lost as a consequence of this crisis.
Now, we didn’t get here by accident. We got here after 10 years of an economic agenda in Washington that was pretty straightforward: You cut taxes for millionaires, you cut rules for special interests, and you cut working folks loose to fend for themselves. That was the philosophy of the last administration and their friends in Congress. If you couldn’t find a job or you couldn’t go to college, tough luck -- you’re on your own. But if you’re a Wall Street bank or an insurance company or an oil company, then you got to write your own ticket and play by your own rules. And we know how this turned out.
So when I took office, because of the help of some of the people in this room, we put forward a new economic plan -- a plan that rewards hard work instead of greed; a plan that rewards responsibility instead of recklessness; a plan that’s focused on making our middle class more secure and our country more competitive in the long run -- so that the jobs and industries of the future aren’t all going to China and India, but are being created right here in the United States of America.
Instead of spending money on tax breaks for folks who don't need them and weren’t even asking for them, we’re making smart investments in innovation and clean energy and education that are going to benefit all of our people and our entire economy over the long run. (Applause.)
And instead of giving special interests free reign to do whatever they want, we’re demanding new accountability from Wall Street to Washington -- so that big corporations have to play by the same rules that small businesses and entrepreneurs do.
Now, because the policies of the last decade got us in such a deep hole, it’s going to take some time for us to dig ourselves out. We’re certainly not there yet. But I want everybody to understand, after eighteen months, I can say with confidence we are on the right track. (Applause.)
When we were -- instead of losing millions of jobs, we have created jobs for six straight months in the private sector. Instead of an economy that is contracting, we’ve got an economy that is expanding. So the last thing we would want to do is go back to what we were doing before.
And I want everybody in this room to understand, that is the choice in this election. (Applause.) The choice is -- the choice is whether we want to go forward or we want to go backwards to the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place.
Now, understand, it’d be one thing if the Republicans had seen the error of their ways. (Laughter.) Right? I mean, if after the rejections of 2006 and 2008, realizing, gosh, look at this big disaster that we caused and taking record surpluses into record deficits and causing all this hardship -- we’re going to rethink our approach and go out in the wilderness for a while, come back with some new ideas. (Laughter.)
But that’s not what happened. It’s not like they’ve engaged in some heavy reflection. They have not come up with a single, solitary, new idea to address the challenges of the American people. They don’t have a single idea that’s different from George Bush’s ideas -- not one. (Applause.)
Instead, they’re betting on amnesia. (Laughter.) That’s what they’re counting on. They’re counting on that you all forgot. They think that they can run the okey-doke on you. (Laughter.) Bamboozle you. (Laughter.)
I mean, think about it, these are the folks who were behind the steering wheel and drove the car into the ditch. So we’ve had to put on our galoshes, we went down there in the mud, we’ve been pushing, we’ve been shoving. They’ve been standing back, watching, say you’re not moving fast enough, you ain’t doing it right. (Laughter.) Why are you doing it that way? You got some mud on the car. Right? (Applause.)
That’s all right. We don’t need help. We’re just going to keep on pushing. We push, we push. The thing is slipping a little bit, but we stay with it. Finally -- finally -- we get this car out of the ditch, where we’re just right there on the blacktop. We’re about to start driving forward again. They say, hold on, we want the keys back. (Laughter and applause.) You can’t have the keys back -- you don’t know how to drive. (Laughter and applause.) You don’t know how to drive.
And I do want to point out, when you get in your car, when you go forward, what do you do? You put it in “D.” When you want to go back, what do you do? (Laughter.) You put it in “R.” We won’t do want to go into reverse back in the ditch. We want to go forwards. We got to put it in “D.” (Applause.) Can’t have the keys back. (Laughter.)
The choice in this election is between policies that encourage job creation here in America or encourage jobs to go elsewhere. That’s why I’ve said instead of giving tax breaks to corporations that want to ship jobs overseas, we want to give tax breaks to companies that are investing right here in the United States of America. (Applause.) And by the way, we’ve already cut taxes for businesses eight times since I’ve been President -- eight times. And we want to do more, because small business owners are the lifeblood of this economy. (Applause.)
Right now, as we speak -- as we speak, there’s a bill in the Senate that would cut taxes for small businesses, would help them get the loans they need to hire again. The members of Congress who are here, they already voted on this. They already passed this bill. And by the way, this is a bill that's based on Democratic and Republican ideas. It’s been praised by groups like the Chamber of Commerce. They never praise me. (Laughter.) The National Federation of Independent Business. It’s a bill that’s fully paid for, doesn’t add to our deficit.
So you would think -- Republicans say they're the pro-business party, isn’t that what they say? You would think this is a bill that they would want to pass. And, yet, day after day, week after week, they keep on stalling this bill and stonewalling this bill and opposing this bill. Why? Pure politics.
They're more interested in the next election than the next generation. And that's why they can’t have the keys back -- because we need somebody who is driving with a vision to the future. (Applause.) That's what we’ve been doing over these last 20 months.
We’re also jumpstarting a homegrown, clean energy industry -- because I don’t want to see the solar panels and the wind turbines and the biodiesel created in other countries. I don't want China and Germany and Brazil to get the jump on us in the industries of the future. I want to see all that stuff right here in the United States of America, with American workers. And the investments we’ve made so far are expected to create 800,000 jobs by 2012 -- 800,000 jobs in an industry of the future. (Applause.)
We want to create the infrastructure for the future -- not just roads and bridges -- but also the broadband lines and the smart grid lines that will ensure we stay competitively on top for years to come, creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs all across the country in the process. So that's our plan to create jobs right here in America -- not just short term, but long term.
But the fact is, most of the members of the other party voted no on each and every one of these initiatives. No on tax cuts to small businesses. No to clean energy jobs. No to the railroad and highway projects.
Now, I want to point out that doesn’t stop them from showing up at the ribbon-cuttings. (Laughter and applause.) John, you notice that? They’ll be voting no -- no, this is Obama’s -- no, we don't believe in recovery, we don't believe in all this. And then you show up at that ribbon cutting, and they're all there right in the front. Cheesing and grinning. (Laughter.) Sending out press releases. (Laughter.)
So a few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House was asked, what’s your jobs plan if your party takes control of Congress next year? He said, well, you know, our number one priority -- he was asked what’s your jobs plan -- your number priority is to repeal the health care bill.
Now, this is a bill that makes sure that insurance companies can’t deny you coverage if you’ve got a preexisting condition, makes sure that young people can stay on their parents’ insurance till they're 26, provides a 35 percent tax credit to small businesses that are doing the right thing, giving their employees health care, makes sure that companies can’t drop you when you get sick.
Now, I have no idea why you would want to repeal that in the first place, but I sure don't understand how repealing it would create jobs, unless it’s for some folks in the insurance company who are being hired to deny you your claims. But that can't be a real jobs plan.
Now, look, I may be wrong. Maybe they know something I don't, or no other economist or expert understands. And if you think that's a good idea, then you should vote for them.
But I’ve got a different view. The health insurance reform we passed isn’t just preventing insurance companies from denying you coverage -- it’s making the coverage that you got more secure, and is ultimately going to lower costs for all Americans. And one of the most important things we can do to reduce our budget deficit is to get control of health care costs.
These guys don't have a plan for that. They just have a plan to say no because they're thinking about the next election instead of the next generation. And that's the choice that we’re going to be making in this next election. The choice in this election is between policies that strengthen the hand of the special interests or strengthen America’s middle class.
They want to repeal health care -- we’re not going to let it happen. We want to move forward. They pledged to repeal Wall Street reform. Here we’ve got the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. Everybody knows, having looked at it, that the incentives on Wall Street were skewed and people were doing crazy things with other people’s money, making huge, risky bets and then expecting taxpayers to bail them out if it didn’t work out. So after all the hardship we’ve gone through to repair this economy, you’d think it would be common sense to say, let’s have some basic rules of the road in place to ensure that a crisis like this doesn’t happen again.
But what did the other party say? No. They want to go back to the status quo that got us into this same situation. The reforms we passed protect consumers and responsible bankers and responsible business owners. That’s what the free market is supposed to be about: setting some basic rules for the road so that everybody can compete -- not on how to game the system, but how to provide good service and good products to customers.
Make sure that mortgage companies can’t give you a mortgage that you don’t understand. Make sure that credit card companies can’t jack up your rates without providing you some notification -- common sense stuff. But they want to repeal it because they’re more interested in the next election than they are in the next generation. And that’s the choice that we will face in this next election.
If the other party wants to keep on giving taxpayer subsidies to big banks, that’s their prerogative. But that’s not what America is about. That’s not going to move us forward.
I’ll give you another example. We had a law in place when I took office in which the government was guaranteeing student loans, except they were going through financial middlemen who were taking out billions of dollars of profits issuing the loans. But the loans were guaranteed, so they weren’t taking any risks. They were just making billions of dollars of money.
We said, well, that doesn’t make sense at a time when young people are trying to get to college. So what we’re going to do is we’re going to cut out the middle man. We’ve added tens of billions of dollars to the student loans program. More than a million young people are going to get help that wouldn’t otherwise get help because of the decision we’ve made. (Applause.) What side do you think they were on? The other party voted no.
We passed a law to prohibit pay discrimination. My attitude is equal pay for equal work. Women should be paid just like men for doing the same job. (Applause.) They said no. They want to go backwards. We want to move forwards. (Applause.)
They want to extend the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. Now, I believe in tax cuts for the right folks. I kept my campaign promise -- cut taxes for 95 percent of working Americans. But I don’t understand how do you get up here and talk about how you care so deeply about the deficit, and yet you want to perpetuate a tax cut that costs $700 billion, with a “B” -- $700 billion -- and would not provide the kind of economic growth or benefits for the vast majority of Americans. That’s the choice that we face in this election.
They voted to make sure that oil companies continue to get protected from some liabilities with respect to oil spills. How do you do that? We just spent all this time and energy trying to cap this well in the Gulf. You’d think it would make just common sense to ensure that oil companies are fully accountable. They voted no against that.
When we forced BP to put $20 billion aside to make sure those fishermen and store owners and hotel owners were protected -- (applause) -- and what happened? The guy who would be the chairman of the Energy Committee in the House apologized to BP. Sure did. Apologized. Said we engaged in a shakedown to protect ordinary families from the devastation that had taken place.
So look, you go across the board, Atlanta, there’s going to be a choice in this election. It’s the choice between special interest policies that led us into this mess and policies that are finally leading us out, that are finally helping America grow again, policies that are making middle-class Americans more secure and giving them greater opportunity.
I know this nation has been through incredibly difficult times. And I also know, by the way, that not all the steps we took have been popular. Folks in Washington, these pundits, sometimes they write -- they're all surprised -- “President Obama went ahead with some of these steps like health care reform and helping the auto companies, and those weren’t popular.”
Well, I knew they weren’t popular. I’ve got pollsters too. (Laughter.) You don't think I’ve got polls that tell me what’s popular and what’s not? But for the last 20 months, my job has been to govern.
So when I went to Detroit last week, and I look out and I see plants producing clean energy cars that otherwise would have been shut down, a million jobs that would have been lost, cars no longer made in America because the entire industry had collapsed, and I say, we made the right decision.
And now Ford and Chrysler and GM are all making a profit. They’ve all hired 55,000 workers back. (Applause.) They are on the move. They're about to pay the taxpayers back for every investment that we made. (Applause.) Then I say to myself, I’m not here just to do what’s popular -- I’m here to do what’s right.
And that's the kind of leadership you need and you deserve. That's the choice we face in this election. And, Democrats, if you work hard, as hard as you worked for me in 2008, we’re going to keep going forward. We are not going backwards. (Applause.)
Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.) God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
Well, we have some just extraordinary leaders here today. I want to acknowledge a few of them. First of all, please give another round of applause to your outstanding young mayor, Kasim Reed. (Applause.) Three wonderful members of Congress who are fighting day in, day out, on behalf of the people of Georgia but also on behalf of people all across this country -- Congressman Sanford Bishop -- (applause) -- Congressman David Scott -- (applause) -- and one of the genuine heroes of this country, Congressman John Lewis. (Applause.)
Our Labor Commissioner and U.S. Senate candidate Michael Thurmond is in the house. (Applause.) Attorney General Thurbert Baker -- (applause) -- I think is here. If not, give him a round of applause anyway. Ag Commissioner Tommy Irvin. (Applause.) State party chair Jane Kidd. (Applause.) And the DNC Southern finance chair Daniel Halpern is in the house. (Applause.)
So, Atlanta, it is wonderful to be here, wonderful to be among so many good friends. A lot of people here worked hard on behalf of my campaign. I am reminded of the story President Lincoln told about one of his supporters who came to the White House seeking some patronage, seeking a job. And apparently in the outdoor reception area, he said, look, I want to see Lincoln personally because I’m responsible for him getting that job. Nobody did more than me. It’s payback time. So Lincoln lets him into his office. He says, sir, I understand that you take responsibility for me having this job. The guy says, that’s right. And Lincoln says, you’re forgiven. (Laughter.)
Look, we all know that the last few years have been extraordinarily challenging for the United States. Eighteen months ago, I took office after nearly a decade of economic policies that gave us sluggish growth, falling incomes, and a record deficit, and policies that culminated in the worst financial crisis that we’ve seen since the Great Depression. In the last six months of 2008, three million Americans lost their jobs. The month I was sworn, January of 2009, 750,000 Americans lost their jobs; 600,000 were lost a month later. All told, 8 million jobs lost as a consequence of this crisis.
Now, we didn’t get here by accident. We got here after 10 years of an economic agenda in Washington that was pretty straightforward: You cut taxes for millionaires, you cut rules for special interests, and you cut working folks loose to fend for themselves. That was the philosophy of the last administration and their friends in Congress. If you couldn’t find a job or you couldn’t go to college, tough luck -- you’re on your own. But if you’re a Wall Street bank or an insurance company or an oil company, then you got to write your own ticket and play by your own rules. And we know how this turned out.
So when I took office, because of the help of some of the people in this room, we put forward a new economic plan -- a plan that rewards hard work instead of greed; a plan that rewards responsibility instead of recklessness; a plan that’s focused on making our middle class more secure and our country more competitive in the long run -- so that the jobs and industries of the future aren’t all going to China and India, but are being created right here in the United States of America.
Instead of spending money on tax breaks for folks who don't need them and weren’t even asking for them, we’re making smart investments in innovation and clean energy and education that are going to benefit all of our people and our entire economy over the long run. (Applause.)
And instead of giving special interests free reign to do whatever they want, we’re demanding new accountability from Wall Street to Washington -- so that big corporations have to play by the same rules that small businesses and entrepreneurs do.
Now, because the policies of the last decade got us in such a deep hole, it’s going to take some time for us to dig ourselves out. We’re certainly not there yet. But I want everybody to understand, after eighteen months, I can say with confidence we are on the right track. (Applause.)
When we were -- instead of losing millions of jobs, we have created jobs for six straight months in the private sector. Instead of an economy that is contracting, we’ve got an economy that is expanding. So the last thing we would want to do is go back to what we were doing before.
And I want everybody in this room to understand, that is the choice in this election. (Applause.) The choice is -- the choice is whether we want to go forward or we want to go backwards to the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place.
Now, understand, it’d be one thing if the Republicans had seen the error of their ways. (Laughter.) Right? I mean, if after the rejections of 2006 and 2008, realizing, gosh, look at this big disaster that we caused and taking record surpluses into record deficits and causing all this hardship -- we’re going to rethink our approach and go out in the wilderness for a while, come back with some new ideas. (Laughter.)
But that’s not what happened. It’s not like they’ve engaged in some heavy reflection. They have not come up with a single, solitary, new idea to address the challenges of the American people. They don’t have a single idea that’s different from George Bush’s ideas -- not one. (Applause.)
Instead, they’re betting on amnesia. (Laughter.) That’s what they’re counting on. They’re counting on that you all forgot. They think that they can run the okey-doke on you. (Laughter.) Bamboozle you. (Laughter.)
I mean, think about it, these are the folks who were behind the steering wheel and drove the car into the ditch. So we’ve had to put on our galoshes, we went down there in the mud, we’ve been pushing, we’ve been shoving. They’ve been standing back, watching, say you’re not moving fast enough, you ain’t doing it right. (Laughter.) Why are you doing it that way? You got some mud on the car. Right? (Applause.)
That’s all right. We don’t need help. We’re just going to keep on pushing. We push, we push. The thing is slipping a little bit, but we stay with it. Finally -- finally -- we get this car out of the ditch, where we’re just right there on the blacktop. We’re about to start driving forward again. They say, hold on, we want the keys back. (Laughter and applause.) You can’t have the keys back -- you don’t know how to drive. (Laughter and applause.) You don’t know how to drive.
And I do want to point out, when you get in your car, when you go forward, what do you do? You put it in “D.” When you want to go back, what do you do? (Laughter.) You put it in “R.” We won’t do want to go into reverse back in the ditch. We want to go forwards. We got to put it in “D.” (Applause.) Can’t have the keys back. (Laughter.)
The choice in this election is between policies that encourage job creation here in America or encourage jobs to go elsewhere. That’s why I’ve said instead of giving tax breaks to corporations that want to ship jobs overseas, we want to give tax breaks to companies that are investing right here in the United States of America. (Applause.) And by the way, we’ve already cut taxes for businesses eight times since I’ve been President -- eight times. And we want to do more, because small business owners are the lifeblood of this economy. (Applause.)
Right now, as we speak -- as we speak, there’s a bill in the Senate that would cut taxes for small businesses, would help them get the loans they need to hire again. The members of Congress who are here, they already voted on this. They already passed this bill. And by the way, this is a bill that's based on Democratic and Republican ideas. It’s been praised by groups like the Chamber of Commerce. They never praise me. (Laughter.) The National Federation of Independent Business. It’s a bill that’s fully paid for, doesn’t add to our deficit.
So you would think -- Republicans say they're the pro-business party, isn’t that what they say? You would think this is a bill that they would want to pass. And, yet, day after day, week after week, they keep on stalling this bill and stonewalling this bill and opposing this bill. Why? Pure politics.
They're more interested in the next election than the next generation. And that's why they can’t have the keys back -- because we need somebody who is driving with a vision to the future. (Applause.) That's what we’ve been doing over these last 20 months.
We’re also jumpstarting a homegrown, clean energy industry -- because I don’t want to see the solar panels and the wind turbines and the biodiesel created in other countries. I don't want China and Germany and Brazil to get the jump on us in the industries of the future. I want to see all that stuff right here in the United States of America, with American workers. And the investments we’ve made so far are expected to create 800,000 jobs by 2012 -- 800,000 jobs in an industry of the future. (Applause.)
We want to create the infrastructure for the future -- not just roads and bridges -- but also the broadband lines and the smart grid lines that will ensure we stay competitively on top for years to come, creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs all across the country in the process. So that's our plan to create jobs right here in America -- not just short term, but long term.
But the fact is, most of the members of the other party voted no on each and every one of these initiatives. No on tax cuts to small businesses. No to clean energy jobs. No to the railroad and highway projects.
Now, I want to point out that doesn’t stop them from showing up at the ribbon-cuttings. (Laughter and applause.) John, you notice that? They’ll be voting no -- no, this is Obama’s -- no, we don't believe in recovery, we don't believe in all this. And then you show up at that ribbon cutting, and they're all there right in the front. Cheesing and grinning. (Laughter.) Sending out press releases. (Laughter.)
So a few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House was asked, what’s your jobs plan if your party takes control of Congress next year? He said, well, you know, our number one priority -- he was asked what’s your jobs plan -- your number priority is to repeal the health care bill.
Now, this is a bill that makes sure that insurance companies can’t deny you coverage if you’ve got a preexisting condition, makes sure that young people can stay on their parents’ insurance till they're 26, provides a 35 percent tax credit to small businesses that are doing the right thing, giving their employees health care, makes sure that companies can’t drop you when you get sick.
Now, I have no idea why you would want to repeal that in the first place, but I sure don't understand how repealing it would create jobs, unless it’s for some folks in the insurance company who are being hired to deny you your claims. But that can't be a real jobs plan.
Now, look, I may be wrong. Maybe they know something I don't, or no other economist or expert understands. And if you think that's a good idea, then you should vote for them.
But I’ve got a different view. The health insurance reform we passed isn’t just preventing insurance companies from denying you coverage -- it’s making the coverage that you got more secure, and is ultimately going to lower costs for all Americans. And one of the most important things we can do to reduce our budget deficit is to get control of health care costs.
These guys don't have a plan for that. They just have a plan to say no because they're thinking about the next election instead of the next generation. And that's the choice that we’re going to be making in this next election. The choice in this election is between policies that strengthen the hand of the special interests or strengthen America’s middle class.
They want to repeal health care -- we’re not going to let it happen. We want to move forward. They pledged to repeal Wall Street reform. Here we’ve got the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. Everybody knows, having looked at it, that the incentives on Wall Street were skewed and people were doing crazy things with other people’s money, making huge, risky bets and then expecting taxpayers to bail them out if it didn’t work out. So after all the hardship we’ve gone through to repair this economy, you’d think it would be common sense to say, let’s have some basic rules of the road in place to ensure that a crisis like this doesn’t happen again.
But what did the other party say? No. They want to go back to the status quo that got us into this same situation. The reforms we passed protect consumers and responsible bankers and responsible business owners. That’s what the free market is supposed to be about: setting some basic rules for the road so that everybody can compete -- not on how to game the system, but how to provide good service and good products to customers.
Make sure that mortgage companies can’t give you a mortgage that you don’t understand. Make sure that credit card companies can’t jack up your rates without providing you some notification -- common sense stuff. But they want to repeal it because they’re more interested in the next election than they are in the next generation. And that’s the choice that we will face in this next election.
If the other party wants to keep on giving taxpayer subsidies to big banks, that’s their prerogative. But that’s not what America is about. That’s not going to move us forward.
I’ll give you another example. We had a law in place when I took office in which the government was guaranteeing student loans, except they were going through financial middlemen who were taking out billions of dollars of profits issuing the loans. But the loans were guaranteed, so they weren’t taking any risks. They were just making billions of dollars of money.
We said, well, that doesn’t make sense at a time when young people are trying to get to college. So what we’re going to do is we’re going to cut out the middle man. We’ve added tens of billions of dollars to the student loans program. More than a million young people are going to get help that wouldn’t otherwise get help because of the decision we’ve made. (Applause.) What side do you think they were on? The other party voted no.
We passed a law to prohibit pay discrimination. My attitude is equal pay for equal work. Women should be paid just like men for doing the same job. (Applause.) They said no. They want to go backwards. We want to move forwards. (Applause.)
They want to extend the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. Now, I believe in tax cuts for the right folks. I kept my campaign promise -- cut taxes for 95 percent of working Americans. But I don’t understand how do you get up here and talk about how you care so deeply about the deficit, and yet you want to perpetuate a tax cut that costs $700 billion, with a “B” -- $700 billion -- and would not provide the kind of economic growth or benefits for the vast majority of Americans. That’s the choice that we face in this election.
They voted to make sure that oil companies continue to get protected from some liabilities with respect to oil spills. How do you do that? We just spent all this time and energy trying to cap this well in the Gulf. You’d think it would make just common sense to ensure that oil companies are fully accountable. They voted no against that.
When we forced BP to put $20 billion aside to make sure those fishermen and store owners and hotel owners were protected -- (applause) -- and what happened? The guy who would be the chairman of the Energy Committee in the House apologized to BP. Sure did. Apologized. Said we engaged in a shakedown to protect ordinary families from the devastation that had taken place.
So look, you go across the board, Atlanta, there’s going to be a choice in this election. It’s the choice between special interest policies that led us into this mess and policies that are finally leading us out, that are finally helping America grow again, policies that are making middle-class Americans more secure and giving them greater opportunity.
I know this nation has been through incredibly difficult times. And I also know, by the way, that not all the steps we took have been popular. Folks in Washington, these pundits, sometimes they write -- they're all surprised -- “President Obama went ahead with some of these steps like health care reform and helping the auto companies, and those weren’t popular.”
Well, I knew they weren’t popular. I’ve got pollsters too. (Laughter.) You don't think I’ve got polls that tell me what’s popular and what’s not? But for the last 20 months, my job has been to govern.
So when I went to Detroit last week, and I look out and I see plants producing clean energy cars that otherwise would have been shut down, a million jobs that would have been lost, cars no longer made in America because the entire industry had collapsed, and I say, we made the right decision.
And now Ford and Chrysler and GM are all making a profit. They’ve all hired 55,000 workers back. (Applause.) They are on the move. They're about to pay the taxpayers back for every investment that we made. (Applause.) Then I say to myself, I’m not here just to do what’s popular -- I’m here to do what’s right.
And that's the kind of leadership you need and you deserve. That's the choice we face in this election. And, Democrats, if you work hard, as hard as you worked for me in 2008, we’re going to keep going forward. We are not going backwards. (Applause.)
Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.) God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
Obama Raises $500K For DNC In Atlanta
From the White House Pool Report:
A person who insisted on being identified as a “Democratic source” came over to inform your pool that roughly 200 guests are forking over anywhere from $1,000 to $10,000 apiece for a total of $500,000.
The person said she could not explain why that highly sensitive information has to be anonymously sourced in this era of transparency except to say that her organization, which we’re not allowed to identify either but can be safely assumed to be in some fashion or another Democratic in orientation, will not allow her to be on the record and will not itself to be identified either.
Joining POTUS for the fundraiser are Reps. John Lewis, David Scott and Sanford Bishop, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and Georgia Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond. Rep. Lewis has already spoken before our arrival and Mayor Reed introduced POTUS, according to our anonymous Democratic informant.
Former Gov. Roy Barnes is still absent, campaigning about 100 miles south of here. Fortunately, we can identify our source on that – it’s the Associated Press, accessed via Google.
Peter Baker
New York Times
A person who insisted on being identified as a “Democratic source” came over to inform your pool that roughly 200 guests are forking over anywhere from $1,000 to $10,000 apiece for a total of $500,000.
The person said she could not explain why that highly sensitive information has to be anonymously sourced in this era of transparency except to say that her organization, which we’re not allowed to identify either but can be safely assumed to be in some fashion or another Democratic in orientation, will not allow her to be on the record and will not itself to be identified either.
Joining POTUS for the fundraiser are Reps. John Lewis, David Scott and Sanford Bishop, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and Georgia Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond. Rep. Lewis has already spoken before our arrival and Mayor Reed introduced POTUS, according to our anonymous Democratic informant.
Former Gov. Roy Barnes is still absent, campaigning about 100 miles south of here. Fortunately, we can identify our source on that – it’s the Associated Press, accessed via Google.
Peter Baker
New York Times
Text of President Obama's Speech To The DAV National Convention
Disabled American Veterans
Hyatt Regency Atlanta
Atlanta, Georgia
Monday, August 2, 2010
Good morning. Thank you Commander Barrera for your kind introduction and your lifetime of service—in the Marines in Vietnam and as a tireless advocate for your fellow disabled veterans. Thank you Bobby.
I want to thank your great leadership team for welcoming me today—Chairman Ray Dempsey; incoming commander Wally Tyson; national adjutant Art Wilson; Judy Hezlep of the D-A-V Auxiliary; and your Executive Director in Washington, Dave Gorman. And I’m pleased to be joined by a decorated Vietnam veteran, wounded warrior and a lifetime member of the D-A-V—my outstanding Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Eric Shinseki.
Disabled American Veterans, I valued your advice and counsel when I was a senator, when I co-sponsored the Post-9/11 GI Bill. You were one of the first veterans organizations that I called upon when I began my presidential campaign.
And as President, it’s been my pleasure to welcome you to the White House—to make sure America is serving our veterans as well as you’ve served us; and, most recently, to sign advanced appropriations into law so that veterans health care will never again be held hostage to the budget battles of Washington
There’s another visit I won’t forget. I was in the Oval Office expecting a visit from the D-A-V. And in comes Bobby carrying a baseball bat. Now, it’s not every day that somebody gets past the Secret Service while wielding a baseball bat. I think you heard about this. Turns out it was a genuine Louisville Slugger—a thank you for going to bat for our veterans on advanced appropriations.
So I’m grateful for that symbol of our partnership, and I’m proud of the progress we’ve achieved together.
In the life of our nation, not every generation has been summoned to defend our country in its hour of need. But every generation to answer that call has done so with honor and courage.
Among you are members of that generation that saved the world from fascism. I was honored to stand with our World War II veterans at Normandy last year for the anniversary of D-Day. And this year, as we mark the 65th anniversary of our victory in that war, we once again salute our veterans of the Second World War.
Others among you faced a brutal foe on a cold Korean peninsula. This year, as we mark the 60th anniversary that conflict, I will be proud to travel to the Republic of Korea in November to pay tribute to our veterans of the Korean War.
Many of you served in the jungles of Vietnam. You also served with honor, but were often shunned when you came home. That was a national disgrace, and it must never happen again. That’s s why we’re making sure our veterans from today’s wars are shown the respect and dignity that they deserve.
And whether you served in the Gulf to free a captive Kuwait, fought in the streets of Mogadishu or stopped an ethnic slaughter in the Balkans, you too are part of an unbroken line of service stretching across two centuries.
For you, coming home was the beginning of another battle—the battle to recover. You fought to stand again, to walk again, to work again. You fought for each other—and for the benefits and treatment you had earned. And you became leaders in our communities, companies and country, including a former Vietnam vet and senator, Max Cleland, who reminded us that America’s disabled veterans are “strong at the broken places.”
Today, your legacy of service is carried on by a new generation of Americans. Some stepped forward in a time of peace, not foreseeing years of combat.
Others stepped forward in this time of war, knowing they could be sent into harm’s way. For the past nine years, in Afghanistan and Iraq, they have borne the burdens of war. They – and their families – have faced the greatest test in the history of our all-volunteer force—serving tour after tour, year after year. Through their extraordinary service they have written their own chapters in the American story, and by any measure have earned their place among the greatest of generations.
Now, one of those chapters is nearing an end. As a candidate for President, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end. Shortly after taking office, I announced our new strategy for Iraq and for a transition to full Iraqi responsibility. And I made it clear that by August 31, 2010 America’s combat mission in Iraq would end. And that is exactly what we are doing—as promised, on schedule.
Already, we have closed or turned over to Iraq hundreds of bases.
We’re moving out millions of pieces of equipment in one of the largest logistics operations that we’ve seen in decades. By the end of this month, we’ll have brought more than 90,000 of our troops home from Iraq since I took office—more than 90,000.
Today – even as terrorists try to derail Iraq’s progress – because of the sacrifices of our troops and their Iraqi partners, violence in Iraq continues to be near the lowest it’s been in years. And next month, we will change our military mission from combat to supporting and training Iraqi security forces. In fact, in many parts of the country, Iraqis have already taken the lead for security.
As agreed to with the Iraqi government, we will maintain a transitional force until we remove all our troops from Iraq by the end of next year. During this period, our forces will have a focused mission—supporting and training Iraqi forces, partnering with Iraqis in counterterrorism missions, and protecting our civilian and military efforts. These are dangerous tasks. And there are still those with bombs and bullets who will try to stop Iraq’s progress. The hard truth is we have not seen the end of American sacrifice in Iraq.
But make no mistake, our commitment in Iraq is changing—from a military effort led by our troops to a civilian effort led by our diplomats. And as we mark the end of America’s combat mission in Iraq, a grateful America must pay tribute to all who served there.
For our nation has had vigorous debates about the Iraq War. There are patriots who supported going to war, and patriots who opposed it.
But there has never been any daylight between us when it comes to supporting the more than one million Americans in uniform have served in Iraq—far more than any conflict since Vietnam.
These men and women from across our country have done more than meet the challenges of this young century. Through their extraordinary courage, confidence and commitment, these troops and veterans have proven themselves as a new generation of American leaders. While our country has sometimes been divided, they have fought together as one. While other individuals and institutions have shirked responsibility, they have welcomed it. And while it is easy to be daunted by overwhelming challenges, the generation that has served in Iraq has overcome every test before them.
They took to the skies and sped across deserts in the initial charge into Baghdad. And today we’re joined by an infantryman who was there as part of the 101st Airborne Division—Sergeant Nicholas Bernardi.
When invasion gave way to insurgency, our troops persevered, block by block, city by city, from Baghdad to Fallujah. As a driver in a transportation company, this soldier endured constant attacks but never waivered in his mission—and we thank Sergeant Dan Knabe.
And when terrorists and militias plunged Iraq into sectarian war, our troops adapted and adjusted—restoring order and effectively defeating al Qaeda in Iraq on the battlefield. And among those who served in those pivotal days was a scout with the 1st Cavalry Division—Specialist Matt Seidl.
For each of these men and women there are countless others. And we honor them all. Our young enlisted troops and non commissioned officers who are the backbone of our military. The National Guardsmen and Reservists who served in unprecedented deployments. And more women tested by combat than in any war in American history, including a Marine here today—Sergeant Patricia Ruiz.
And we salute the families back home. They too have sacrificed in this war. That is why my wife Michelle—and the Vice President’s wife, Dr. Jill Biden—have made it their mission to make sure America takes care of our remarkable military families, including our veterans.
Now, this summer, tens of thousands of our troops in Iraq are coming home. Last week, Vice President Biden was at Fort Drum to help welcome back members of the legendary 10th Mountain Division. Families are being reunited at bases across the country, from Fort Bragg in North Carolina to Fort Riley in Kansas to Fort Lewis in Washington.
In this season of homecomings, every American can show their gratitude to our patriots who served in Iraq.
As we do, we are humbled by the profound sacrifice that has been rendered. Each of the veterans I have mentioned carries with them the wounds of this war. And as a nation, we will honor forever all who gave their lives in service in Iraq. Soldiers. Sailors. Airmen. Marines. Coast Guardsmen. Active. Guard. Reserve.
But even as we end the war in Iraq, even as we welcome home of so many of our troops, others are stilled deployed in Afghanistan.
Let us never forget—it was Afghanistan where al Qaeda plotted and trained to murder 3,000 innocent people on 9/11. It is Afghanistan and the tribal regions of Pakistan where terrorists have launched other attacks against us and our allies. And if Afghanistan were to be engulfed by an even wide insurgency, al Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates would have even more space to plan their next attack. And as President of the United States, I refuse to let that happen.
That is why, after years in which the situation had deteriorated in Afghanistan, I announced a new strategy last December—a military effort to break the Taliban’s momentum and train Afghan forces so they can take the lead for security; a civilian effort to promote good governance and development that improves the lives of the Afghan people; and deeper cooperation with Pakistan to root out terrorists on both sides of the border.
We face huge challenges in Afghanistan. But it’s important that the American people know that we are making progress and we’re focused on goals that are clear and achievable.
On the military front, nearly all the additional forces that I ordered to Afghanistan are now in place. Along with our Afghan and international partners, we’re going on the offensive against the Taliban– targeting their leaders, challenging them in regions where they’d had free reign, and training Afghan National Security Forces.
And today our thoughts are prayers are with all our troops risking their lives for our safety in Afghanistan.
On the civilian front, we’re insisting on greater accountability, and the Afghan government has taken concrete steps to foster development; to combat corruption; and to put forward a reintegration plan that allows Afghans to lay down their arms.
In Pakistan, we’ve seen the government begin to take the fight to violent extremists within its borders. Major blows have been struck against al Qaeda and its leadership.
Because in this region and beyond, we will tolerate no safe for al Qaeda and their extremist allies. We will disrupt, dismantle, and ultimately defeat al Qaeda. And we will give our troops the resources and equipment to get the job done and keep our country safe.
At the same time, every American who has ever worn the uniform must also know this—your country is going to take care of you when you come home. Our nation’s commitment to our veterans—to you and your families—is a sacred trust. And to me and my administration, upholding that trust is a moral obligation.
That’s why I’ve charged Secretary Shinseki with building a 21st century VA. That includes one of the largest percentage increases to the VA budget in the past 30 years. Yes, we will cut the deficit, and I’ve proposed a freeze on discretionary domestic spending. But what I haven’t frozen is the spending we need to keep our military strong, our country safe and our veterans secure. So we’re making an historic commitment to our veterans.
For about 200,000 Vietnam vets who may have been exposed to Agent Orange and who now suffer from three chronic diseases, we’re making it easier for you to get the health care and benefits you need. And or our Gulf War veterans, we’ve declared that nine infectious diseases are now presumed to be related to your service in Desert Storm.
For our disabled veterans, we’ve eliminated co-pays for those of you who are catastrophically disabled.
We’ve kept our promise on concurrent receipt by proposing legislation that would allow severely disabled retirees to receive your military retired pay and your VA disability benefits. It’s the right thing to do.
We’ve dramatically increased funding for veterans health care across the board. That includes improving care for rural veterans and women veterans. For those half-million vets who had lost their eligibility—our Priority 8 veterans—we’re restoring your access to VA health care.
And since the rumors continue to fly, let me say it as clearly as I can. The historic health care reform legislation that I signed into law does not—I repeat, does not—change your veterans benefits. The VA health care and benefits that you know and trust are safe, and that includes prosthetics for our disabled veterans.
Thanks to advanced appropriations, the days of delayed funding for veterans medical care are over. And just as those delays were unacceptable, so too are long delays in the claims process.
So we’re working hard to create a single lifetime electronic record that our troops and veterans can keep for life.
Today, I can announce that for the first time ever, veterans will be able to go to the VA website, click a simple “blue button” and download or print your personnel health records so you have them when you need them and can share them with your doctors outside the VA. That’s happening, this fall.
We’re hiring thousands of new claims processors to break the backlog once and for all.
And to make sure the backlog doesn’t come back, we’re reforming the claims process itself, with new information technologies and paperless systems.
As a result of the innovation competition that I announced last summer, our dedicated VA employees suggested more than 10,000 new ways to cut through the red tape and bureaucracy. And we’re already putting dozens of these innovative ideas into action. Additionally, we’re enabling more veterans to check the status of their claims on-line and from their cell phone.
As a next step, we’re opening this competition to entrepreneurs and academics so the best minds in America can help us develop the best technologies to serve our vets, including those of you with multiple traumatic injuries. And we’re going to keep at this until we meet our commitment to cut those backlogs, slash those wait times, and deliver your benefits sooner. This is a priority, and we’re going to get it done.
We’re making progress in ending homelessness among our veterans. Today, on any given night, there are about 20,000 fewer veterans on the streets. But we’re not going to be satisfied until every veteran who has fought for America has a home in America.
Finally, we’re keeping faith with our newest veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. We’re offering more of the support and counseling they need to transition back to civilian life. That includes funding the Post-9/11 GI Bill, which is already helping more than 300,000 veterans and family members pursue their dream of a college education.
For veterans trying to find work in a very tough economy, we’re helping with job training and placement. I’ve directed the federal government to make it a priority to hire more veterans, including disabled veterans. And every business in America needs to know—our vets have the training, they’ve got the skills, and they’re ready to work. Our country is stronger when we tap the incredible talents of our veterans.
For those coming home injured, we’re continuing to direct unprecedented support to our wounded warriors in uniform—more treatment centers, more case managers and delivering the absolute best care available. For those who can, we want to help them get back to where they want to be—with their units. And that includes service members with a disability, who still have so much to offer our military.
We’re directing unprecedented resources to treating the signature wounds of today’s wars—Traumatic Brain Injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. I recently signed into law the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act. It not only improves treatment for T-B-I and P-T-S-D, it gives new support to many of the caregivers who put their lives on hold to care for their loved one.
As so many of you know, P-T-S-D is a pain like no other—the nightmares that keep coming back, the rage that strikes suddenly, the hopelessness that has led too many of our troops and veterans to take their own lives. Today, I want to say to anyone who is struggling—do not suffer in silence. It’s not a sign of weakness to reach out for support; it is a sign of strength. Your country needs you. And we are here to help you stand tall again.
We’re making major investments in awareness, outreach and suicide prevention; hiring more mental health professionals; and improving care and treatment. For those of you suffering from P-T-S-D, we’re making it a whole lot easier to qualify for VA benefits. From now on, if a VA doctor confirms a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress, that’s enough—no matter what war you served in.
These are the commitments my administration has made. This is the sacred trust we have pledged to uphold—to you and all who serve, including a truly inspiring American, Staff Sergeant Cory Remsburg. He was at Bethesda during one of my visits to see our wounded warriors. As I walked into his room, I saw a picture on the wall—a picture of the two of us together. It turns out I had met Cory before, back at the D-Day anniversary in Normandy. A proud Army Ranger, he had joined in a reenactment of that historic paratrooper jump.
Soon after, Cory served on his 10th deployment since 9/11—that’s right, his 10th. And that’s when an I-E-D nearly took his life. The traumatic brain injury was severe. Cory was in a coma for months, and it seemed possible that he might never wake up. But then something happened. His doctors can’t explain it. His parents call it a miracle. Cory opened one of his eyes. A few weeks later, he moved a leg, then an arm.
Now, there at Bethesda, we were meeting again. Cory still couldn’t speak. But he looked me in the eye. He lifted his arm and shook my hand firmly.
And when I asked how he was feeling, he held up his hand, pulled his fingers together and gave a solid thumbs up.
Today, Cory is at a VA hospital in Florida. With the support of his family and VA staff, he’s working hard every day to regain his strength. He’s learning to speak again. And he’s grateful for the visits he’s received from friends and supporters—including the Disabled American Veterans.
Cory is only 27 years old. He knows he has a long and hard road ahead. But he pushes on, and he’s determined to get back to his fellow Rangers. And when someone at the hospital said, “Cory, you’re going to walk out of here someday,” he said “No, I’m going to run out of here.”
Staff Sergeant Cory Remsburg, Disabled American Veterans—you are the very essence of America, the values that sustain us a people, and the virtues our nation needs most right now.
The resilience that, in the face of great loss, lets us pick ourselves up and keep pushing on.
The sense of purpose that tells us to carry on, not just when it’s easy, but when it’s hard, even when the odds seem overwhelming.
The confidence that our destiny is never written for us, it is written by us.
And the faith—that fundamental American faith—that there are brighter days ahead; and that we not will not simply endure, we will emerge from our tests and trials even stronger than before.
That is your story. That is America’s story. And I’m proud to stand with you as we write the next proud chapter in the life of the country we love.
God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
Georgia Politicos Welcome President Obama To Atlanta
Below is a slideshow of the photographs I took at Dobbins ARB this morning as Air Force One landed in Atlanta.
Later today, I'll post some images of the President boarding Air Force One as he prepares to leave the Empire State of the South.
(Photos by Andre Walker)
Later today, I'll post some images of the President boarding Air Force One as he prepares to leave the Empire State of the South.
(Photos by Andre Walker)
GOP Congressional Candidate Commends Obama for Addressing Wounded Veterans
Liz Carter, the Republican nominee for Congress from the 4th district, released the following statement in advance of President Obama's speech to the Disabled American Veterans National Convention:
"I applaud President Obama for coming to speak to this organization that does so much good on behalf of our disabled vets and their families," stated Carter, the Republican nominee for Georgia's 4th district House of Representatives. "Our wounded warriors are very deserving of our appreciation and gratitude."
"Our veterans have made enormous sacrifices and our troops continue to do so around the world. I'm pleased that the President is attending the convention to honor their service."
"I applaud President Obama for coming to speak to this organization that does so much good on behalf of our disabled vets and their families," stated Carter, the Republican nominee for Georgia's 4th district House of Representatives. "Our wounded warriors are very deserving of our appreciation and gratitude."
"Our veterans have made enormous sacrifices and our troops continue to do so around the world. I'm pleased that the President is attending the convention to honor their service."
Quote of the Day: the Michael "Cookie" Coles edition
". . . I think the difficult thing for anyone in Georgia --if you run as a Democrat-- is to separate yourself from not being a national Democrat, because Georgia Democrats like Zell Miller and Sam Nunn are cut out of a different cloth . . ."
-Former Democratic congressional candidate Michael "Cookie" Coles discussing the tight-rope walk Georgia Democrats must walk in order to win in the Peach State.
-Former Democratic congressional candidate Michael "Cookie" Coles discussing the tight-rope walk Georgia Democrats must walk in order to win in the Peach State.
President Obama Official Schedule And Guidance To Atlanta, Georgia
From the White House Press Office:
In the morning, the President will travel to Atlanta, Georgia. The departure from the South Lawn and arrival at Dobbins Air Reserve Base are open press. Later in the morning, the President will speak at the national convention of Disabled American Veterans in Atlanta, Georgia. He will address our ongoing drawdown in Iraq as we near the goal of ending our combat mission at the end of August, as well as our support for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he will discuss the Administration’s commitment to serve our veterans as well as they have served us. The President’s remarks are open press.
In the afternoon, the President will deliver remarks at a DNC finance event. There will be travel pool coverage of the President’s remarks.
The President will return to Washington, DC later in the afternoon. The departure from Dobbins Air Reserve Base and the arrival on the South Lawn are open press. The President will then meet with senior advisors in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press.
In the morning, the President will travel to Atlanta, Georgia. The departure from the South Lawn and arrival at Dobbins Air Reserve Base are open press. Later in the morning, the President will speak at the national convention of Disabled American Veterans in Atlanta, Georgia. He will address our ongoing drawdown in Iraq as we near the goal of ending our combat mission at the end of August, as well as our support for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he will discuss the Administration’s commitment to serve our veterans as well as they have served us. The President’s remarks are open press.
In the afternoon, the President will deliver remarks at a DNC finance event. There will be travel pool coverage of the President’s remarks.
The President will return to Washington, DC later in the afternoon. The departure from Dobbins Air Reserve Base and the arrival on the South Lawn are open press. The President will then meet with senior advisors in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press.
- 9AM - THE PRESIDENT departs the White House en route Andrews Air Force Base
South Lawn - 9:15AM - THE PRESIDENT departs Andrews Air Force Base en route to Atlanta, Georgia
Andrews Air Force Base - 10:45AM - THE PRESIDENT arrives in Atlanta, Georgia
Dobbins Air Reserve Base - 11:30AM - THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at the Disabled Veterans of America Conference
Hyatt Regency Hotel - 1:25PM - THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a DNC finance event
Hyatt Regency Hotel - 2:30PM - THE PRESIDENT departs Atlanta, Georgia en route Andrews Air Force Base
Dobbins Air Reserve Base - 3:55PM - THE PRESIDENT arrives at Andrews Air Force Base
- 4:10PM - THE PRESIDENT arrives at the White House
South Lawn - 4:15PM - THE PRESIDENT meets with senior advisors
Oval Office
Nathan Deal: A Leader On Ending Birthright Citizenship
Former Congressman Nathan Deal and I don't agree on a whole lot of issues. However, there is one issue Deal introduced to the public three years ago that I whole-heartedly support -- ending birthright citizenship in this country.
Three years ago, then-Congressman Deal introduced H.R.1940; the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007. When I learned about Deal's bill, I wrote on this site that we need to put an end to birthright citizenship [Walker, Andre (2007-7-3). We need to put an end to birth right citizenship. Georgia Politics Unfiltered. Retrieved on 2010-8-2.].
To pull a line from the 1995 film The American President, "America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship." American citizenship is a privilege, not a right. And American citizenship should not be conferred upon the children of people who broke the law to get here in the first place.
With new attention being given to ending birthright citizenship due to the proposed legislation from U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R - South Carolina), I believe it is completely appropriate to highlight the fact that Nathan Deal has been a leader on this issue [Bolton, Alexander (2010-8-1). Political momentum grows for revoking birthright citizenship. The Hill. Retrieved on 2010-8-2.].
Leaders lead.
Three years ago, then-Congressman Deal introduced H.R.1940; the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007. When I learned about Deal's bill, I wrote on this site that we need to put an end to birthright citizenship [Walker, Andre (2007-7-3). We need to put an end to birth right citizenship. Georgia Politics Unfiltered. Retrieved on 2010-8-2.].
To pull a line from the 1995 film The American President, "America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship." American citizenship is a privilege, not a right. And American citizenship should not be conferred upon the children of people who broke the law to get here in the first place.
With new attention being given to ending birthright citizenship due to the proposed legislation from U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R - South Carolina), I believe it is completely appropriate to highlight the fact that Nathan Deal has been a leader on this issue [Bolton, Alexander (2010-8-1). Political momentum grows for revoking birthright citizenship. The Hill. Retrieved on 2010-8-2.].
Leaders lead.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
White Democrats Avoid Being Seen With Obama
Saturday afternoon, AJC Political Insider Jim Galloway published a list of Democrats who will and won't be appearing with President Obama when he comes to Atlanta tommorrow. On that list is a proverbial who's who of white Democrats.
Wait, strike that, there is the possibility of blacks staying at home on election day. But then again, every time there's an election, Democrats trot out those same tired old civil rights leaders who say that people fought and died for blacks to get the right to vote.
That's true. Still, voting and voting monolithically for one party over another are two separate issues.
I believe Democrats, particularly white Democrats, take black voters for granted. I also believe that blacks do themselves, and their community, a disservice by voting in a near monolithic block for one political party's candidates over another.
Democrats don't compete for the black vote, because they know they already have it. Republicans don't compete for the black vote, because they know the Democrats already have it.
If competition is good within the business community, then it certainly is good within the black community. What I'm saying is that Democrats and Republicans both need to start competing for the black vote. And more importantly, black folks need to hold both political parties' proverbial feet to the fire.
To the Democratic Party, black voters should pose this question:
We've been voting for you en bloc for decades, and yet unemployment is remains high in the black community while educational achievement remains low in the black community. Tell me, John Q. Negro, what the Democratic Party's plan is to put more blacks to work and send more blacks to college than are going to jail?
To the Republican Party, black voters should post this question:
We've been voting Democratic en bloc for decades, and yet we have have next to nothing to show for our loyal support. Tell me, John Q. Negro, what the Republican Party's plan is to put more blacks to work and send more blacks to college than are going to jail?
It's that simple. No patronizing. No pandering. The same issues that are critical in the white community are just as critical in the black community. And those issues are jobs, education and the economy.
President Barack Obama’s second visit to Georgia this year may be one of those parties best remembered for the guests who failed to show.
Roy Barnes, the former governor and his party’s July choice to retake the office, has received the most attention for his decision to give priority to a Monday schedule that will take him through Middle and South Georgia. But there are others:
Ken Hodges, the nominee for attorney general, will be in Albany for a case he’s working on for his law firm;
U.S. Rep. Jim Marshall of Macon, who faces yet another Republican challenger, has plans to help his daughter move;
U.S. Rep. John Barrow of Savannah will remain in Washington for “a minor medical procedure.” And, yes, he’ll have Republican opposition in November.
Galloway, Jim (2010-7-31). Political Insider Guess who won’t be coming to lunch with Obama?. Political Insider. Retrieved on 2010-7-31.
Wait, strike that, there is the possibility of blacks staying at home on election day. But then again, every time there's an election, Democrats trot out those same tired old civil rights leaders who say that people fought and died for blacks to get the right to vote.
That's true. Still, voting and voting monolithically for one party over another are two separate issues.
I believe Democrats, particularly white Democrats, take black voters for granted. I also believe that blacks do themselves, and their community, a disservice by voting in a near monolithic block for one political party's candidates over another.
Democrats don't compete for the black vote, because they know they already have it. Republicans don't compete for the black vote, because they know the Democrats already have it.
If competition is good within the business community, then it certainly is good within the black community. What I'm saying is that Democrats and Republicans both need to start competing for the black vote. And more importantly, black folks need to hold both political parties' proverbial feet to the fire.
To the Democratic Party, black voters should pose this question:
We've been voting for you en bloc for decades, and yet unemployment is remains high in the black community while educational achievement remains low in the black community. Tell me, John Q. Negro, what the Democratic Party's plan is to put more blacks to work and send more blacks to college than are going to jail?
To the Republican Party, black voters should post this question:
We've been voting Democratic en bloc for decades, and yet we have have next to nothing to show for our loyal support. Tell me, John Q. Negro, what the Republican Party's plan is to put more blacks to work and send more blacks to college than are going to jail?
It's that simple. No patronizing. No pandering. The same issues that are critical in the white community are just as critical in the black community. And those issues are jobs, education and the economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)