Wenona Benally Baldenegro Interview — Podcast June 4, 2012

Posted on June 6, 2012 by William Timberman


A New Voice in Arizona’s First Congressional District: With primary campaigning in Arizona well underway, Democratic Perspective interviews Wenona Benally Baldenegro, Democratic candidate for Arizona’s First Congressional District. She talks with co-hosts Mike Cosentino and Steve Williamson about her background  — growing up in Kayenta as a member of the Navajo nation, her degrees from Harvard Law School and the John F. Kennedy School of Government and Public Policy, and her involvement in Arizona politics.  She discusses tribal government, the struggle over mining and water rights, the safeguarding of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and the pressing need for jobs in our rural communities here in Northern Arizona.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Arizona Politics, Elections, Interviews, Medicaid, Medicare, Podcasts, Social Security | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wenona Benally Baldenegro Interview — Podcast June 4, 2012

Paul Lenze Interview — Podcast May 28, 2012

Posted on May 30, 2012 by William Timberman


A Closer Look at Iran: Middle-East expert Dr. Paul Lenze, of Northern Arizona University, returns to Democratic Perspective to discuss Iran’s history, demographic make-up, and political ambitions. Does Iran want to become a nuclear power? If so, what are its reasons, and how, short of war, might the United States and its allies persuade the Iranian government to agree to abide by its obligations under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Foreign Affairs, Interviews, Middle East, National Politics, Podcasts | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Paul Lenze Interview — Podcast May 28, 2012

A Closer Look At Iran.

Posted on May 29, 2012 by Gary LaMaster

To gain more insight into the conflict with Iran over its nuclear ambitions, Democratic Perspective once again turned to Dr. Paul Lenze of Northern Arizona University.
We began by asking Dr. Lenze to distinguish between Iran and Arabs, “This is a centuries old conflict that goes back to the death of the prophet Muhammed. The Shia people of Iran believe that any descendant of Muhammed is the rightful leader of Islam. This created a huge division in Islam between the Shias and the Sunnis.”

Fast forwarding to modern times, we asked Dr. Lenze to describe Iran, “Modern Iran is made up of people who are predominately Persian,” he said. “There are minorities in the country, but they all share Islam as their faith and they speak Persian. Iran is modern…the largest part of the population is 18-35, and this large youth population and middle class have actually created a lot of problems for the regime and the economy. There have not been enough jobs for young people which have created a lot of protests. Just like those of us in the West, Iranians want shelter, they want to be able to feed their families, they want to be able to send them to school, they want them to be able to find a job when they get out of school, and they want to live a normal life. Politics have gotten in the way of that.”

When asked what’s driving this Islamic regime, Lenze replied, “The main reason Iran is trying to exert its influence in the Middle East is that it wants to be…a regional power. This stems back to 1979 and 1980 when the Islamic Republic came into power. And you have the Iran-Iraq War which lasted 8 years in trying to battle it out for supremacy, and you have the International community supporting Iraq and Saddam Hussein. It caused the late Ayatollah Khomeini to call the United States “the Great Satan” and directly state that Israel is the sworn enemy of Iran. It has caused Iran to try to influence US policy in the Middle East by providing assistance to the PLO and, later on, Hamas.”

“Iran is a very nationalistic country,” Lenze continued. “The clerical regime today is concerned about three things: Prestige, security and to use nuclear energy to appeal to Iranian nationalism. It does not have global ambitions.”

Turning to the brutality in Syrian, Dr. Lenze said, “The situation in Syria is a vexing one for the international community. China and Russia do not want to see the US involved further into the domestic politics of one of their allies.”

As for the Arab Spring, Lenze said, “Facebook and Twitter represent a force in the region. From 2003 up into 2011, social media became a way for civil society, the middle class, to participate. They organized Facebook groups. They were able to show the world what was happening.”

As for how we can avoid war with Iran, Dr. Lenze said, “We continue to talk with Israel and persuade them to continue the sanctions. We want to continue to promote the sanctions against Iran because they’ve actually been working. The Revolutionary Guard which is the elite force in Iran, they have hit them pretty hard. They have also hit the international market, specifically Iran can no longer sell oil to the international market, and the states in Europe as well as the United States have cut off trading with Iran. This has hurt not just the Iranian government; the sanctions are being felt in Iranian society.”

“An attack against Iran would be a way for this regime to cause people to rally around Iran,” Lenze explained. “There are fractures within Iran, but an attack would only serve to legitimize the Iranian government’s desire for nuclear weapons development. We need to remove the motivation for Iran to want to apply its nuclear ambitions.”

“Using smart sanctions; using sanctions to prevent Iran from continuing in secrecy is the best option,” said Lenze. “As long as it remains a member of the non-proliferation treaty, then it still has to open itself up for inspections. And if it does that then maybe the United States can get rid of some of the sanctions and engage Iran in politics of the region.”

Posted in Foreign Affairs, Government, Interviews, Middle East, National Politics | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on A Closer Look At Iran.

More Hullabaloo.

Posted on May 24, 2012 by Gary LaMaster

In her latest interview with Democratic Perspective, Heather Parton (aka Digby) revealed the secret to her amazing success as a blogger: hard work. “I work seven days a week. I write every single day,” she said.

“I’m sympathetic to anyone trying to start (a blog) in this environment. It was much easier when I started,” she continued. “The best thing to do is to write a lot and try to be part of various communities talking about the things you’re interested in. You’ve got to be active in comment sections. You’ve got to be active in forums. You have to dedicate yourself to crashing through the mindset out there. It’s very, very difficult, but people do break through.”

Turning to politics, we asked how deficit reduction became the focus of this recession when the traditional economic response is stimulus and raising taxes. “It’s an excellent question,” she responded, “and it’s one that we don’t ask enough. I know it’s stymied the economists – people like (Dean) Baker and (James) Galbraith.”

“We did a little bit of stimulus,” Parton said, “But we offset it with a bunch of cuts at the same time, which meant that the stimulus we had was much less effective than it would have been. The politics at the time were such that we were lucky to get any stimulus at all.”
When asked about Speaker Boehner’s recent threat to hold the country hostage again over the debt ceiling, Parton replied, “I don’t know what’s going to happen. It’s a very, very disturbing sign.”

“We’re dealing with kind of a bizarro world version of what’s going on…that the safety net programs are the cause of the recession, when, in fact, many of them like Medicaid, unemployment insurance and food stamps are not the cause. They’re the result of the recession,” said Parton.

“I think the idea behind the conservative approach to this is we’re not going to do it now …we’re going to cut it in the future so our kids won’t have to bear the burden of them,” she said.

Parton continued, “Somebody’s going to pay for elderly people to live somehow, unless we adopt the attitude that we’re going to put ‘em on an ice flow. Or just send them out walking in the desert with a small bottle of water and see how they do. Unless we adopt that as our official policy, the elderly have to be cared for. It depends on who’s going to pay for it, how much suffering they’re going to do.”

When we noted that the main cuts in the Ryan Plan are intended to affect poor people, Heather responded, “There’s a really interesting right wing view that the poor people are not contributing enough and therefore they deserve it. They’re working poor, but there’s this concerted effort to build resentment toward them.”

“This goes all the way back to the beginning of the New Deal really,” said Parton. “They never accepted Social Security. There’s just an ideological, philosophical desire by some of these vastly wealthy people to ending what they consider to be socialistic programs.”

“The truth is that Social Security is simply not in bad shape,” she said. “The irony is, they say there’s going to be a shortfall in 2037 or 2039, and it will only be able to pay out something like 80 percent of what’s supposed to be paid out, so we need to cut now so that it will be 100 percent; meaning that we’ll pay less now because there’s going to be a shortfall later. There’s absolutely no logic to this but somehow or another it’s passing through. Even some of the smartest people in the world are saying, yes, we need to do this. It’s ridiculous. Social Security is outside the normal budgeting process. There’s no reason for it even to be discussed in the context of deficit reduction.”

“Social Security isn’t just some nice middle-class people retiring comfortably and traveling the world,” Parton continued. “Social Security supports lots of people who are disabled and can’t work. In order to have a dynamic economy you have to give people a little ability to take risks. If you’re living in a country where your healthcare is precarious and extremely expensive, where there are no pensions, no Social Security, how are you going to start a business? How are you going to take any risks? It’s not going to happen.”

You can read more of Heather Parton’s thoughts at http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/.

Posted in Blogging, Deficit Reduction, Economic Policy, Economic Stimulus, Fiscal Policy, Government, Interviews, Medicaid, Medicare, National Debt Ceiling, National Politics, Social Security, Taxes and the Deficit, U.S. Budget | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on More Hullabaloo.

Digby Interview — Podcast May 21, 2012

Posted on May 22, 2012 by William Timberman


Deficit Reduction and the Conservative Attack on Social Insurance Programs:  Digby, aka Heather Parton, the creator of Hullabaloo, returns to Democratic Perspective to discuss the art of successful blogging, and to expose the decades-old right-wing ideological crusade against critical social programs, now masquerading as a campaign for Federal deficit reduction.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Blogging, Deficit Reduction, Interviews, Medicaid, Middle East, National Debt Ceiling, National Politics, Podcasts, Social Security | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Digby Interview — Podcast May 21, 2012

The Predator State.

Posted on May 16, 2012 by Gary LaMaster

On May 14, 2012, Democratic Perspective welcomed James K. Galbraith, Professor of Economics at the LBJ School of Public Affairs and the Department of Government at the University of Texas. He is now part of the executive committee of the World Economics Association and past Executive Director of the Joint Economic Committee for Congress.

Mr. Galbraith’s books include Balancing Acts: Technology, Finance and the American Future, Created Unequal: The Crisis in American Pay, Inequality and Industrial Change: A Global View, and The Predator State: How Conservatives Abandoned The Free Market and Liberals Should, Too.

We began the interview by asking what he means by “predator state?” He responded, “Social Security and Medicare are a very large part of our economic activity, and a growing part. As a result, these institutions become really fat targets for certain parties that seek to make a lot of money. The predators are those who gather around these institutions; Big PhRMA, corporations, and insurance companies. Anything you cut back, such as benefits from Social Security, increases the opportunity for privatization. Their objective is to make money and we lose the insurance aspect of these programs.”

When asked how the book was received by conservatives, he said, “I got a friendly reception in some conservative circles for that book. At the end of the George W. Bush administration, things were held together by a group of industries and corporate interests. Since then we’ve unfortunately learned that the power of institutions is greater than the power of ideas. Personnel and philosophies stayed the same,” he stated. “Bernanke was not a bad appointment, but he should have been replaced. We need to have personnel capable of taking a fresh look.”

As for his book, Inequality and Instability, Galbraith said, “It’s my take on the reforms in place. They’re clearly not strong enough to have prevented what did happen. The Consumer Protection Bureau is a good idea. The crucial question is: Can we continue going forward with banks and institutions as large as they are? Financial institutions were emboldened and empowered by the way the Obama administration set about protecting them. “

On the proposal by some to increase the minimum wage $8 an hour, Galbraith said, “It would be useful to figure how to restructure the bottom end. Small businesses would get back through customers what it would cost. There would be two effects,” he said. “It would put some businesses under pressure, but it would result in more customers. They would make it up on volume. Unfortunately, businesses tend to only look at the cost side, but not the demand side. It would create a more stable economy by restructuring the service sector,” he concluded.

We followed up by asking about another economic proposal – the so-called Robin Hood tax, which is a tax on financial transactions. Galbraith responded, “It would be rough on high-speed trading, but it would encourage stable, long-term investing. I think restructuring the financial sector and cutting out tax loopholes would be more effective,” he added.

“The transaction tax would be easy to evade,” he said. “The financial sector is much too large. It’s a cost on every business. We need a concerted effort to cut it back down to size. In 2009, I would have taken control over the weakest dinosaurs in the sector. They would have been downsized. More numerous and smaller banks would benefit everyone.”

Posted in Economic Policy, Financial Sector, Fiscal Policy, Government, Interviews, Medicare, Social Security | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The Predator State.

James Galbraith Interview — Podcast, May 14, 2012

Posted on May 15, 2012 by William Timberman


Predators and Victims: The Cost to the Real Economy and the Middle Class of an Overgrown  Financial Sector. Democratic Perspective co-hosts Mike Cosentino and Steve Williamson talk with James K. Galbraith, professor at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs and at the Department of Government, University of Texas at Austin, and Senior Scholar with the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College about his 2008 book, The Predator State. How an outsized and unregulated financial sector acts to extract wealth from the real economy, and threatens both the wages and the government social programs which support a prosperous middle class. What can be done to protect the public interest against the predators of finance capitalism.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Economic Policy, Financial Sector, Government, Interviews, Investment Banking, Medicare, Podcasts, Privatization, Social Security, Unemployment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on James Galbraith Interview — Podcast, May 14, 2012

Beyond Austerity.

Posted on May 10, 2012 by Gary LaMaster

Once again, Democratic Perspective had the privilege to interview famed economist, Dean Baker. In case you’re not familiar with Mr. Baker, he predicted the housing bubble and its effects as early as 2002. He is co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, contributor to BeatThePress.org, and the author of many books, including Social Security: the Phony Crisis, False Profits: Recovering from the Bubble Economy, The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer, and more.

We began the interview by asking for his thoughts on the European austerity programs and the election of the first Socialist president in France since 1981. He responded, “Austerity is not working very well. They have rising unemployment as the result of cutting spending and raising taxes. If you cut spending, you’re pulling money out of the economy. Europe counted on the markets compensating for it, but they didn’t. People have a chance to vote on it now. In France, (the) two (major) parties together got just over one-third of the vote. ”

When asked if problems in the US are comparable to Greece, he replied, “The US is not at all like Greece. In Europe, they think the US economy is booming. Greece is not predicted to turn around soon,” he continued. “Greece’s debt is 160 percent of the economy. It doesn’t have its own currency, so it doesn’t have a way out of it.”

As for what the US should do now. “It would be great to have more stimulus,” he said. “The Fed could do more, and work sharing would help.” (Work sharing is a program in which firms agree to reduce hours instead of laying people off. The federal government makes up the difference.) “Work sharing worked well in Germany,” he continued. “However, conservatism in thought means that we don’t draw from others’ experiences,” he said. “This is no greater government intrusion than unemployment insurance. The longer you’re out of work, the harder it is to get a good job.”

In response to a question about his thoughts on the book by Ed Conard, Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital partner, Baker said, “It’s striking for a couple of reasons: The extent to which he’s ignored what’s happened around us and the fact that he blames people who took out loans.”

“The book glorifies people getting rich. We do benefit from some investments, but not from his type of work as a venture capitalist,” Baker continued. “The idea that we should be thankful that he and Romney are good at finding tax dodges is absurd. I hope Romney has to comment on it. I think it’s completely off the mark and wrong and offensive.”
“No one I know is arguing that we should take over private enterprise,” Baker concluded. “It’s another thing to let them run wild.”

“We’ve seen a large redistribution of income from the 80s to now,” Baker said. “That has really persisted through the last few decades, except for the 90s. It’s driven by policy,” Baker continued. “It’s been caused by the deregulation of the financial industry, too-big-to-fail banks and insurance, as well as trade policy.”

“They’ve put our workers in direct competition with the lowest paid workers in the world. But they didn’t do the same for our highest-paid employees,” he said. “CEOs’ pay is not just unfair. It’s corrupt.”

“It’s not the same in Europe or Japan,” Baker said. “Our banks were on the dole. We could have put conditions on TARP (the Troubled Assets Relief Program), but didn’t. That was a missed opportunity. Bank of America is kind of the poster child (of the problems). It bought up Merrill-Lynch. ..There’s a long list of things. It’s hard to think of a better candidate for breaking them up, although JP Morgan Chase should be, too.”

Baker continued, “Much of the banks’ money has nothing to do with making things work. Much of what they do is take money out of others’ pockets.”

Posted in De-regulation, Economic Policy, Economic Stimulus, Elections, Fiscal Policy, Government, Interviews, Monetary Policy, National Politics, U.S. Budget | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Beyond Austerity.

Dean Baker Interview — Podcast May 7, 2012

Posted on May 8, 2012 by William Timberman


Policy Responses to the Economic Crisis: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.  Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research, and author of The Conservative Nanny State (2006) and The End of Loser Liberalism (2011) returns to Democratic Perspective for a discussion of governmental policy responses to the current economic crisis, both here and in Europe. He explains why austerity — reduced government spending — can’t restore full employment, and why socialism for the rich — tax-funded bailouts of insolvent investment banks — won’t keep them from wrecking the world economy again. Fortunately, he tells us, there are sensible policy alternatives which can do both, if only our governments could find the political will to adopt them.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Economic Policy, Economic Stimulus, Government, Interviews, Podcasts, Taxes and the Deficit, U.S. Budget, Unemployment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Dean Baker Interview — Podcast May 7, 2012

Teapublican Lies Exposed!

Posted on May 2, 2012 by Gary LaMaster

Okay, this is awkward! I have been placed in the position of writing a blog about a Democratic Perspective interview of myself. Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about the coverage of a book that has yet to be officially published. And I’m thrilled that the rest of the editorial crew thought it would be of interest to our audience.

For the record, the complete title of the book is The Teapublican Book Of Lies: 50 myths and outright lies originated by the Republican Party and their Tea Party allies.

As I mentioned in my interview, the reason for writing the book stems from a blatant and wholly unnecessary lie about Al Gore during the 2000 presidential campaign. That lie led me to wonder what else the party was lying about. If the party was willing to tell a lie so easily disproved, what must they think of the electorate? And what else are they lying about?

Since then, I have mentally collected a list of some of the biggest whoppers told by Teapublicans.

We began the radio interview talking about the accepted myth that US corporations pay higher taxes than any other nation on Earth. It’s simply not true. Sure, the stated US corporate rate of taxes, including state taxes, is 34.2%. But that not appreciably higher than other developed nations. And very few, if any, corporations actually pay that rate. In fact, some of the largest US corporations have negative tax rates. In other words, through subsidies and write-offs, the US government actually pays them!

In addition, US payroll taxes are less than most of the developed world which further reduces corporate tax obligations.

Next, we addressed the Teapublican claim that most Americans don’t pay taxes. In fact, the poor and middle class pay a bigger share of their incomes in taxes than the wealthy. Even if they make so little that they don’t pay income taxes, they pay sales taxes, property taxes (even if they rent), gasoline taxes and payroll tax deductions for Social Security and Medicare. The real tax freeloaders are those who live off of investments, paying capital gains taxes of 15 percent or less.

Among other things, we also talked about the myth that raising taxes on those who make more than $1 million per year will harm small business and the myth that the Environmental Protection Agency was created by liberals and is destroying business.
If you’d like to learn more, you’ll find the origins of my book’s content on my blog at http://www.lamasterscorner.com/.

My thanks to Steve Williamson and Mike Cosentino for giving me the opportunity to talk about my coming book and for making me so comfortable in the studio I almost forgot the microphone was inches from my face.

Posted in Economic Policy, Environment, Fiscal Policy, Interviews, National Politics, Taxes and the Deficit | Tagged , | Comments Off on Teapublican Lies Exposed!