Upcoming Broadcasts — September and October, 2011

Posted on September 17, 2011 by William Timberman

Here is the schedule of upcoming Democratic Perspective broadcasts for September and October, 2011:

September 19: Jobs, Income and the Future: Why unemployment is so high, wages are so low, and what we can do about it. Democratic Perspective tackles the stagnant U.S. economy — how it got in such bad shape, what the future looks like for ordinary wage-earners, and what we can do to restore prosperity for everybody.

September 26: Alan Grayson Interview.
Alan Grayson, former Democratic Congressional Representative from Florida’s 8th District, famous for his no-holds-barred style, and for going after Republicans on their own turf, explains why he’s running again in 2012, and why the need to do something different about the country’s problems is more pressing now than it ever has been.

October 3: Ann Kirkpatrick, interview — LIVE in our KAZM studio.
Democratic Perspective talks to Ann Kirkpatrick about state and national issues, and how they affect us here in Northern Arizona. We’ll ask her about her positions, and the progress on her current campaign for Congress.

October 10: Ann Kirkpatrick Interview, Part 2.

October 17: Raúl Grijalva Interview. Raúl M. Grijalva, Democratic Congressional Representative from Arizona’s 7th District, and co-chair of the U.S. House Progressive Caucus, talks with Democratic Perspective about the issues facing Arizona and the Nation, and discusses the The Prioritize Emergency Job Creation Act to Allow for Emergency Job Creation Funding, which Representatives Grijalva, Barbara Lee and John Conyers introduced in the House on September 13.

October 24: Raúl Grijalva Interview, Part 2.

Join us on am780 KAZM for a fresh look at the issues of the day from a reality-based Democratic Perspective.

Posted in Broadcast Schedule | Comments Off on Upcoming Broadcasts — September and October, 2011

Barbara Litrell Interview — Podcast September 12, 2011

Posted on September 14, 2011 by William Timberman


Democratic Perspective Goes Local: Barbara Litrell Discusses the Proposed State Route 89A Takeover in Sedona. Democratic Perspective interviews Sedona City Council member Barbara Litrell on the latest developments in the State Route 89A takeover controversy — the issue, the politics, and the upcoming vote on Propositions 410 and 411 in the special election being held this November 8th.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Arizona Politics, Elections, Government, Interviews, Podcasts | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Barbara Litrell Interview — Podcast September 12, 2011

Responding To Misguided Referendums And Rumors.

Posted on September 14, 2011 by Gary LaMaster

Sedona City Council member, Barbara Litrell, was recently invited to appear on Democratic Perspective to discuss a local issue of roadway control in Sedona.

According to Litrell, since 2006 the Sedona City Council has asked ADOT (Arizona Dept. of Transportation) to improve safety in West Sedona. “ADOT’s solution is to install 108 street lights on a 2.3-mile section of Highway 89A,” she said. “When Sedona responded that most accidents occur during the day, ADOT offered a package of more than $15 million in funds and improvements for the city to assume control of the roadway, instead.”

“Following a City Council vote to accept control of the roadway,” said Litrell, “A small group of citizens opposed the decision and began a referendum. As a result, there will be a special election on Proposition 410 on November 8. A Yes vote on Prop 410 is a vote to approve the city’s takeover of the roadway. A No vote means that ADOT will continue to control the roadway and will install 108 lights from the intersection at Airport Road to the intersection at Dry Creek Road.”

Another proposition on the November 8 ballot is Prop 411. “A Yes vote on this proposition will mean that no city council in the future can negotiate with ADOT,” said Litrell. “I believe that Prop 411 is blatantly unconstitutional. There are rumors that taking over the roadway will cost the City of Sedona mega dollars resulting in the reduction of other city services,” she continued. “Those rumors are simply not true. There is also a fear that the roadway takeover will lead to a city property tax. Again, I do not believe that will happen,” she said. “The City Council could not make that decision. According to state law, voters would have to pass a bill requesting a property tax,” said Litrell.

“The City of Sedona has money available to improve and maintain the roadway,” Litrell said. “In addition to the money offered by ADOT, the city will have a $1.5 million surplus this year. There are additional funds now that the city has paid off the treatment plant. And, in any event, there is no plan to do all of the improvements at once,” she concluded.

Mail-in ballots for the election will be mailed on September 27 and must be returned by November 8. Or, if they prefer, voters can vote at their regular polling stations on Tuesday, Novermber 8. If Sedona residents vote Yes on Prop 410, Litrell said the city and ADOT will return to negotiations. “ADOT wants Sedona to take back the roadway,” Litrell stated.

More information on the subject is available at http://voiceofchoicefor89A.com.

Posted in Arizona Politics, Elections, Government, Interviews | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Responding To Misguided Referendums And Rumors.

Lane Kenworthy Interview, Part 2 — Podcast September 5, 2011

Posted on September 6, 2011 by William Timberman


Trickle-Down Economics, Marginal Tax Rates, and the Rise in Income Inequality: Part 2 of Democratic Perspective’s interview with Professor Lane Kenworthy. What we really need to do if we want to successfully address the economic crisis brought about by the near-collapse of our banking system, and restore the American worker’s chance at a better life.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Fiscal Policy, Government, Interviews, Monetary Policy, National Politics, Podcasts, Taxes and the Deficit | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Lane Kenworthy Interview, Part 2 — Podcast September 5, 2011

Do Trickle-Down Economics Work?

Posted on September 5, 2011 by Gary LaMaster

As Democratic Perspective continued our conversation with Lane Kenworthy, Professor of Sociology and Political Science at the University of Arizona on Labor Day, we began by posing that question to him. Professor Kenworthy responded by saying, “To an extent. Nobody favors a perfectly equal distribution of income, but if you have a society like ours where a very small slice has been getting a whole lot of the economic growth, is it good for the middle class? Or is it bad? The best we can tell is that it’s not a healthy development.”

When asked how to address the growing income inequality, Kenworthy replied, “Some people favor pay limits on CEOs, but I don’t. For one thing, how do you then address the huge salaries for athletes and entertainers? It’s much simpler to raise taxes. There’s no indication that increasing the tax rate on the rich would create any harm.”

As to concerns that raising taxes on the wealthy will curtail job growth, Kenworthy said, “There’s nothing to indicate that it would. In fact, if the rich have to pay more of their income to taxes, it may cause them to work harder and actually create more jobs.”

As for the popular idea that running the federal government should be like managing a family budget – it should live within its means – Kenworthy stated, “This analogy gets back to the public’s frustration with the economy. People are looking for someone, or something, to blame. But the analogy is wrong on two accounts. It’s simply not true that families live within our means. We tend to be net debtors. We take out mortgages for our houses and borrow to get past problems such as car repair, medical emergencies, etc.”

“The same is true for government,” he continued. “There are needs that require borrowing and it’s best to borrow in times like now when the interest rates are low. Also, it’s good to run a surplus in good times. Our government was running a surplus in the 90s, but they forgot that principle in the early 2000s when they passed the tax cuts.”

Finally, we asked Professor Kenworthy what one thing we could do to fix the economy. He began his answer by saying, “First you have to separate the short term needs from the long term. The priority is to get back to economic growth and to improve employment. Then, for the longer run, we need to look for new sources of investment and boost wages for low-end service jobs. This is important because these jobs are now such a large part of our economy, and probably will be for the foreseeable future.”

Posted in Government, National Debt Ceiling, National Politics, U.S. Budget | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Do Trickle-Down Economics Work?

Lane Kenworthy Interview — Podcast August 29, 2011

Posted on August 30, 2011 by William Timberman


What Is Government For? Lane Kenworthy, Professor of Sociology and Political Science at the University of Arizona, and author of Progress for the Poor, Jobs with Equality, Egalitarian Capitalism and In Search of National Economic Success, talks with Democratic Perspective about American attitudes toward government, and how the rise of economic inequality since the 1970s has affected them.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Government, Interviews, National Politics, Podcasts | Comments Off on Lane Kenworthy Interview — Podcast August 29, 2011

What Is Government For?

Posted on August 29, 2011 by Gary LaMaster

Democratic Perspective posed the question to Lane Kenworthy, Professor of Sociology and Political Science at the University of Arizona and author of Progress for the Poor, Jobs with Equality, Egalitarian Capitalism and In Search of National Economic Success.

We began the discussion with a couple of quotes on the subject, one by Abraham Lincoln, “The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but can not do at all, or can not so well do, for themselves – in their separate, and individual capacities.”

The second is by Jared Bernstein, “If too many Americans don’t believe in or understand what government does to help them, to offset recessions, to protect their security in retirement and in hard times, to maintain the infrastructure, to provide educational opportunities and health care decent enough to offset the disadvantages so many are born with…if those functions are unknown, underfunded, and/or carried out poorly, why should they care about how much this deal or the next one cuts?”

Then we turned to Kenworthy for his perspective.

“People take for granted all of the things that government can do,” he responded. “Protecting our physical safety with the police and military, money, clean air and water, liberty, sewage and water, disaster protection, to name a few. The insurance portion of government is also important, such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and an array of smaller programs.”

“That’s not to say that government works perfectly,” he continued. “It doesn’t. But it is necessary.”

When asked to explain the anti-government sentiment in today’s politics, Kenworthy replied, “We have a long history of public opinion surveys. A lot will say that government should be smaller. But when you mention individual programs, the same people think we should be spending more. 20 percent of Americans believe deeply in smaller government,” he continued. “A big part of the reason is the economic crisis. When the economy is bad, a bigger share say they don’t have any confidence in government, or even the private sector. They want to blame someone for their problems.”

Finally, we asked Kenworthy to elaborate on one of his previous statements, “Although themes of opportunity and prosperity dominate American culture, more than one in ten Americans is poor according to the official government measure, inequality has increased markedly over the past generation, and the United States is more unequal than any other affluent country.”

“Things began to change in the 1970s,” he said. “During the period following WWII, we saw living standards and real income double in a generation. Since the 70s, progress has not changed. The economy grew, but wage growth slowed. And now the poverty rated is even higher after the crash.”

To read more from Lane Kenworthy, visit his blog at Consider the Evidence.

Posted in Government, Interviews, Medicaid, Medicare, National Politics, Social Security | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on What Is Government For?

Aviva Chomsky Interview, Part 2 — Podcast, August 22, 2011

Posted on August 23, 2011 by William Timberman


Scapegoating Immigrants: Is There a Better Way To Deal With the Issue of Immigration? Part 2 of Democratic Perspective’s interview with Aviva Chomsky. If you have a situation like the one we have in the U.S., in which the economic conditions in a neighboring country are terrible, there is an economic need to fill jobs here which no citizen will take at the wages likely to be offered, and there is no legal path to immigration for more than a few thousand people a year from that neighboring country, is simply declaring immigrants illegal and deporting them all really a solution to our mutual problem? Why comprehensive immigration reform is both necessary and inevitable.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Immigration, Interviews, Podcasts | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Aviva Chomsky Interview, Part 2 — Podcast, August 22, 2011

Avi Chomsky Cont’d – Scapegoating Immigrants

Posted on August 22, 2011 by Gary LaMaster

As Democratic Perspective continued its interview with the author of They Take Our Jobs! and 20 other myths about immigration, we began by asking if the immigration problem is just too big to solve. She responded by saying, “It depends on how you define the problem; whether you’re talking about human rights or economics.”

“In reality, the problem is mostly for the immigrants themselves,” she continued. “They have been pushed out of their homes by the international economy and denied human rights. To solve the problem, you have to start with human rights. Legislation such as the Dream Act could help.  So would allowing them to get driver’s licenses and rejecting the Obama administration’s Secure Communities program.”

Speaking specifically about the Dream Act, Chomsky admitted she couldn’t understand why it hasn’t passed. “It would allow a path for citizenship only for those brought here before age 12,” said Chomsky. “It would require them to attend college or serve in our military for two years.”

“The real problem is that most people believe that there is a path to citizenship,” she continued. “You hear them say immigrants should ‘do it the right way.’ But there is no path to citizenship now. Many of those arrested are those who are re-entering the country. They went back to Mexico for some reason then try to get back to their families and homes here.”

When asked about public opinion and anti-immigrant laws such as Arizona’s SB1070, Chomsky replied, “Public opinion is very malleable. It depends on the information they’re given. Immigration reform almost passed under Bush. But the Tea Party won’t consider it. The debate on immigration is a way of creating a scapegoat for very real problems, like the economy, even the environment. They talk about going back to some mythical moment,” she said. “I ask them, ‘When, exactly?’ There has always been immigration and inequality in the US. And the human race has benefited from multi-culturalism since it began.”

Posted in Arizona Politics, Immigration, Interviews, National Politics | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Avi Chomsky Cont’d – Scapegoating Immigrants

They Take Our Jobs! and 20 other myths about immigration.

Posted on August 17, 2011 by Gary LaMaster

That’s the title of a book by Avi Chomsky who was interviewed by Democratic Perspective. As a historian, teacher, and coordinator of the Latin American studies at Salem State College, she has become a strong voice for fairness in our economic system.

When asked about the title of her book, Ms. Chomsky replied, “When people say that immigrants take our jobs, underlying the statement are some flawed ideas of how our economy works. They don’t understand that the world economy is extremely integrated.”

“In the US, there is a dual labor market,” she continued. “One category consists of good jobs that offer security, benefits, decent pay and safe working conditions. The second category consists of jobs that are dangerous and unpleasant with no security and low wages. The jobs in the second category have always been done by those who are politically excluded, such as undocumented workers. By politically excluding workers, employers are able to exploit them. And others in our society rely on people doing these jobs.”

Of course, the question most often heard in a “debate” on immigration is “What part of illegal don’t you understand?” Although it’s intended to be a conversation stopper, Chomsky said she usually responds by saying, “What part of illegal do you understand?” She said, “The status of illegal immigrant has been created for a reason. It’s a status that gives workers no rights.”

“Compared to the jobs shipped overseas by our corporations, the jobs taken by illegals are a very small percentage,” she continued. “Every job has global connections. In reality, immigrants who come to the US create jobs because they are also consumers. They purchase food and automobiles, and they rent or buy homes. They also pay taxes in the form of sales taxes, property taxes, income taxes, even Social Security. In 2010, it’s estimated that illegals paid $12 billion into Social Security. But they are not eligible for any of the government services provided by those taxes.”

Posted in Arizona Politics, Immigration, National Politics | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on They Take Our Jobs! and 20 other myths about immigration.