line
Posted 1 year ago on November 4 2008


Permalink

I Do Support Obama Based on Substance, Thank You Very Much

What Ruffles my Feathers

Small government, less taxes, privatization, letting the free market shake out as it may, all are supposedly the laurels by which the Republican Party stand by. I prescribe to most of them. However, the actions of its members have in no way been congruent with any such philosophy.

All the arguments I’ve heard derailing Obama in this regard are highly ironic, considering that such suspicions are in fact current realities under the present sitting administration. His election as president to erupt in more socialist policies, bigger, more pervasive government intervention, greater vulnerability to a national terrorist attack, frivolous spending policies, ALL have been the case under Bush, and are very likely to continue under McCain, considering all of his plans directly correlate with those which are already in place. I feel this is more than evidenced by the recent bailout plan, the decision to go to war without the consent of congress, the apprehension and persecution of various US citizens without due process of law, the unstructured expansion of various government departments (Homeland Security, Border Control), and namely the waste and fraudulent spending in Iraq.

I’m not arguing whether we should have gone to war or not, nor that our troops be supplied the provisions they require, my misgiving lies in the exorbitant amount of funds which have been appropriated to private entities operating in Iraq without any oversight, accountability or code of conduct, an issue which was bought to my attention by my good buddy Mike when he gave me the book Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone to read. I was mainly surprised considering I had actually completed my co-op as a procurement specialist for the Navy. There are professionals whose jobs exist explicitly to ensure that the government is getting the best price on what it procures. That is routinely done through competitive solicitation and particularly when costing over $25,000, public bidding invitations. The motive therein of outsourcing to the private sector is to increase the strength of small businesses and maximize taxpayers’ dollars.

Many in the administration, namely Donald Rumsfeld, exploited this ideology to make the case that outsourcing and opportunities to privatize are key drivers in the American economy, justifying the purchases made for Iraq with this very philosophy. However, what happened in practice is the stark opposite to everything that a democratic free-market economy represents. Instead of small businesses getting their opportunity to participate in requests for work and material, they were awarded, without any preliminary bidding or solicitation process, to companies such as Haliburton, Custer Battles, Blackwater, etc. Even if companies are truly sole-source, being the only provider of such and such product or service, they’ve got to justify their costs with some kind of price-list or past invoice. However, it has been proven that varius contract specialists who questioned exorbitant purchases found themselves with their job in jeopardy and their decisions overrode by higher-ups. Nevermind the authorization of cost-plus contracts, which match in profit whatever the company spent, and thus resulting in decisions by contractors to stay in 5-star hotels, destroy perfectly satisfactory goods, and in essence spend as much money as possible.

This is fundamentally against everything that any conservative, republican, or American believes in, let alone being in absolute violation of numerous Federal Acquisition Regulations, and therein illegal. It in no way resembles a privatized model, and conversely, leads to greater government control and intervention, inefficiency, and frivolty. It is a system that might as well be likened to that of Iraq’s before the occupation. Certain companies are anointed and awarded the bulk of their work by the government. Having public stock doesn’t really mean much if most of your principal shareholders are those who at one point worked for the government and currently have strong ties with those in the administration.

Any corporation is accountable to its stockholders, and have to maintain accurate financial reports and spending accounts, or they will find themselves under some pretty impetuous fire. In the public arena, as Obama has reiterated, the stockholders are each individual taxpayer, yet no one has had to answer to why the Department of Defense does not know where it’s inventory is or why it is out of compliance with Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990, which was passed to hold government agencies to the tough accounting practices applied to the private sector, and compliance is nowhere on the horizon. If you need some convincing on this point, below is a montage of various documentaries and news reports I’ve collected illustrating this issue which I feel has been grossly overlooked by any news medium. In essence, where before you had a soldier who would normally carry out telecommunications, operational, or administrative work, all has been outsourced to private companies. Meaning that instead of paying a miltary specialist say $6/hour, each taxpayer pays about 9x more for a third-party affiliate. Additionally disconcerting, these contractors do not have to answer to any chain of command, whose consequent negligent actions can lead to much more dangerous and threatening situations for our troops.

http://iraqspending.vodpod.com/


So now I present how this has distorted and weighed on the 2008 Budget:

Mandatory spending is considered entitlements which are written into law and cannot be compromised, aka they are specifically itemized in your paycheck (Medicare, Social Security). Discretionary have time limits and change each year based on the proposals by the president. Therefore, it is true that more of the mandatory budget is dedicated to social security and medicare, but not that of the entire budget. The breakdowns are as follows:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/

In 2008:

Mandatory Spending:

National Defense: $ 3.7 billion
Social Security: $ 608 billion
Health: $ 226 billion
Medicare: $ 386 billion
Income Security: $ 324 billion
Veteran’s Benefits: $ 83 billion
Administration of Justice: $ 2 billion
General Science and Basic Research $ .127 billion
Natural Resources: $ 1.2 billion
Agriculture: $ 13 billion
Transportation: $ 2 billion
Community and Regional Development: $ .34 billion
Education, Training, Employment and Social
Services: $ 6.3 billion
General Goverment Expenses $ 3 billion


Discretionary Spending:

National Defense: $ 602 billion
International Affairs: $ 36 billion
Energy: $ 4 billion
Community and Regional Development $ 24.6 billion
Social Security: $ 4.8 billion
Health: $ 53.8 billion
Medicare: $ 5.1 billion
Income Security: $ 56 billion
Veteran’s Benefits: $ 38 billion
Administration of Justice: $ 45 billion
General Science and Basic Research $ 26 billion
Natural Resources: $ 31.7 billion
Agriculture: $ 6 billion
Commerce and Housing Credit: $ 3 billion
Transportation: $ 76.7 billion
Community and Regional Development: $ 76.3 billion
Education, Training, Employment and Social Services: $ 6 billion
General Goverment Expenses $ 18 billion


Total Spending:

National Defense: $ 606 billion
Social Security: $ 612 billion
Health: $ 226 billion
Medicare: $ 386 billion
Income Security: $ 380 billion
Veteran’s Benefits: $ 120 billion
Administration of Justice: $ 47 billion
Education, Training, Employment and Social Services: $ 12 billion
Community and Regional Development: $ 77 billion
Commerce and Housing Credit: $ 3 billion
Transportation: $ 79 billion
Natural Resources: $ 33 billion
Agriculture: $ 19 billion
General Science and Basic Research $ 26 billion


What makes up the giant pieces of health, medicare, and income security? Health is made up of $202 billion of Medicaid grants. Medicare almost all by hospital insurance and Supplementary Medical Insurance. Income security is usually the expense which Republicans try to leverage their policies against Democrats. That piece is made up of a number of services, including General Retirement and Disability Insurance, Unemployment compensation, Housing and Food Assistance, Child Support, and tax credits.

What’s left in the dust is Education, Training, Employment, and Social services, Community and Regional Development, Transportation, Natural Resources and Energy, and General Scientific and Basic Research. So perhaps, perhaps if we invested in these things, as Obama propses, totally revised the Medicaid and Medicare systems which have proved rather ineffective, and reallocated some of our spending in the pentagon, maybe we wouldn’t have to spend so much on income security.

This in no way reflects any of the proposals of McCain. He constantly stresses the need to strengthen our military, which is prominently displayed on his site, and attributes his reduction in budget spending to the elimination of earmarks, something that he harps on continually, but has no real basis. Some literature on that:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_budget_according_to_mccain_part_i.html http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/mccains_fantasy_war_on_earmark.html


Why I Support Obama

Obama has disappointed me in some regards. I’ve read how he’s changed his major stance on an energy bill after receiving funds from a particular oil company, how he’s shifted from his more pragmatic standpoint of instating and spending on preventative measures for criminals as opposed to increasing police force, as well as voting yes on the wire tapping bill, and how often he still mentions “terrorism” or plans to deploy troops from Iraq only to seemingly replace them in Afghanistan or potentially even Pakistan, which he alludes to quite often. I feel it is also disheartening that both him and Joe Biden proclaim an undying loyalty to Israel without giving a second thought to the rights and travesties of Palestine. I think the actions of both states should be considered justly, despite religious affiliation.

However he still got my vote as opposed to Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader, and that is because his policy initiatives have demonstrated to me that he takes more sensible and nuanced approaches to prolonged problems, over 90% of his funding came from small-time donors, he is very precise and thoughtful in drafting law and decision-making, he has managed his campaign extremely effectively, and most of his proposals are detailed and respectable.

Most notably, I appreciate the following past initiatives of Obama:

*Creating a searchable database of recipients of federal contracts and grants available to the public, atomizing (RSS-ing) government technology and a technical policy through broad power of a CTO for the government, making the insanely backwards systems actually work. This has been deemed the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, meant to bring average Americans a kind of Google for the federal government, an online search engine that will allow citizens to look up any company, organization or other entity receiving federal contracts, grants and earmarks. A coalition led by the libertarian Reason Foundation asked the presidential candidates to sign a pledge to issue an executive order directing all departments and agencies to join in the “timely implementation of the letter and spirit” of the act. Only Obama, Brownback and Paul signed the pledge.

*Josh Tauberer, who launched Govtrack.us, has pointed out that one major impediment to making these tools even better is the reluctance of government bodies to adopt convenient formats for the data they publish. A plain text page (typical fare on existing government sites like THOMAS) meets the letter of the law, but an open format with rich metadata would see the same information put to more and better use.Obama’s stated position is to make data available “online in universally accessible formats,” a clear nod in this direction. He also calls for live video feeds of government proceedings. One more proposal, camoflaged among these others, is …pilot programs to open up government decision-making and involve the public in the work of agencies, not simply by soliciting opinions, but by tapping into the vast and distributed expertise of the American citizenry to help government make more informed decisions.

*Bringing foreign policy decisions directly to the people by requiring his national security officials to have periodic national broadband town hall meetings to discuss foreign policy. He will personally deliver occasional fireside chats via webcast.

* Expose Special Interest Tax Breaks to Public Scrutiny: Barack Obama will ensure that any tax breaks for corporate recipients — or tax earmarks — are also publicly available on the Internet in an easily searchable format.

* End Abuse of No-Bid Contracts: Barack Obama will end abuse of no-bid contracts by requiring that nearly all contract orders over $25,000 be competitively awarded.

* Worked to make sure that soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan were screened for traumatic brain injury and to prevent homelessness among veterans

*Working to ban no-bid contracts in Katrina reconstruction

* Launched a major nonproliferation initiative by addressing the growing threat from unsecured conventional weapons and by bolstering a key line of defense against weapons of mass destruction

*Ensured that, here at home, Health and Human Services and state governments put in place plans that address issues of surveillance, medical care, drug and vaccine distribution, communication, protection of the work force and maintenance of core public functions in case of a pandemic. Accelerating research into avian flu vaccines and antiviral drugs. Establishing incentives to encourage nations to report flu outbreaks quickly and fully

*A lobbying reform bill (with Tom Coburn), which would do all sorts of good things, requiring that bills be made available to members of Congress at least 72 hours before they have to vote on them.

* He has also worked to pass more scrutiny towards the accuracy of Genetic Testing results. As many see his voting record on abortion to be rather liberal, they may be interested to know that he has addressed one of the causes by instating a higher degree of accountability in regards to genetic testing and ensuring the results are accurate so that a mother makes such decisions based on correct information.

His site is way more detailed in explaining his policies than McCain’s, foreign policy is even listed as an issue! Oh, and before John McCain’s site was black and ugly. No it looks oddly like Obama’s but much more obnoxious. I will refer you to it rather than reiterating everything: http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/


Why I Really Do Not Want McCain and ESPECIALLY not Palin

Before I thought McCain was a formidable candidate. I had heard him give interviews where he more thoughtfully considered the issues of immigration and torture, saying that we have to keep into account certain illegal immigrants who are US soldiers or sons and daughters of veterans, and that our justice system shouldn’t succumb to antiquated torture tactics practiced by communism regimes of which we are supposed to be far detached in virtue. But during this campaign he has separated himself drastically from these more moderate and sensible viewpoints, and I think in many ways has compromised more fundamentally his true character.

* He has received a zero percent rating for his environmental record from the League of Conservation Voters last year. That’s worse than every other single member of Congress, all 535 of them, including those who were out for much of the year due to serious Illnesses and even lower than some who died during their term. His lifetime score is 24 out of 100. Obama’s is 86.

*The Children’s Defense Fund rated John McCain as the worst senator in Congress for children, as he voted against healthcare for uninsured children that would be funded by raising a cigarette tax.

*Doug Goodyear CEO and employee Doug Davenport of the DCI group who lobby (well lobbied, since they did fire all the lobbyist as it got further into the race) for John McCain’s campaign are also lobbyists for the oppresive government of Myanmar ( The one who won’t allow food and emergency supplies into the destroyed nation after the cyclone) DCI is a pioneer of astro-turf organizing, such as that which was conducted for the tobacco industry.

*Then there is Charlie Black, McCain’s Senior Advisor. Black is part of a lobbying firm called Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly which has worked on behalf of many dictators, including Somalia’s Mohamed Siad Barre, Zaire’s Mobuto Sese Seko, Angolian rebel leader Jonas Savimbi, and Nigeria’s Ibrahim Babangida, This list is actually ridiculously long. Here’s the link

http://mccainsource.com/mccain_fact_check?id=0007

He might have fired them, but only much after he was the nominee.

*Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) gave him a D+ for his voting record, while Obama received a B+. Failing to support Jim Webb’s GI Bill, among voting against many other services to veterans including In 2005 and 2006, when McCain voted against expanding mental healthcare and readjustment counseling for service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, efforts to expand inpatient and outpatient treatment for injured veterans, and proposals to lower co-payments and enrollment fees veterans must pay to obtain prescription drugs. Recently, the GI Bill would bring back WWII-era measures that provided vets with full state college tuition along with room and board. Right now, those vets who try to use the GI Bill to attend school are eligible to receive only $1,100 a month for a maximum of three years.

*Although there’s plenty of blame to go around, his top economic advisor, Phil Graham, first grouped deposit banks and investment banks together when they should be two separate entities. Then, worst of all, drafted a bill which got rid of all the oversight for predatory lending, being a key contributor to the current financial crisis

*In April 2007, McCain, speaking to voters in South Carolina, responded to a question about Iran by singing “Bomb, bomb Iran” to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann.” A man had asked McCain about sending “an air mail message to Tehran.” McCain answered by singing, “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.” while his senior adviser Max Boot, demands for war with Iran and Syria.

*In 2001, McCain voted against establishing tax credits for investments in renewable energy technologies

*In 2001, McCain voted to kill an amendment prohibiting the use of funds for the pre-leasing or leasing of oil and gas, or other exploration activities within lands designated as national monuments. Not to mention his whole Drill Baby, Drill slogan which is totally bogus, considering oil companies currently aren’t putting to full use the national reserves they already have and domestic drilling will have little to no effect on oil dependence, if so, not until 2012. n 1995, McCain voted multiple times in favor of amendments to the GOP budget (HR 2491) to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil drilling. Environment New Jersey in a statement attacked McCain for supporting offshore oil drilling when the majority of the state’s congressional delegation opposed the move. The state Sierra Club also criticized McCain. Acknowledging he was among the first to offer national, comprehensive global warming legislation, they said in a statement “his proposals promote coal, fossil fuels, and unsafe nuclear power.” It would appear that more than a dozen of the senator’s top campaign advisors and fundraisers have deep ties to the oil and gas industry. The Center for Responsive Politics finds that, as a group, McCain’s team received more than $6.5 million in lobbying contracts with some of the world’s largest oil conglomerates, such as Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, Texaco, Occidental International, and the trade group, American Petroleum Institute, among others.

*McCain has built his reputation on opposing torture, but while running for the Republican nomination, he voted against a bill to ban waterboarding torture. Then he applauded President Bush for vetoing the torture ban.

I think it goes without saying why I disapprove of Palin.

So that’s my opinion, and perhaps if you’re on the fence or really haven’t had the time to research both candidates properly, you’ll think twice. Thank you!