you give Gov. Dean too little credit:
…
{Guy in the audience: “Give ’em hell, Howard!”}
Harry Truman used to say, {when} people used to say, “Give ’em hell, Harry,” he’d say, “I don’t give them hell, I just tell the truth and Republicans think it’s hell.” We need a balanced budget in this country so we’re going to have jobs in America again to invest in America. No Republican president has balanced the budget in 34 years in this country. If you want to trust the federal government with your hard-earned money, you had better vote for a Democrat, because the Republicans can’t handle money. You know, the president’s given a lot of our tax dollars away to
big corporations, but I think we better change our policy, because those
corporations take our jobs elsewhere. What we need in this country is an investment policy for
small businesses.
Small businesses don’t pay as well as
big businesses, their fringe benefits aren’t as good, but they stay in their own community. We need jobs in America. We need to invest in America. Three trillion dollars. Can you imagine, if we could have taken some of that money, to rebuild our roads and our bridges, and our schools, and broadband telecommunications in the most rural parts of America so they can have information jobs as well, and invest in renewable energy and rebuilding the grid, so we can put people to work, and save the environment, and save our national security? We can do better than this. We need jobs, Mr. President, not empty promises and $3 trillion of our tax money going to your friends who are writing you those $2,000 checks to finance your campaign. We can do better than that.
…
http://www.thestranger.com/2003-08-28/dean_speech.html…
Governor Dean, about those high earners, the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has suggested using revenue from the estate tax as a progressive way to help bolster Social Security. Should wealthy Americans be contributing more to Social Security?
MR. DEAN: What wealthy Americans should be doing is paying their fair share of the payroll tax. Social Security cannot survive -- (scattered applause) -- on its present track. And the solution to that is simply to make wage-earners above $85,000 subject to the payroll tax, and that will cure the Social Security ills, if we can change presidents.
Now, you asked about pensions. A few days ago we were in San Francisco talking to the United Food & Commercial Workers. (Scattered cheers.) A gentleman over here named Larry Allen, who is a produce clerk at Wal-Mart in Henderson, Texas, took two days of his vacation to come to San Francisco for the UFCW forum. When he went back, he was fired for violating the no-solicitation clause.
If you want to protect pensions, the way to do that is to organize. And if you want to organize at places like Wal-Mart, we'd better have card check. We'd better ban mandatory compulsory meetings. We'd better fire the National Labor Relations Board, because that's how you protect working people in this country. (Scattered applause.)
And we ought to have independent pension funds that are no longer controlled by
corporations. It would solve two problems. First of all,
major corporations going out the door would not be raiding the pension funds in order to try to keep their company afloat. That money doesn't belong to the
corporations. It belongs to the people in whose trust it was set aside.
And secondly, it would contribute to portable pensions so that if you move from job to job to job, you still get your pension. You don't have to worry about vesting anymore. We need complete pension reform in this country, and we need to start by making unions strong enough to demand it.
…
http://www.aflcio.org/issuespolitics/politics/candidates_forumtranscript.cfmGuest Post by Howard Dean
The post below is from Governor Howard Dean. You can check out the crossposting and commentary at www.blogforamerica.com and read more about Howard Dean at www.deanforamerica.com. Thanks!-- Matt, Zephyr and Nicco, Dean Internet Team
posted by { Zephyr Teachout } on { Jul 14 03 at 3:58 PM } to { presidential politics } { 31 comments }
It’s been a busy day, but it’s great to blog here on Larry Lessig’s blog.
I’ll be writing all week, but if there’s a day I can’t make it, Joe Trippi, my campaign manager, will fill in for me. Thank you Professor Lessig for inviting me.
The Internet might soon be the last place where open dialogue occurs. One of the most dangerous things that has happened in the past few years is the deregulation of media ownership rules that began in 1996. Michael Powell and the Bush FCC are continuing that assault today (see the June 2nd ruling).
The danger of relaxing media ownership rules became clear to me when I saw what happened with the Dixie Chicks. But there’s an even bigger danger in the future, on the Internet. The FCC recently ruled that cable and phone based broadband providers be classified as information rather than telecommunications services. This is the first step in a process that could allow Internet providers to arbitrarily limit the content that users can access. The phone and cable industries could have the power to discriminate against content that they don’t control or-- even worse-- simply don’t like.
The
media conglomerates now dominate almost half of the markets around the country, meaning Americans get less independent and frequently less dependable news, views and information. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson spoke of the fear that
economic power would one day try to seize political power. No
consolidated economic power has more opportunity to do this than the consolidated power of media.
posted by { Howard Dean } on { Jul 14 03 at 3:26 PM } to { } { 198 comments }
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/2003_07.shtml
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
