paulinsblog

Gridlock or Jobs Creation Progress?

2011-01-05T16:04:00.000-08:00

Today, Ohio Congressman John Boehner received the gavel of power from outgoing Speaker and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi as the new Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives for the new 112th session of Congress. And right out of the box with other party leaders the group has already drawn a line in the sand for the Republican Party's 242-193 person majority to repeal President Obama's health care reform measure--even tentatively planning a symbolic vote on January 12--and an ambitious goal to slash $100 billion from the federal budget. Contentious issues for sure but where is job creation on their priority list? To me this is a valid question since nearly every new member, even those from the Tea Party wing, campaigned aggressively filling the airwaves with promises repeatedly on this issue last fall. Can't the Congress just move forward from reopening old legislative wounds and just face up to the task of governing? For the sake of millions of unemployed and underemployed Americans I pray that they can. Despite all the attempts to sugarcoat the statistics and certain indicators, our national economy is still very fragile. Compound this with all the huge budget deficits that many state and local governments face, the priority for job creation should be clear and time is of the essence. To echo the repeated calls of millions of Americans for months, its jobs, jobs, jobs, Speaker Boehner, not party and principle.

The numbers from "real" people in the trenches remain frightful. In addition to the millions unemployed and underemployed, recent numbers from the print media include 10.8 million homeowners who owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth or an astonishing 22.5% of all mortgage borrowers. Consumer bankruptcies recorded a nine percent jump in 2010, and according to the American Bankruptcy Institute are expected to climb further in 2011. Home foreclosures continue to increase and are expected at elevated levels for years. And it should be emphasized here that the vast majority of people who find themselves in these unfortunate circumstances are not subprime or leave-the-keys-in-the-mailbox deadbeats but heretofore responsible middle class Americans with good credit scores who have worked for decades, lost very good paying jobs due to the Great Recession and now after exhausting retirement savings and borrowing all they can from friends and relatives, without an income they have nowhere to turn and face financial ruin. And we're talking full-time, decent paying jobs here, not temporary or part-time minimum wage jobs that inflate government "job growth" statistics. Let's be real. And, let's also not forget, the potential pool of unemployed Americans could grow substantially larger in future months as state and local governments struggle with very serious budget problems of their own where significant department reorganizations and staff reductions are inevitable.

Others have offered the premise and I could not agree more that the President, House Speaker Boehner and the new Congress should recognize the economy and accompanying joblessness for the true crises that they are and establish a modern day "Manhattan Project" to devote the time and resources necessary to get those that need and want jobs back to work as quickly as possible--before they are added to the statistics above--so we can give the collective psyche of the jobless and the nation the major shot in the arm that we desperately need at this time. Some government indicators have improved over the last several months and the stock market has been on the upswing but where are the jobs? From what I have heard and read, small businesses, who have been responsible for the vast majority of new job creation historically, still are not hiring full-time workers because of a perceived, still troubled economic environment. Instead, growth is just inching forward through the hiring of temporary and/or part-time workers with depressed wage levels and most without benefits, including health care. Stock market profit numbers are due to companies cutting costs (often through layoffs), building huge cash reserves that they're sitting on and refusing to invest, dubious jobs growth numbers (including global companies hiring foreign workers) and erratic economic indicators. If the upward-trending statistics that are being publicized are so wonderful, where are the jobs?

I realize America has long been known for its optimistic, never-say-die attitude. History has recorded that we have come together so many times as a people over the life of our nation and shown the resolve to tackle even the most extreme challenges within our borders and across the globe with the characteristic positive spirit, enthusiasm and sacrifice that are our heritage. But as we have so willingly come to the aid of other nations and peoples we face a very real crisis in our own country. In the richest country in the world, too many, once proud and successful middle class Americans are needlessly suffering. They want and need to work but there are no jobs or no one will hire them due to age discrimination or other factors. Please, President Obama, House Speaker Boehner and the rest of the Congress , we need progress and hope not gridlock and politics to get our people back to work and the economy truly humming again. Truly, make it the priority you have all promised. The time for action is now, this year, before the circus of presidential campaign politics that will surely dominate 2012.

How Do You Define "Recovery?"

2010-12-30T16:03:00.000-08:00

Listening to the nightly news or reading or listening to "expert" economists spin the latest government data is an interesting exercise these days. To hear the "recovery" cheerleaders tell it the latest week of declining new jobless claims, "impressive" holiday sales figures, reports of increased private sector jobs and an upward swing in other obscure economic indicators we are pointing to a not-so-bad national economy heading into 2011. I would suggest it depends on your perspective--if you have a job circumstances are certainly brighter than for the millions of people still unemployed or significantly underemployed as a result of the Great Recession. How does the term "recovery" translate for them? Not so bright, I'm afraid.

The numbers remain staggering with 15 million people still classified as unemployed with an ever increasing percentage of this total more seriously unemployed for a year, two years or longer. In the latter case, many of these folks have not only exhausted their regular savings but also their retirement nest egg savings, borrowed all they can from friends and relatives, and even sold their jewelry or prized family possessions to try to make ends meet. Still others have reached the absolute bottom of their financial well and face bankruptcy and/or foreclosure on their homes. Outdoor homeless camps seem to be sprouting up and growing larger outside many major U.S. cities, thousands are sleeping in their cars or forced to move back into cramped quarters with elderly parents or relatives, and record numbers are depending on government food stamps or private food banks barely able to keep up with the increased demand. If there is an economic "recovery" in progress it certainly isn't trickling down to these particular Americans.

And it's certainly no picnic for "older" unemployed workers either, those 55 or older downsized at no fault of their own because they're easy targets for budget cutting with salaries and/or benefits that have grown to certain levels due to decades of dedicated service. Ageism in today's job marketplace is blatant. Companies know that "older" people in this economy cannot afford to litigate so hiring managers everywhere are boldly instructing their HR gatekeepers to eliminate any candidate resumes with 15, 20 or more years of experience, no matter how impressive the credentials, and even though most of these candidates would be more than willing to take substantial pay cuts just to secure a job. The fallout from this practice is not only an incredible "brain drain" of quality candidates forced from the workforce but the long-term economic consequences of "older" workers that basically fall into a growing involuntary retirement category who by necessity must prematurely tap their retirement nest eggs merely to survive. And if the nation's Social Security system is not already under tremendous stress, record numbers are also being forced to take early retirement at 62 despite decreased benefit levels. Delaying retirement to the full benefit stage is no longer an option because no one will hire them and they need the money. Granted there are exceptions to this rule where internal politics, nepotism or a "good old boy" network exists but these more fortunate situations are far outnumbered by the masses of ordinary Americans.

So in the final analysis the term "recovery" is diluted by a new economic reality for 2010 and beyond. A once relatively prosperous middle class is now under siege. Without meaningful full-time replacement jobs (and discounting all of the "job creation" statistics bloated with temporary or part-time positions) huge middle class numbers that in the past could be counted on to fuel a true economic recovery are just no longer there. By necessity, these once dependable consumers are dialing back their lifestyles big time because many may never work again, especially "older" Americans, or, alternatively, must compete with larger numbers of Americans forced into minimum wage jobs paying a fraction of their former salaries (if they can get by the "overqualified" employer argument, that is). Instead of a consumption mode, these middle class Americans must revert to a survival mode. The sooner these economic recovery optimists recognize this new societal economic landscape and, more importantly, the sooner the Obama administration and the Congress examine more closely the statistics they are being fed and recognize the true crisis and importance in America today with respect to job creation instead of partisan bickering the better it will be for millions of Americans. How "recovery" is defined from this time forward will be far different from the past in order for the term and its users to accurately retain their credibility with a majority of Americans.

The Congress is Broken--It's Time for a Fix

2010-05-26T22:07:00.000-07:00

Recent polls indicate that only 17 percent of Americans approve of the job the Congress is doing. Surprise? Hardly. Pure and simple, more and more Americans are sick and tired of the gridlock, the finger pointing and over-the-top partisanship. The body is flat out dysfunctional and their record of accomplishment is abysmal. The body routinely passes 1,000-1,500 page bills that the congressmen themselves admit they have not read. For the sake of party and politics, either you have much ballyhooed Rose Garden signings or minority party sound bites sensationalizing perceived legislation flaws. The end result is more often than not bad legislation that then requires more time consuming and equally contentious "fix-up" legislation ad infinitum. I have to believe our Founding Fathers would be absolutely appalled at the current process and how the government's legislative function has evolved. Certainly, the times and the issues are much more complex now than in those early days but the model is now sadly battered beyond recognition.

Modern day examples are too numerous to mention but what about financial regulatory reform legislation as just one. Either you have legislation that is weakened or altered beyond recognition in the translation to regulations or laws and follow-up regulations misinterpreted or not enforced by incompetent and undermanned regulatory bodies. Topping the list is the flood of legislation that emerged after the savings and loan debacle in the 1980s, the repeal of the Glass-Steagall legislation in the Clinton administration originally passed after the Great Depression to separate commercial and investment banking, the Sarbanes-Oxley or SOX legislation post Enron and WorldCom that in the beginning may have been well meaning to make Boards and management teams more financially accountable to investors but has since proved to be an administrative and extremely expensive nightmare for smaller companies, and, now, the latest round of post-Great Recession "reform" legislation that has passed the House and Senate in differing versions and now must be reconciled in what is sure to be a contentious conference committee process. It's legislation that more often than not is conceptualized in a reactive rather than proactive mode and then almost always must navigate a minefield of overly partisan political theatrics, demagoguery, and populism as well as powerful and hugely financed corporate lobbies. Add in archaic congressional procedural rules and inevitable delays on the road to passage or failure due to any number of reasons and you have dysfunction.

Many will argue that our representative Congress is better than any alternative despite its flaws. It's the American and Democratic way. Granted, this assessment has validity but this doesn't mean that there can't be meaningful improvements to what we now have and what it has become. At a minimum, elected representatives should be mandated--no exceptions--to vote in accordance to the wishes of their constituents and their districts and not in lock step to the party hierarchy. More strict limitations on fund-raising and political donations should be established for individuals, corporations and their PACs and loopholes closed for the Move on.org-type structural hybrids, including an energized objective enforcement, so representatives are less beholden to various interests, especially those with the deepest pockets or the most powerful lobbyists. Media political ads before they are printed or aired should be subjected to a more academic and non-partisan censorship system that is above reproach and there should be equal limits on how much space and/or time can be purchased as well as when and how often all advertisements are run. Ideally, this oversight should include the Internet but I also realize this may not be possible or practical with today's technology. Finally, much stronger rules need to be established for policing the employment of ex-congressmen with businesses and corporations, especially ex-chairmen or committee members under whose jurisdiction relevant legislation falls.

Am I dreaming? Probably. But 83 percent of Americans is a pretty convincing majority that demands something be done with how the Congress now performs. It's easy to say just "throw the bums out" but as a practical matter in today's gerrymandered system of "safe" districts what are the odds for any significant improvement? History has shown over the years that we need to do more than change personalities, much more. Bottom line, today's system is broken and needs to be fixed. It is not a sacred cow. While a 100 percent or even 90 percent approval rating for the Congress may be a real stretch we surely should be able to set our sights on a level significantly higher than today's anemic standards. Let's face it, the future welfare of this country and millions of Americans are at stake and to sit back and do nothing is not and should not be an option.

Enough Already...Let's Move On!

2010-02-26T11:01:00.000-08:00

Yesterday's Washington health care reform summit, while perhaps well-intentioned, just extended the futility of the Obama administration in trying to forge some sort of compromise with Republicans on achieving any true reform on this important issue anytime soon. The President is desperate to trumpet success on a signature promise of his campaign but the Republicans are just as desperate to block it. Answer? For the good of the country and its citizens we must move on to address the far more pressing joblessness dilemma in this country before it becomes a national death spiral beyond the point of no return.

Alarmist? I don't think so. According to the Labor Department, jobless claims bumped up close to 500,000 in the latest week while the measurable number of long-term unemployed--those out of work over six months and near the end of their unemployment benefits--continues to grow. (The key word here is "measurable" since BLS "official" numbers continue to underestimate the true breadth of the crisis.) Other economic indicators like new orders for durable goods and housing starts continue to stagger along. Yes, the Congress may yet finally pass a modest bipartisan jobs bill but it is far too little in the face of an ever deepening problem. We need leadership at the highest level to present bold, new FDR era-like initiatives because it is increasingly obvious the private sector likely will remain on the sidelines much longer awaiting a true recovery before they will resume any real, substantive job hiring.

In the meantime, the suffering of a once vibrant middle class of Americans continues unabated. Government outreach programs are woefully inadequate and bogged down with needless paperwork and bureaucracy. Solid citizens who have diligently and proudly worked for decades, always paid their bills on time and enjoyed comfortable yet not lavish lifestyles are for the first time facing the nightmare of their lives and once unthinkable symbols of societal failure in foreclosure, bankruptcy, divorce and worse. Discussion boards on the Internet are flooded with thousands of stories of personal despair and desperation. From all over America across all demographics the stories are sad and frightening, not just for those unemployed, underemployed or otherwise hurting but also for many fortunate enough with jobs yet fearful that they, too, could join the ranks of the less fortunate as what has been described as the "nascent" recovery sputters.

Americans have a history of strength and resiliency but when you take away their ability to work to support their families and their "pursuit of happiness" it's like a dagger to the heart. Life basically stops during unemployment--roles are reversed, relationships altered, priorities shift, and emotions boil over. Add in the ongoing frustrations and humiliation of fruitless job searches, sleepless nights, constant money worries, including agonizing over having to borrow from friends and relatives for the very first time, and the loss of individual security and dignity and it is not difficult to see how job loss ranks right at the top by experts as one of the most stressful events in any lifetime.

So...Mr. President and members of Congress, enough already! Isn't it about time to put country ahead of party and politics, compassion ahead of money, greed and lobbyists, and responsibility ahead of foot-dragging and do a full-court press on the unemployment crisis in this country? Americans need you to do what we elected you to do--work as hard as you can to especially help those most in need so they and our country can be the very best (it) we can be. The suffering and despair are real, yet the disconnect between constituents and elected officials in Washington and in our state capitols grows deeper. It's past time to step up and make a change. It's too late for many but opportunities remain for millions more. Let's move on!

OK, What Do We Do Now?

2010-01-24T10:58:00.000-08:00

Borrowing Robert Redford's line after he unexpectedly won his election in the movie, The Candidate, no more appropriate words could describe the political and economic environments at this time, one year into President Obama's presidency. Anyone who is anyone, irregardless of political party, could not disagree with the fact that the populist unhappiness with the current state of affairs in the economy and so many lives is not the fault of one man--there is plenty of blame to spread around, including former presidents Bush and Clinton, the Congress, the Republicans, the Democrats--yet as the point person in our form of government in the U.S., rightly or wrongly, President Obama and his administration are obvious targets because he is the current captain of the ship. The daunting challenge now is to keep the ship from sinking despite the larger and larger waves of suffering and dissatisfaction.

We've heard the statement many times in recent weeks--"what a difference a year makes." A year ago President Obama was swept into office with hopes of change and political non-partisanship to help usher in his ambitious agenda. But therein lies two of his problems--party partisanship and gridlock are more entrenched now than ever and maybe his agenda was too ambitious and many would argue not prioritized as it should have been. Let's face it, despite the rhetoric, the Republicans covertly have hoped all along the President would fail because a legislative victory in his health care reform effort, or any major legislative initiative for that matter, could mean the wave of positive momentum could sink the Republican Party, already barely treading water from ideological differences between its moderate and far right, conservative wings. Merits or not, whether it's the cost, the deficits, federal government intrusion in our lives or ineptitude, you name it, health care reform could not and would not succeed without at least some Republican support. Enter the unemployment crisis and the lingering effects of the Great Recession allowed to fester during the President's watch while a contentious health care reform debate drags on for months and months and you have a perfect storm for what happened in Massachusetts--a Republican senator elected for the first time since 1972. I'm not saying health care reform is not important or badly needed--almost universally this is a given--it's just that the economy and joblessness should trump even health care reform at this time. What good is health care reform when people don't have jobs to pay for it even when you factor federal subsidies in the equation? One could also argue that provisions in the House and Senate-approved plans could even be at least a partial contributing factor in why businesses aren't hiring new employees because of the plans' projected cost implications and advertised penalties to business for non-compliance. At this point, decisions will have to be made on whether any real reform is possible in this overly partisan political environment and/or what watered down version could emerge worthy of the President's signature. If I were a betting man, I would have to say that the chances are not good--certainly below the over 50 percent needed.

So, all this being said, President Obama and his team now are forced to chart a new course in these turbulent waters. Health care reform is relegated to a sidebar issue and the targeted focus turns to where it probably should have been in the first place--the economy and jobs. We'll hear more details on the new course direction in the President's State of the Union address this week. How much the President and his team can really do to help on today's job scene when conditions are so bad is certainly debatable, but something needs to be done and done quickly. As the unemployment crisis drags on, every day solid and responsible middle class Americans are losing their life savings, their retirement nest eggs, their homes, and, more importantly, their sense of security and dignity. Suffering is happening across all demographics but the situation is especially bleak for those 18-29 and increasingly so for those over 50 who want and need to work but have become not only victims of corporate downsizing but also of age discrimination as they try to seek new, full-time responsible paying positions in competition with everyone else. With 6.7 unemployed (not to forget the underemployed) people seeking each single job opening, the odds are not good, especially for those in the 50+ demographic where hiring managers and youthful HR gatekeepers are often quick to dismiss their candidacies as too costly and/or overqualified.

There are no easy answers during these unprecedented times. But one thing is clear. It is not the time to point fingers or crow about artificial political "victories." While things might be rosy with the stock market, on Wall Street, the big banks and others bailed out by the taxpayers, on Main Street a real crisis exists and needs solutions not gridlock. Democrat or Republican, neither party should feel particularly secure about their positioning in this midterm election year. People need help not empty promises.

What Has Happened to the Financial System Reform Initiative?

2010-01-10T16:33:00.000-08:00

I recall early on in the Obama administration a major provision of his "change" agenda was to dissect what was wrong with our financial system that allowed the meltdown of 2008 and to incorporate changes on Wall Street and within the existing financial system regulatory structure to assure a repeat performance could be avoided in the future. In light of all the constituent outrage and heart-wrenching accounts from millions who have lost jobs, their retirement savings due to stock market slides and now are losing their homes to foreclosure, it would appear reform was certainly politically possible and that a path was "greased" for much-needed legislation. But as we enter a new year--most importantly, a critical midterm election year--as well as amidst high level government economists' declarations that the "recession is over," it appears now that the air has gone out of the proverbial balloon for financial system reform much to the chagrin of millions of middle class Americans who continue to suffer from the effects of this Great Recession. Where did the momentum go and why the change?

Just as quickly as we realized that a gambling casino mindset of recklessness and greed that began on Wall Street and sent shock waves across the world just averting a total financial system collapse, a mindset of euphoria and the "good old days" has returned to Wall Street thanks largely to government bailout induced profits and accentuated by the recent announcement of a new round of big compensation bonuses. Both Senator Chris Dodd of the Senate Banking Committee and Barney Frank of the House Financial Services Committee, as chairmen of their respective committees with jurisdiction on these matters, were quickly out of the gate with major reform bills last year that both included thoughtful, proposed changes to the current system of oversight and regulation--the formation of a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency with increased powers, power shifts amongst existing regulatory agencies, including the Federal Reserve Board, a reexamination of the Glass-Steagall repeal legislation that occurred during the Clinton Administration, which post Great Depression had established a then much-needed separation between the investment banking and commercial banking communities, and a much-needed revisionary focus on the "too big to fail" doctrine that has dogged this country's financial regulatory system and its regulators for decades. But as the months of contentious debate over a major health care reform bill have dragged on, not to forget the debates over Afghanistan, the economic stimulus, the deficits and a host of other issues, combined with the vigorous opposition of the big bank/Wall Street lobbyists already indebted to the American taxpayer for huge government bailouts, "true" financial system reform now seems, in the parlance of " inside the Beltway" political analysts as DOA or "dead on arrival." Also not to be overlooked is the fact that Senator Dodd, the champion of reform in the U.S. Senate, has announced his retirement. It's too soon to tell whether Senator Dodd will cave into the growing anti-reform sentiments or forge ahead with a substantive legacy reform bill in the remaining months of his Senate tenure.

With all of this as backdrop, it will be interesting to see what, if anything, constructive will come out of the public hearings of a blue-ribbon Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission that are scheduled to begin this week. The supposedly bipartisan commission established early last year to investigate what happened on Wall Street and within the financial system to cause the near domestic collapse and international domino effect will hopefully through its leadership and investigative staff bring to light the abuses that contributed to the meltdown and maybe, just maybe, this could reignite the ongoing congressional reform efforts. Concerned middle class Americans everywhere should be rooting for this commission and hope it truly reveals the precarious position our Wall Street/big bank dominated financial system is in and that it can present thoughtful and meaningful recommendations that can be incorporated into reform legislation.

I want to be optimistic but considering all of the factors noted above I am skeptical. Why? Significantly, the pre-meltdown, speculative climate has returned to Wall Street. While millions of Americans continue to suffer economically in the aftermath of the horrific abuses resulting from the near collapse, according to Wall Street the recession is over and happy days are here again. The risk-taking is back as are the collateralized debt obligations (CDO's), the credit default swaps, the speculative and complex derivatives and other exotic Wall Street concoctions that got us into the huge financial mess in the first place. The rating agencies are still being paid by the firms who issue the securities and assigning artificial high grades for unsuspecting and/or uninformed marketplace investors. Finally, and most egregiously, it's big bonus season on Wall Street again with six-and seven-figure bonuses set to be doled out in the weeks ahead as if the 2008 financial collapse and near financial disaster never even occurred. Do these financial executives have any consciences at all? To me, in light of their bailouts, jacking consumer interest rates on even their best customers and other behavior this situation is unconscionable. While they feast on their hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars, there are millions of proud, hard-working Americans who have already and continue to face financial ruin, mostly due to the Wall Street and big bankers' unregulated and senseless excesses. It's indeed a sorry time for this country and one can only hope the powers to be somewhere wake up before it's too late.

Year-end Musings...

2009-12-01T11:33:00.000-08:00

As we begin the final month of another year it begs a reflective mood on where we've been as a nation, where we are now and where we hope to be in 2010. On the economic front, we have seen the very worse of the Great Recession that officially began in December 2007, twenty-two consecutive months of job losses, unemployment reaching a 26-year double-digit high of 10.2 per cent, the bankruptcies of the once mighty General Motors as well as Chrysler, not to mention perhaps thousands of smaller businesses, a collapse of the credit markets, bailed out banks tightening credit standards including reducing credit lines and jacking up credit card interest rates even for their very best customers, rising personal bankruptcies, record foreclosures, 124 bank failures to date and record budget deficits. Optimists would balance all of this with the rise in the stock market, once again surpassing the 10,000 barrier, some positive GDP numbers (albeit inflated by substantial government assistance), an uptick in housing sales and some leveling off in values, low inflation and near zero Fed discount rates, the price of gold at over $1200 an ounce and an increase in the overall consumer savings rate. Politically, we inaugurated the nation's first African-American president under an aura of hope and change for the better along with an ambitious legislative agenda for a new, Democratically-controlled Congress, a $787 billion economic stimulus package for which the jury is still out, long-needed health care reform on the precipice, and, tonight, the announcement by President Obama of an escalation of 30,000 more troops committed to Afghanistan (at an additional cost per soldier of one million dollars each per year).

These are just some of the highlights ( or "lowlights" depending on your perspective) of the past year up to the present. Granted even weighing in what good we can with the bad there are enormous challenges before us so what can we hope for in 2010? First and foremost in my mind, there needs to be a serious and determined refocus by government at all levels on the unemployment crisis in this country. The upcoming Obama "jobs summit" would appear to signal a recognition of the magnitude of the problem but we need a major creation of real job opportunities through a concerted partnership of government and private business to put a meaningful dent in the crisis that exists. Waiting (and hoping) for the trickle down of the Obama stimulus package with its flawed counting of "saved" and new jobs is not the answer and what accumulated successes could ultimately result are taking too long. Whether it's tax credits for new job creation, shaming businesses who are taking entire operations abroad for cheaper labor or creating some sort of Office of National Employment to create new public service jobs along the lines of the New Deal's Works Progress Administration, something major needs to be done and it needs to be done quickly. The struggles of millions of unemployed and underemployed workers in this country is a national disgrace, not to mention the economic cost of lost tax revenues, the cross-industry domino effects caused by the absence of consumer spending and the resulting draconian cuts in much needed social services by governments like senior citizen, mental health, rehabilitation, extreme poverty and law enforcement/fire protection safety nets. Not only would such ramped up job creation efforts immediately improve the well being of millions of citizens but isn't it the morally responsible thing to do, especially at this "giving" time of year?

And speaking of the morally responsible thing to do, my second most desired wish for 2010 would be for the Congress to finally end the gridlock, bickering and political theatrics and finally pass some sort of health reform legislation early in the year. I don't think there is any argument whether one is Democrat or Republican that reform is badly needed. There are probably thousands, perhaps millions of documented stories of excessive hardships and even tragedies from the current system--treatment denied because of cost or pre-existing conditions, insurance company snafus, on and on--practices and consequences that continue while the debate needlessly drags on. Yes, there is a cost and I feel compromise is possible on the lightning rod issues of payment for abortions, immigrant coverage and some sort of limited public plan. But isn't the cost for doing nothing measured monetarily and in public pain and suffering potentially so much greater? Please, Congress, let's pass a meaningful health care reform package soon.

My comprehensive wish list for 2010 includes other items--financial institution regulatory reform allowing us to avoid a repeat of the late 2008 meltdown stands out as my number three--but if we could only get the leadership, compassion and understanding to come forth on the issues of the unemployment crisis and health care reform, the quality of the lives of so many Americans as well as the overall psyche of the country could be improved immeasurably now and well into the future.

Reading the 2009 Election Tea Leaves

2009-11-05T08:12:00.000-08:00

The usual Washington talking heads and spin doctors have had a field day over the last 48 hours chiming in on what this past Tuesday's election results really mean. Were the governor losses in New Jersey and Virginia a voter rebuke of the policies of the Obama administration and/or the Democratically-controlled Congress? Or on the other side of the political spectrum, was the defeat of the Conservative Party candidate in New York State's 23rd congressional district, supported by conservative mavericks Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck, by a Democrat resulting in the loss of a Republican seat for the first time in a century a shot across the bow for the ideologically split Republican Party? I would contend that the results of these three elections do not mark a trend in either political direction but rather a reflection of the deepening disconnect felt by the American mainstream electorate over the continuing partisan gridlock in Washington and state capitols across this country, and the failure of governing bodies to address more pressing domestic issues like persistent unemployment/lack of jobs and health care reform. Frankly, many Americans, especially a growing Independent block, are becoming increasingly disillusioned with both parties and unless there is a genuine recognition of the plight and frustrations of a majority middle class soon the 2010 midterm elections (and beyond) could result in an irreversible "vote all the bums out" mentality.

Nowhere is this disconnect more evident than in the state of the economy (a factor, by the way, reinforced in numerous election exit polls). Despite the steady stream of "improving" economic indicators released by the government and reported by the media--admittedly, in many sectors like housing and auto manufacturing artificially inflated by government stimulus efforts--the unemployment situation in this country and unavailability of good-paying jobs remains a very serious crisis. Wherever you read, jobs are still being slashed in both the public and private sector and no new jobs are being created. The stock market has shown signs of life in recent months with companies reporting profits but largely because they continue to cut to the bone on expenses and reduce payrolls, not because of a growing demand for their products and services. Despite the government's urging, businesses note in independent survey after independent survey that they are still extremely cautious about hiring/rehiring staff in the present environment. Unemployment numbers have dropped in many areas of the country not because new jobs are being created but because of the antiquated statistical methodologies used by government agencies to report the unemployment numbers where many long-term unemployed have given up searching for non-existent jobs while many others who need full-time jobs are forced to take part-time jobs at a fraction of their previous pay. Younger voters (18-29) who came out strongly for President Obama in 2008 in Virginia, for example, comprised only about 10 percent of the vote in 2009. Why? Well, so many in this demographic are unemployed or underemployed and are more concerned about paying for everyday living expenses and paying off their huge public/private student loans now that their payment deferral periods have passed. Notably, a Wall Street Journal story reported recently that less than 50 percent of this age group that are able to work even have a job commensurate with their college educations. At the other demographic end, many experienced and talented workers over 55 downsized due to this economy cannot find suitable, good-paying replacement jobs because of not-so-subtle age discrimination. Many financially able to do so are taking early retirement while others less financially fortunate are trying to hang on until they can take early retirement at 62, which is creating its own problem placing even more pressure on an already distressed Social Security system and the coming tsunami of Baby Boomer retirements.

And a few words here about the ongoing partisan debate over health care reform. While Washington fiddles, the ("burning") obvious problems of affordability, increased costs, the plight of the uninsured and under insured, etc., continue unabated. Health care premiums continue to rise and more employers are shifting a greater percentage payment burden to employees who already see their wages frozen or hours cut by the recession. People continued to be denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions, see costs reaching or surpassing maximum policy caps or are just rolling the dice opting for no insurance out of necessity. Recent reports indicate that passage of a true health reform package could be delayed into 2010, an election year. If this scenario materializes, health care reform will probably be even further delayed (if it's ever enacted at all) because of the traditional nervousness of legislators wary to vote on anything the least bit controversial in an election year.

How do you read this year's election tea leaves? One would like to be optimistic--it's the American way--but for too many during these days the realism trump card rules. Huge numbers of people need help and jobs not political posturing. The sooner all the politicians and governmental officials finally realize this, the better for them but, more importantly, the better for this country.

Think Long and Hard Before Escalating Troop Levels in Afghanistan

2009-10-11T22:17:00.000-07:00

Internationally, one of the most controversial issues facing the Obama administration today is whether or not we should commit up to 40,000 more (or a lesser number) American troops to a recalibrated war strategy in the country of Afghanistan. There are emotional arguments on both sides of the issue but for the economic well being of this country in both the short and long term I would argue that the seriousness of our domestic problems trumps any perceived benefit to dedicate another "surge" to this part of the world. Afghanistan is a poor and rugged country with a corrupt and inefficient government that oversees a populace of mostly illiterate people. U.S. troops have been seeking out the Taliban/al Qaeda terrorist sympathizers for over eight years now. U.S. war dead now number nearly 800 with hundreds more wounded. At one time it appeared that the U.S. mission had achieved some success with the Taliban presence in the country supposedly weakened and many reported high level al Qaeda leaders killed or on the run and/or taking up new residence in neighboring Pakistan. More recently, however, it appears that the Taliban forces have become more bold with greater numbers and weapons, including an increased implementation of the dangerous IEDs that have claimed so many American lives in Iraq. From a military perspective, it is not a surprise that the thinking of military leaders would be to counter the Taliban's boldness with more American troops. But how many more would be enough? Will an additional 40,000 be enough or after this surge will military leaders then claim that they'll need another 40,000 or even more fresh troops to accomplish a successful mission? What criteria will define a "victory with honor?" When will it stop? I'm no military expert but history and the military mind have shown vividly in Vietnam and even Iraq that no number of troops is ever enough and more requests in the future are almost inevitable. After Iraq, the current unprecendented economic times at home, mind-boggling trillion dollar deficits and a country mired in political gridlock can we afford a major escalation in Afghanistan at this time? I respect the views of others and am truly thankful for the sacrifices of American military families wherever loved ones may be stationed throughout the world, but I fear that the military thirst for more will never be quenched and decisions need to be made for a more rifle shot focus of the al-Qaida core be this in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Then governmental leaders need to shift its "war" effort to right here within our borders to create jobs for the millions of unemployed, ensure affordable healthcare for all, stamp out hunger and homelessness, upgrade our infrastructure--roads, bridges, the utilities' grid, raise the standards of public education to the heights of other countries of the world, on and on. Yes, we need to think long and hard about Afghanistan and whether increased troop levels will truly make a difference. One could argue whether any troop level, no matter how high, will ever be enough to combat world extremists and/or their sympathizers who are now surgically implanting explosives into their own bodies taking suicide bombing to an almost unthinkable level. America cannot do it alone and the problems at home need the greater attention and financial support at this time. I fear negative forces more within than those in a distant part of the world.

It's the Economy, Stupid

2009-09-24T16:52:00.000-07:00

Long the campaign battle cry of many a political contest, no words could be truer in today's economic climate. Recent polls indicate that the economy is the number one concern of Americans today--perceived more important than health care reform, national security and/or other pressing domestic or international issues of the day. So why doesn't the Obama administration declare a war on unemployment just as previous administrations have against drugs, cancer, AIDS, poverty, inflation or other major areas of public concern? Statistics reported by the government do not tell the whole story, especially of the thousands who have at least temporarily given up their new job searches in total frustration. While President Obama, Fed Chairman Bernanke, various economists and others in high ranking governmental positions want to believe that the Great Recession has hit bottom, jobs are still disappearing and not enough new, meaningful ones are being created, banks are still failing with the FDIC deposit insurance reserve once over $50 billion now less than $10 billion, and the auto and housing industries still very fragile despite being artificially pumped up by the "Cash for Clunkers" program and an $8000 first-time homebuyers tax subsidy that is scheduled to expire in November. And, most importantly, consumers, who have historically led the country out of past recessions (where experts proclaim that 70 percent of the U.S. economy is fueled by consumer spending), still aren't spending because too many that are fortunate enough to still have jobs are afraid of losing them, face furloughs or have had their hours drastically cut. The vast majority of jobs already lost are lost forever and so goes the spending of the millions of people who once held these jobs or who are now underemployed with temporary, much lower paying jobs forced to purchase just the necessities to survive. Major retailers have already announced plans to scale back seasonal holiday hirings even below the depressed levels of one year ago when the bottom really fell out for consumer spending. So many other employers are still playing a "wait and see" strategy or have announced salary freezes and/or already "no raise" policies for 2010. Where will the spending come from? And the misery index is still high. Despite low interest rates, even prime borrowers/businesses cannot get loans due to extremely restrictive underwriting standards or reduced or eliminated credit lines. Government-backed loans comprise a huge majority of all residential home loans being granted in today's environment; loans that must adhere to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac agency standards while these governmental entities themselves continue to bleed billions in losses even after being nationalized in late 2008. In light of all of the other government bailouts (banks, auto industry, etc.), how much longer can the federal government continue to backstop the purchasing of mortgage securities that fuels this housing finance? Housing sales numbers are also artificially inflated by the forced bank sales of thousands of underwater mortgages (where the owners have walked away due to loan balances exceeding the home's market value) or the continuing flood of home foreclosures now affecting even the most prime loans due to borrower unemployment or catastrophic health care indebtedness. I'd like to be the eternal optimist just like the next person but there are just too many holes in the optimist's argument today. Not to downplay the importance of health care reform, the tremendous need for infrastructure improvements, or supporting our troops in harm's way, I, for one, believe that the economy should be this country's number one priority at this time--responsible and responsive lending to qualified borrowers by the nation's banks, hiring the unemployed with targeted tax breaks for corporations or small businesses, etc.--whatever the country needs to get back on track to real prosperity supported by realistic measures of economic health and not sugar-coated for political expediency. The stakes are too high and the problem too great not to give it the attention it truly needs. Yes, it is the ECONOMY, people! Is anyone listening?

A Question of Morality

2009-09-17T12:32:00.000-07:00

Perhaps my viewpoint is biased because I sympathize with the millions of professionals currently unemployed, but are there others out there who like me see a decided increase in the number of heart-rending stories from "ordinary" Americans struggling to survive from the effects of a recession predicted by experts to be over? We've lost millions of jobs during this recession, and not just the blue-collar type that have constituted the rolls of previous recessions but a new breed of long-time dedicated workers across many age groups and from higher income levels. And, tragically, a vast majority of these jobs are lost forever, never to return again. With noticeable new job creation still months or years away, you now have a tremendous pool of experienced and qualified workers applying in huge numbers for the small number of jobs that remain. Often competing against hundreds or thousands of applicants for any one job opening, you have executives competing with young people for summer, part-time jobs or for step-down, blue collar janitorial jobs, retirees adversely affected by challenging financial markets having to come out of retirement seeking jobs, stay-at-home moms reentering the workforce, long-time, usually secure government workers at all levels downsized due to reduced revenues and program funding cutbacks joining the ranks of the unemployed for the first time, as well as individuals from hundreds or thousands of failed small businesses (i.e., victims of the Great Recession, denied new bank loans or facing reduced/eliminated credit lines, unable to afford health insurance for themselves or their workers, etc.) forced to return to the overall, generalized labor pool. And what about the thousands of recent or soon-to-be new college graduates entering the workforce, many needing jobs to pay back the thousands and thousands of dollars of student loans they have incurred to earn their college degrees, a burden most will have to bear for years to come? Where are the new jobs for this vastly expanded labor pool of new workers, unemployed and underemployed going to come from? I'm not sure even the most celebrated experts can answer this with accuracy. Suffice it to say, the wait will be long for even those financially able to weather the storm. But for thousands, perhaps millions of others, the waiting period has already or will soon expire. For so many workers thrust into the nightmare of unemployment for the first time in their lives, their rainy day savings are already gone, they have had to deplete their retirement nest eggs to survive, they have already or will soon exhaust their unemployment benefits or are being forced to turn to credit cards or temporary family loans to support everyday living expenses. Can more be done by others more fortunate in society, business leaders or in governmental power positions to help? To me, this is a deep-seated moral issue and is the greatest challenge facing our country today, bigger than health care, bigger than the environment, bigger than national security and bigger than Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a cancer within and I pray that someone is listening.

Financial Reform Still Needed

2009-09-14T14:37:00.001-07:00

Today marked the one-year anniversary of the financial calamity on Wall Street that nearly took down our financial system. President Obama marked the occasion by delivering a speech directed at Wall Street saying, in part, "We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess." For our country's sake as well as the welfare of millions of its citizens I hope the President is correct in his prediction. But I fear the reform effort that at one time was embraced with fervor by the Obama administration and certain key congressional members like Senator Chris Dodd, who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, is losing much of its steam. I read in the Wall Street Journal and other publications that some of the same risk-taking, exotic financial instruments and trader big bonuses are returning to the Wall Street landscape. Big banks including Goldman Sachs, who along with other "too big to fail" banking institutions that received huge federal taxpayer bailouts are seemingly flaunting inflated profit numbers with some of the same excesses of the past, despite the President's optimism, including penalizing their very best customers with new fees, increased interest rates, dropping credit lines and overly restrictive loan underwriting standards. While the overall financial environment has certainly improved from its near disastrous plunge of one year ago, can we now afford to sink into complacency and lulled into some false sense of security? No. I feel that the financial system is still fragile and it is more important now than ever to promote the cause of reform while the "iron is hot." Yes, health insurance reform is important as are other administration priorities but government and congressional leaders cannot lose sight of the pressing need for financial reform and restructuring. The current system remains ripe for abuse and greed. Like a child who has been repeatedly scolded not to raid the cookie jar without parental (governmental) oversight the temptation will always be present. President Obama and Chairman Dodd, I implore you not to retreat at this sensitive time and to keep the fire of reform burning bright. A reoccurrence of what happened one year ago that revealed such widespread abuse cannot be allowed. Too much is at stake and wavering is too dangerous to even imagine.

Having the Right People Working for You in These Times

2009-09-13T12:58:00.000-07:00

In Jim Collins' best-selling book, Good to Great, he states that "people are not your most important asset, the right people are." Stories abound in today's media about the abundance of talent and experience caught up in organizational job eliminations and corporate downsizing. There are thousands of top recommended executives, managers and line employees with accomplished track records available to make meaningful contributions and add value to company and/organization management teams yet hiring managers because of cost cutting or other reasons in this environment are unwilling to give these motivated individuals a chance. At the same time, one reads story after story or hears internal accounts about individuals in the public or private sectors who in some way have abused their management or team member positions with repeated incompetent workplace behavior invoking poor morale by forcing other dedicated team members to work harder to compensate for their (weaker) employee shortcomings. Is this fair to existing hard-working employees or to the existing talent pool of unemployed executives and managers who are extremely motivated to return to the workplace? I think not. Why not use these unprecedented economic times to reevaluate internal employee performance levels and purge existing staffs of weak or "tired" employees and replace them with proven talent from the ranks of today's unemployed? Granted there may be some circumstances due to contractual obligations where this may not be possible. But in study after study, chief executives cite "hiring and retaining quality staff" as their number one challenge. From a sound business perspective as well as achieving the ongoing goal of maintaining a healthy and productive work environment, why not employ this staff re-engineering strategy today? Notably, most companies and organizations already operate under "at will" personnel hiring policies. Chief executives need to employ the very best available personnel for the sake of their career paths. It is not the time to be weak, subjective or overly charitable. Strong leaders should and need to make these kinds of decisions on behalf of their companies or organizations.

What Has Happened to the Agenda of President Obama and the Democratic Party?

2009-09-02T21:36:00.000-07:00

During the 2008 presidential campaign so many, including millions of young, first-time voters, were inspired by the words and vision of a youthful, brilliant and charismatic leader hailed as the newest torch bearer of the Democratic Party. Then candidate and now President Obama excited and inspired his audiences much the same way as another youthful, charismatic leader of my generation had, John F. Kennedy. He rallied the masses on issues of grave importance--much needed reform of the nation's health care system, a promise to wind down operations and bring troops home from Iraq, pledges to do more to help the middle class with their tax burdens, growing job losses, rising energy costs, increased foreclosures and victims of a greed-plagued, deregulated banking industry with new restrictive lending policies and near punitive credit card standards for even its most loyal and dedicated customers. The Obama crusade swept into office and carried huge majorities of Democrats into the U.S. House and Senate--a mandate for change from the Republican policies of the previous eight years that had drifted too far right on the political spectrum. What has happened to this momentum for change? Sadly, it appears we now have a Democratic Party not knowing what it wants to be and seemingly on the defensive from a vocal, fear-mongering Republican minority. True health care reform, inclusive of a public alternative, is in trouble thanks to a misinformed public and splintering party support, the Iraq timetable has been altered and troop levels continue to rise in Afghanistan with dangerous Vietnam-like parallels, large banks are announcing "profts" thanks to taxpayer-funded TARP funds, shrinking assets and more restrictive lending and a rash of new account and credit card fees, including huge interest rate bumps levied on customers with sparkling credit records and payment histories. A long ago proposed Home Affordable Refinance Program or HARP designed to assist distressed homeowners with needed loan modifications has been a dismal failure to date, and much needed financial system restructuring and reregulation has been stalled. Yes, I realize these are all huge problems but the American public voted in a new President and a new Democratic-majority Congress to effect change. Rather than carry forth with this much-needed change once bold iniatives have become watered down by a Democratic Party in disarray and a President seemingly caving into the old politics and special interests of the Washington establishment. Mr. President, we need your leadership and a renewed vigor evidenced so strikingly during the 2008 presidential campaign now more than ever to lead our elected representatives out of the current legislative morass. As you have stated so many times before, the status quo is not acceptable. We need change that is responsive and morally responsible. American's citizens, especially its overly burdened middle class, deserve no less.

Is the Recession Really Over?

2009-09-02T13:24:00.000-07:00

Many economists have been reported recently to be in agreement that the Great Recession that began in December 2007 is over or will soon be over. They point to higher housing starts, auto sales, modest ticks upward in factory production, reductions in inventories and a stabilization in some metro areas in unemployment statistics. Like the Wall Street Journal reported recently I guess one's outlook depends on which America he/she is part of at this time. I guess I would classify myself as representative of the "other" America at this time--unemployed for over 2 1/2 years now despite Herculean efforts to find something here in the states and even abroad, savings depleted and retirement nest egg almost gone, a witness to obvious age discrimination in my search and scared to death of future prospects of possible total financial ruin. Anyone not in this position just can't relate to the pain, sadness, humiliation and frustration that this brings to an individual and his/her family. And just how can the statistics these economists are using portray any kind of a reliable trend when home sales are probably inflated by increased foreclosures and pressured bank sales and not the normal buyer/seller transactions, car sales inflated by the short-termed "Cash for Clunkers" program and unemployment numbers still rising in many areas and realistically not reflective of the huge numbers of long-term unemployed (like me) and underemployed where so many former "executive" types must take on jobs paying a fraction of what they had achieved before becoming unemployed. Although I want to be just as optimistic as the next person, from my side of the aisle I do not see the "shoots" and roses that the other America must see.