DJKucinich
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today addressed an overflowing audience of enthusiastic supporters as he explained the current status of the nuclear industry in the United States. He cited the problematic Davis-Besse nuclear power in Northern Ohio as an example of the state of the industry.
updated 12 years ago
"But make no mistake about it - - Government does work. It is working for Pentagon contractors, for arms manufacturers, for oil companies, and for coal companies. It is working for those who want to hold down wages and suppress the rights of workers. It is working for drug companies whose sweetheart deal on prescription drugs blew a hole in the Medicare budget.
"The apparent dysfunctionality of government masks the reality that the tax resources of government increasingly are going to the highest bidders in a $4 billion national election.
"The debris at the bottom of the 'fiscal cliff' will be wrecked hopes of doctors of Medicare patients, unemployed workers who can't protect their families, middle class taxpayers who just can't pay any more.
"Our nation's pose at the fiscal cliff is proof of the necessity of a constitutional amendment, H. J. Res 100, to rid this nation of the corrupting influence of special interest money with public financing which recreates a true government for the people."
"At home, we choose a false notion of security over personal freedom, even if it means that we look the other way when the very language of this bill opens the door for indefinite detention of Americans. And we choose poverty over plenty by giving over half a trillion dollars for the Pentagon, and nearly $90 billion for wars, including Afghanistan, while facing reductions in domestic spending.
"We put war on the nation's credit card, including a charge for the war in Iraq, which was based on lies and may ultimately cost $5 trillion. We gather at a fiscal cliff of our own making and refuse to see the implications of our unrestrained spending for war. But when it comes to providing for the long term security of our seniors, a cynical ploy using the Consumer Price Index is being used to cut Senior's Social Security benefits.
"When did America become more concerned about the control of and the security of foreign lands than the retirement security of its own people? Unending war abroad means austerity here at home. It's caviar for the Pentagon and cat food for seniors.
"Our choices are being made again with this bill, but when will we choose for America - -Jobs for all? Education for all? Housing opportunities for all? Retirement security for all? When will we choose freedom over fear? When will we break the hold which fear has over this nation?"
"For example, if seniors usually eat steak but then can't afford its higher price, they can switch to something cheaper, like cat food- - and the cost-of-living calculation would be 'chained' to the cheaper item - - cat food. So, the less you pay for food the less benefits you get. The 'chained CPI' benefit cut will chain aging seniors to a poverty of choices, a lower standard of living, with cheaper products.
"The chained CPI formula doesn't take into account seniors' rising health care costs. If it did benefits would go up. There is no justification to cut Social Security benefits. No to throwing seniors off the fiscal cliff. No to a Cat Food Christmas."
"The deeper question is why did the US intervene in Libya in the first place? Twenty months after a U.S.-led mission to overthrow the Libyan government, militias are still battling in the streets for control. Al-Qaeda-linked groups have a foothold in Libya which they did not have before the U.S. intervention.
"Why did we spend U.S. tax dollars to open the door for Al-Qaeda in Libya? The intervention itself was a disaster and it makes the case that the U.S. government's policy of intervention in Libya was wrong and that everything that proceeds from that intervention is bound to be tainted.
"The Book of Ecclesiastes says 'That which is crooked cannot be made straight.' Nothing will ever be made straight about U.S. intervention in Libya."
Professor Steve Keen is an economics professor at the University of Western Sydney, Australia. He is the author of "Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor Dethroned."
The briefing, held in the Small Business Committee Room, focused on the impact of going over the "fiscal cliff" which could trigger further deleveraging in the private sector, leading to a sharp rise in unemployment and decline in tax revenues as unemployment benefit claims would rise.
Professor Keen found that the support to the economy from the federal government has succeeded in bringing an end to deleveraging in the private sector and stabilizing private sector investment. A cut-back in federal government support threatens to undo that hard-won stability and throw the economy into a downward spiral which would create a double-dip and make the fiscal position worse.
Congressman Kucinich summarized saying "Congress must not jump off the cliff" and must instead "invest in America's future today for tomorrow."
"The Washington Post says the Pentagon will dramatically expand the role and size of its own personal spy agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency -- the DIA. It's like the CIA, but they get their mission assignments from the Pentagon. The report says the plan includes sending 1,600 'collectors' - that is why they call their spies -- all around the world. This is what the CIA does, except they are called 'agents.' The DIA doesn't have to report to Congress like the CIA does, so we would know even less than we know about situations like Benghazi.
"Why the Pentagon needs its own spy agency is anyone's guess. Maybe to keep an eye on its generals when the CIA and FBI do not? Meanwhile the CIA has been taking over Pentagon functions, conducting military strikes with drones all around the world. We have the CIA bombing people and the Pentagon spying on people. Who knows what the other DOZEN spy agencies are up to?
"Big government leads to a big national security state which leads to Big Brother getting fat on tax dollars while we have less freedom."
"The top priority of the 'Fix the Debt CEO's' is to cut the essential commitments of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. No skin off their noses. Sorry, you 50 million Americans who are in poverty. Too bad, you millions of children, elderly and poor who rely on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Unemployed? You are just out of luck if you lose unemployment benefits.
"These 71 CEOs who come to Washington to preach fiscal austerity have average retirement assets of $9.1 million. That's about a $65,000 pension check each month for the rest of their lives. In contrast, the average monthly Social Security check for retired workers is $1,237.
"Of all these debt cutting CEO's, only two have sufficient assets in their companies' pension funds to meet their obligations to their own workers. The rest who pay any pension at all have underfunded their workers' pension funds by $103 billion.
"Those who have already shoved their own retiring workers off the fiscal cliff want to do it to the rest of the middle class and poor. NO WAY."
"The poor and the middle class? They're entitled to unemployment, underemployment, foreclosures, and cuts in both Social Security and Medicare.
"Poor and middle-class Americans know all about the fiscal cliff. They've been getting pushed off it for years with an unfair tax system, unconscionable trade deals and the Fed's monetary policies.
"Nearly 50 million people are in poverty in America, twelve million unemployed and millions more underemployed. On January 2, millions stand to lose unemployment benefits. Fourteen million American's mortgages are greater than the value of their homes. On the horizon loom massive cuts to essential services.
"Will the American austerity replace the American dream?
"We need to turn back from the fiscal cliff with wealth creation, education, job creation, infrastructure rebuilding, monetary reform, trade reform, protection of Social Security and Medicare.
"We need a Great Economic Revival, not another Great Depression."
The NSA doesn't need a warrant to record your most private conversations. They have managed to circumvent our privacy laws because they define an "intercept" as a piece of information read by an agent. That means they don't need authorization to record and save your information until someone decides they'd like to read it.
How does this affect you? You are watching this or reading this on a computer or a mobile device. The FBI and the NSA can track you and find out your location. They can then look at your IP address and determine what websites you go to and what accounts you have accessed. They need a warrant to read any email that is less than 180 days old, but they can read any older email with only a court order that DOES NOT REQUIRE PROBABLE CAUSE. Just yesterday, Google disclosed that they have received 7,969 requests for information and access from the United States government in the first half of 2012.
The FBI, if they thought they had a reason, could find out where you are and read your email, with relatively little oversight. Don't think they can? This is what happened to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, an active four star general and two women. Even after this incredible invasion of privacy, the FBI has determined that no crime was likely committed and charges are unlikely to be filed.
Want to know what a national security state looks like? Wake up America.
"Congress still doesn't know why our people in Libya were left vulnerable. We still don't know why the U.S. military was not sent to their defense.
"It is of the highest importance that General Petraeus, who led the CIA at that time, be brought before Congress to testify as to what really happened in Benghazi, whether there was a security lapse or whether the Administration temporized on security, and stood down to mollify violent, disparate groups which have nothing in common with our nation.
"U.S. involvement in Libya is a disaster, compounded by the deaths of four Americans. It is imperative that we find out the truth about Benghazi, wherever it leads, whoever it affects."
"Yet the program has thus far been conducted with virtually no oversight from Congress or any other judicial body and absolutely no due process. Congress has even been denied the right to be informed of and view the legal memos which the Administration uses as its basis to justify these killings. Despite increasing calls for transparency and the legal justification from both Members of Congress and a broad range of advocacy organizations, targeted killing is 'so routine that the Obama Administration has spent much of the past year codifying and streamlining the processes that sustain much of it.'
"The battlefield has been stretched to include nearly anywhere in the world, making it easier to justify the flouting of international law and the laws of war. But the United States is not at war with Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan. Such killings are only lawful under a very narrow set of circumstances. We cannot claim to be meeting those narrow circumstances when the number of people killed by such strikes, including innocent civilians, is estimated to exceed 3,000. This number alone demonstrates that the Administration's claims that such strikes occur only under 'imminent threat' is patently false.
"The expansion of the use of surveillance drones here in the United States also raises significant concerns about the safeguarding of privacy and what information may be collected without prior authorization. Any government or local law enforcement agency deploying such drones must ensure that the 4th amendment rights and the right to privacy of U.S. citizens are not being violated by the use of this technology.
"Congress cannot stand idly by as these actions are being taken in the name of the American people. That is why I am hosting a briefing on Friday, November 16, 2012 to discuss the implications of our drones policy here at home, and abroad."
"Let me explain. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress -- with your tax dollars -- subsidizes the marketing efforts of fast food and junk food companies by as much as $19 billion dollars over ten years. And the way the federal funding system works is that if we give a tax break in one place, we need to replace that lost income from somewhere else, like with higher taxes from the rest of us. In other words, this tax break is a massive subsidy for the junk food and fast food industry. And our children are paying pay for it with their health.
"In 2004 alone, $10 billion was spent on food advertising directed at children. It is effective because a child's brain is unable to distinguish fact from fiction at a time they are developing life-long taste allegiance. If it didn't work, they wouldn't do it. According the Journal of Law and Economics, eliminating this subsidy would reduce the rates of childhood obesity by 5-7 percent.
"We can't wait. A report this month by the Trust for America's Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that "If obesity rates continue on their current trajectories, by 2030, ... all 50 states could have rates above 44 percent."
"While partial blame does lie with a more sedentary lifestyle, and a worsening diet, the influence of sophisticated, targeted marketing of junk food to kids has been largely ignored by the public. But the role of advertising and marketing in the childhood obesity epidemic, which now affects 1 in 3 children, is readily acknowledged by experts.
"According to the Institute of Medicine, 'Aggressive marketing of high-calorie foods to children and adolescents has been identified as one of the major contributors to childhood obesity.'
"We can end this tax break, improve our kids' health and reduce our nation's debt all at the same time. It's time to stop subsidizing the childhood obesity epidemic."
"The effects of climate change are already being felt in the U.S. and around the world in the form of not only extreme weather, but encroaching disease, water shortages, acidifying oceans, species loss, and increasing atmospheric temperatures.
"The scientific consensus is that climate change is caused by increases in concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from human activity. That's right. We are helping to create our own bad weather.
"Science has determined that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide before the industrial revolution was 275 parts per million. Today it is about 394.
"While we may already be past a tipping point, if we set a limit on concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now, there is a chance we can soften the negative effects of global climate change.
"Let's look at the evidence: The amount of reflective surface area on the Earth, now provided primarily by ice and snow, is lessening. Geological deposits with gigatons of methane, which has well over 15 times the warming capacity of carbon dioxide, are being released from permafrost and from the bottom of the ocean. There is a growing acidification of the ocean and a loss of forest cover due to deforestation and forest fires. This hinders the absorption of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
"These conditions challenge our resolve as a people. We simply must set aside all partisan, philosophical and economic differences in a great movement to save our planet for ourselves and for future generations.
"Accordingly, and consistent with the best science available, I will submit to Congress a resolution which will help promote national, economic and environmental security by the adoption of a target of 350 parts per million of atmospheric carbon dioxide. It will be a yardstick by which to evaluate domestic and international climate change policies. Our nation should develop domestic and international energy and environmental policies that are sufficiently flexible to accommodate advancing science, tipping points and apparent changes in weather which now threaten life, the environment, property, the economy and our infrastructure.
"It is time to unite to save our nation and our planet."
"Arming such opposition groups would be dangerous given that they are often at odds and have significant mistrust of each other. It is also well-documented that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to distinguish between rebels who 'are fighting for a noble cause' from 'those who seek to take advantage of the chaos.'
"Despite many initial attempts to brand military intervention in Libya a success, events on the ground should give pause to those pushing for military intervention in Syria. The government continues to have problems controlling armed rebel groups that often act with impunity. A significant amount of arms, brought in during the uprising, continue to pose security problems. With the tragic killing of four U.S. consulate staff, including our ambassador, it is clear that the chaos of the armed revolution created the space for dangerous actors to come in.
"The killing of innocent people in Syria -- or anywhere -- is a tragedy that requires a response. But a military intervention is likely to only cause more casualties and create a power vacuum that allows extremist groups to move in."
"Three hundred fifty drone strikes by the U.S. have killed as many as 3,378 people including as many as 885 civilians, including women and children. Our drone strikes create sympathy for our enemies among the populations we bomb. Numerous academic reports have detailed that our policies are counterproductive and lead to increased radicalization.
"Yet, according to The Washington Post "targeted killing is now so routine that the Obama administration has spent much of the past year codifying and streamlining the process that sustains it."
"According to these officials, the government expects to keep adding names to the kill list, now called a 'disposition matrix.' The Kill Matrix will continue at least another decade. The institutionalization of the kill/capture list should concern us all. This program has been created and expanded absent any oversight from Congress. With the Kill Matrix the ultimate decision to kill rests in the hands of a single individual: the President of the United States.
"Let's take a moment to reflect. Targeted killing under international law is legal only under very narrow circumstances. Significant questions remain as to whether or not the U.S. is conducting these strikes in accordance with the law. Thus far, the evidence says otherwise. We have killed thousands of people. We have evidence that this policy creates new U.S. enemies, and our government wants to make this program permanent. We continue to kill 'top leaders.' How many times have we killed 'Al Qaeda's number 2?' Will we keep killing until everyone who disagrees with us is dead?
"This short-sighted policy has been likened to mowing the grass. As soon as you stop cutting the grass down, it comes right back. Nations aren't made of grass. They are made of people. Innocent civilians are being killed. We are not solving our problems or making the world safer. We are simply staining our own global image, undermining our ethical place to lead and descending into moral depravity."
"The Administration's 'trust us' legal defense of its drone strikes are not enough to assure the Congress, the American people and the international community that such strikes are legal.
"A National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on the necessity of and the impact of drones on U.S. national security is clearly in order. Are drones necessary; are they wise; do they make a bad situation even worse?
"Lacking an NIE estimate, approval of the request for more drones would be tantamount to doubling down on the dismissal of international law.
"Drone attacks do not occur in a vacuum. They result in very real and very grave consequences on our relationships with other countries and on civilian populations. The more innocent people we kill, the more enemies we will create."
"This policy of secrecy undermines public trust and denies members of Congress the opportunity Congress has historically been afforded to provide input on trade deals. According to Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, the U.S. Trade Representative has consulted with 'over 600 mostly corporate advisors on the context of the classified TPP text,' while continuing to deny access to policy makers whose constituencies will be greatly affected by the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
"From what has been leaked of the TPP, it is shaping up to be worse than NAFTA. The North American Free Trade Agreement's (NAFTA) legacy of deregulation, the outsourcing of American jobs, and the undermining of U.S. environmental and health laws is legendary."
"The devastating track record of Free Trade Agreements (FTA) thus far is clear, and recent reports confirm the fears of those of us who opposed the NAFTA-style FTAs with Korea, Colombia and Panama last year. Colombia continues to be the most dangerous place in the world for trade unionists. Our trade deficit with Korea in the auto sector has grown to nearly $8 billion, a 28% increase over the same period from last year.
"In June of this year, I joined over 100 Members of Congress in asking U.S. Trade Representative for more transparent negotiations and to provide Congress with the vital opportunity to provide input for the agreement. Our voices join thousands of people across the country and a broad range of civil society groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Medical Student Association and the AFL-CIO that are calling for increased transparency and accountability in the TPP negotiation process.
"When will the U.S. Trade Representative listen? Why is the process so secret? Shouldn't we know the details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership before the election?"
The Security Failures of Benghazi
October 10, 2012
The war in Iraq will ultimately cost the United States five trillion dollars. Four thousand, four hundred, eighty eight Americans were killed. Tens of thousands of Americans were injured. At least one million innocent Iraqis were killed. Iraq has become a home to Al Qaida which it certainly was not before our intervention. Resentment against the United States has made pursuing peace more difficult. And we still have thousands of armed contractors in Iraq -- paid for by U.S. taxpayers.
Many are trying to rewrite the history of the Iraq war. The people who led us into a war based on lies want us to believe that the intelligence community was duped. They don't want us to ask questions, because they don't want to be held accountable. Those repeating the myth that America was duped are perpetuating one of the biggest lies in American history.
Iraq did not pose a threat to the United States. Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction. Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. We were not duped. We were not fooled. It was obvious at the time. The evidence was in publicly available reports for anyone who cared to look. I personally distributed this memo to Members of Congress. In it I address the false justifications for war, point-by-point and establish the truth. I made the case in an hour-long presentation on the House floor. 133 Members of Congress were not duped; they voted against going to war with Iraq. The Bush Administration lied to the Congress and the American people to sell its war. The intelligence community wasn't duped, The American people were duped and we are still paying the price.
Why did they lie? After ten years, we have never held anyone accountable for the lies. Perhaps it would be useful to look at who benefited from the war. The Neoconservatives in the Bush Administration wanted to show the world American power by destroying an enemy. They thought that American power and American bombs could redraw the maps and ensure American hegemony and American access to cheap oil for a new century. Certainly the bombmakers and war profiteers have gained from a decade of war. The elite chattering class of State Department sponsored spokespersons from so-called "independent" think tanks have also benefited. This professional chattering class receives funding and attention by hyping threats and war. Who else benefited from the war?
America needs a period of truth and reconciliation. How can we avoid future wars if we don't understand how consent was manufactured for a war against Iraq?
Of total U.S. income taxes paid in 2011, 39 percent went to the Department of Defense. In contrast, 16 percent - or less than half of the amount that went to DoD -- was spent on responding to poverty in the United States. Only 2 per cent went to diplomacy.
And the connection between our spending on defense and our growing deficit is clear when we look at the two wars the U.S. has been waging in Iraq and Afghanistan. According to the Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, authors of The Three Trillion Dollar War, the global financial crisis we are all still feeling the ramifications of was due in part to spending on the war. By their calculation, the war in Iraq will cost the United States nearly $5 trillion when you take into account the additional costs of returning veterans.
When the United States cut taxes as it went to war in Iraq, we got soaring oil prices, federal debt and a global economic crisis. Today, we are continuing to travel down the same path with the war in Afghanistan. The war currently costs U.S. taxpayers approximately $2 billion per week. The longer we stay, the more we are committing ourselves to an endless stream of borrowed money and endless economic insecurity.
With the majority of Americans on both sides of the aisle now opposed to the war, it is time to bring the focus back on nation-building here at home. It is time to withdraw our troops safely and responsibly, and invest the billions of dollars that are going to war to creating jobs and building infrastructure.
"The United Nations General Assembly first established the International Day of Peace in 1981. The General Assembly asks people to honor it as a day of non-violence and to commemorate the Day by raising public awareness on issues related to peace.
"This year's theme is 'Sustainable Peace for a Sustainable Future,' focusing on the connection between sustainable development and sustainable peace. This means calling on people -- on both national and international levels - to play a central role in ensuring equitable and sustainable management of their natural resources. It also means we must reconcile ourselves with the natural world. This was the message of the theologian Thomas Berry who said the great work of our life is to reconcile ourselves with the natural world.
"As the sponsor of H.R. 808, a bill to establish a Cabinet-level Department of Peace, I strongly believe that the government has a role and responsibility to create an organized approach to address issues of violence in our society. I believe that ultimately, the promise of peace in our society begins with our own personal commitment to living a life of nonviolence -- by rejecting our government's reliance on weapons and war, and by making a commitment to more peaceful methods of conflict resolution. It comes from building coalitions to fight all forms of discrimination and oppression.
"I look forward to celebrating a global focus on peace on the International Day of Peace, and to working together to make this focus a part of our everyday lives. Let us reflect today and let us strive to live every day with peace in our hearts."
"Peabody Coal's Prairie State coal plant in southern Illinois has brokered a series of shady deals that puts 217 local utilities across the Midwest on the hook for billions of dollars for energy they may never get, while paying twice market rate -- a corrupt boondoggle that will raise utilities' rates and saddle many publically owned utilities with crushing debt obligations. Congress must stand up for utility customers in these areas."
Peabody Energy Corporation convinced nine regional power agencies to become partial owners of a new coal plant in Southern Illinois. The deals specified that the municipalities could get stuck funding the plant even if it never produced electricity. After foreseeable and preventable cost overruns and subpar performance, ratepayers are now forced to buy electricity from the coal plant even though the cost of energy on the open market is much cheaper.
"Did Peabody Energy Company deliberately unload a bad investment on public power organizations serving 217 cities and villages across the Midwest? Congress must find out because Peabody Energy lured public power organizations into contracts that force municipal utilities to pay up to twice the market rate for electricity.
"At a time when private funding could not be had for new coal powered utilities, Peabody Energy unloaded 95% of its investment onto public power customers in what became an almost triple cost overrun, a coalmine that lasts 22 years instead of the 30 years promised, and an ashfill that was supposed to last 23 years and will last only 12-14 years.
"The contract which municipals are tied into forces them to pay for power 42% above the market rate, whether the plant is producing energy or not. Billions of dollars were issued for bond financing for the project and utility customers are vulnerable to huge costs for debt retirement. Wall Street wouldn't invest in the project, so Peabody went to Main Street, and now millions of public power customers will pay sky high electric rates..."
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvptJ89S4xE&feature=player_embedded
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=788HtyoZk4w&feature=player_embedded
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=788HtyoZk4w&feature=player_embedded
"The FDA has received over a million comments from citizens demanding labeling of GMOs. Ninety percent of Americans agree. So, why no labeling? I'll give you one reason: The influence and the corruption of the political process by Monsanto. Monsanto has been a prime mover in GMO technology, a multi-million dollar GMO lobby here and a major political contributor.
"There is a chance that Monsanto's grip will be broken in California where a GMO labeling initiative is on the ballot. And here in Congress, my legislation HR 3553 will provide for a national labeling law. Americans have a right to know if their food is genetically engineered. It's time for labeling and for people to know how their food is being produced."
"I rise in opposition to the rule for the Continuing Resolution. The Continuing Resolution contains $99.9 billion in the Overseas Contingency Operation funds to continue the war in Afghanistan and to fund other operations in the so-called war on terror.
"This is on top of over $1.3 trillion we've already spent in waging war abroad. This is a war that cost U.S. taxpayers $2 billion a week. It's a war that according to the Congressional Research Service has cost the lives of nearly 2,000 U.S. service members and resulted in another 17,519 being injured. Yet the war seems to have fallen from headlines in our national conscience. This is wrong.
"We cannot afford another $100 billion on a war that will never result in stability in Afghanistan or the region. War against Afghanistan boomeranged against the Soviet Union. It's boomeranging against our country.
"When you look at the amount of money that is being spent not just for the war but the United States Pentagon -- we are looking at a Fiscal 2013 budget of $653 billion, spending almost more money than every other country in the world, combined, for so-called defense.
"We have an obligation to defend our country, but we also have an obligation for housing, for health care, for education, for retirement security.
"If you're concerned about Congress regaining authority under Article 1, Section 8, then we should be voting to end this war right now by striking the money for it.
"If you are concerned about the debt, then we should be voting to end this war by taking money away from funding and then you could contribute that to resolving the debt.
"If you are concerned about emboldening radicals in other countries, who are following in the wake of our invasions, then we should be taking the money out of this Continuing Resolution for more war.
"If you're concerned about the budget: that it doesn't have enough for jobs and housing and health care and education and the energy and the environment, then end the war now, vote against it.
"If you're concerned about America taking steps to create peace, then we should get this money out of this budget which creates more war.
"This is the time for us to reclaim our country, which we are losing not just to war but to a national security state, like yesterday when we voted as a House -- I voted against it -- to empower security agencies to be able to intercept the phone calls of anybody in the United States who makes calls internationally.
"We have got to reclaim our nation. This Continuing Resolution doesn't do it. This is the same old, same old, same old:.war and national security state, forget the real needs of the American people.
"I am going to vote against this rule and I am going to vote against the underlying bill."
Today, August 1, 2012 - 224 years after the Constitution was ratified - Congress is presiding over the disestablishment of the Postal Service.
Today a manufactured default created by Congressional legislation is pushing the Postal Service to the brink.
Today the Postal Service will not make a payment that it should never have had to make in the first place to pay for prefunding 75 years of retiree benefits in 10 years. A manufactured default encouraged by banks and other interest groups. A move toward privatization of one of America's most vital services.
The Congress has a responsibility to stand up, but here in the U.S.A., under Citizens United, everything is up for auction including the Postal Service.
Wake up, America. Universal service is on the line. Wake up, America and stand up for the Constitution. 575,000 Postal Service workers and our obligation to the American people to see to it that the Postal Service is rescued from those who want to push it into default or privatize it for their own profit.
America needs to get back to work. If that's what my friends are saying on the other side of the aisle say, then we're together on that. America has to get back to work, but we are going to get back to work while having water that's not safe to drink? Air that's not safe to breathe? We are going to get back to work by having products that you don't know if your pets can consume them? Are we going to get back to work having to worry about when we go to various salad bars if it's something we can consume, whether or not there's a proper food inspection? Are we going to get America back to work by not checking on airplane safety? Is that how we get America back to work? Come on!
There are certain regulations that are absolutely fundamental to running an organized society, whether you are a Democrat or a Republican. I understand wedge issues. This is a political climate. But let's not mix up this mutual concern that we have about creating jobs in this country by trying to score some points saying, 'well, you know, there are regulations that are bad.' I'm sure there are regulations that don't work.
I am not someone who believes the government has the solution to everything. I know better than that. I have been here for 16 years, I understand that much. But I know one other thing, when you take a broad approach to try to knock out regulations, you're looking for trouble. You're going to create trouble and that's what this bill does. I'm urging a no vote, and I'll have more to say on an amendment.
Let's look at some recent history here. 2008: subprime meltdown, collateralized debt obligation, go back for mortgage-backed securities, neighborhoods in Cleveland melting down, people losing their homes. The Fed looked the other way and we're saying, "oh, don't go into the Fed, it would be political."
Yes, it's political. We have unemployment because of politics. We have people losing their homes because of politics. We have banks getting uncalculated amounts of money from the Federal Reserve and we don't even know about it. Meanwhile people can't get a loan to keep their home or keep their business.
Audit the Fed? You bet we should audit the Fed. We have to have accountability. It's time that Congress stood for its Constitutional role: Article 1, Section 8, the power to coin or create money.
It's time we stood up for America's 99%. It's time that we stood up to the Federal Reserve that right now acts like it's some kind of high exalted priesthood, unaccountable in a democracy.
Let's change that by voting for the Paul Bill.
Recent events remind us how important monetary policy is to our economy. The ever-deepening scandal involving the fraudulent manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate ("LIBOR") reminds us that the international financial system is cloaked in shadow for the benefit of the banks, at the expense of the people. Remember, it took a lawsuit by Bloomberg News to force the Fed to reveal that it had created more than $7 trillion to rescue the banks during the financial crisis.
We already know that the Federal Reserve had knowledge of the Libor scheme, at least as far back as 2007. During the financial crises of 2008 and in the aftermath, the Federal Reserve extended extraordinary support to financial institutions that crashed the economy with reckless speculation, and on that support many of the firms made billions in profit and paid obscene bonuses. I fought hard to have the partial audit included in the Dodd-Frank and we learned about some of the Fed's responses to the fiscal crisis, but we need to learn the full extent of the Fed's activities.
The Fed should not be permitted to operate in the dark without oversight by Congress and accountability to the people. The American people deserve no less than a full and complete audit.
The Federal Reserve wants to stay independent; independent of the Constitution, independent of Congressional oversight and independent of the rule of law. We can't let that happen. It's time to audit the fed.
Parents are not informed that their children are given the test. High school students do not know they don't have to take the test. Most school administrators are unaware that administration of the test is optional. They do not know that personal information does not have to be sent to military recruiters.
It is honorable to serve America in the military and I urge young people to find ways to serve our country. But students, parents and high school administrators need to protect students' rights to privacy and the right of parents to be involved in life-changing decisions by their children.
Students, schools and parents should be informed of their rights regarding this test. Students have a right to privacy and we must not have big government gathering personal information on young Americans, particularly without their knowledge or permission
Learn more about your rights here: http://www.acluohio.org/sga/studentrights/asvab.asp