When Did We Become A Monarchy?

Dear editor:

The headlines nationally are quite striking, Iraqi Lawmakers Extend Agreement With U.S. Military for 3 Years. In an amazing vote, the Iraqi Parliament approved the Status of Forces Agreement that charts the way for the U.S. Military to stay in their country until the end of 2011. The pact also restricts the powers of the U.S. military to detain Iraqi citizens and conduct military operations. It further holds American soldiers accountable under Iraqi law for certain crimes committed when off duty.

Whether this is a good or bad international pact is not the amazing part. What is amazing is that it reflects the will of the elected representatives of a democratic society as opposed to the wishes and agreement of a single monolithic dictator. Iraqis have come a long way.

But look at the other side of this agreement. What about the American people’s representatives and their views on this pact? Pardon me, but President Bush, the big believer of bringing democracy to the world, has stated that Congress does not have the right or necessity to approve or disapprove this treaty since he is the “commander in chief,” and this is supposedly a military issue. Evidently he feels that the U.S. Senate is not as worthy as the Iraqi Congress.

One only has to look at Article 2, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which I thought was still in effect, for clarification. It states “He (the president) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.” Without this legally binding Advice and Consent, according to our Constitution, this Status of Forces Agreement is just a piece of paper. And our representatives and senators should say so and use the power of the purse string to do so.

The rule of law, if not applied at all times, is worthless. We do not have a monarch who decides our international agreements, even though our current president seems to think he is. Here is hoping and believing that January 20th will change us back to a democracy and make us at least as free as Iraqi citizens, who we should evidently take a lesson from.

Genius Is More Than Just Timing

Letter to Newsweek Magazine

Dear editor:

Malcolm Gladwell’s assumption (Maybe Geniuses Just Got Lucky, Nov. 24th) that timing has more to do with above the norm accomplishment than the genius of a person evidently is the thinking and writing of a man trying to justify his own shortcomings.

I guess Einstein, Mozart, Copernicus, Moses and Jesus were all just “lucky,” according to the author, to be born in the years they were, rather than recognized for the exceptional works they accomplished. According to Gladwell: the world was waiting for someone (Einstein) to explain relativity; Mozart filled a timing void for a five year old musical genius; Copernicus came into being just when everyone wanted to find out the truth about the sun being stationary and the earth revolved around it, Moses was “lucky” to give up his standing with Pharaoh and lead the Jews out of Egyptian slavery; and Jesus was so “lucky” in timing to be crucified.

How ridiculous.

Bailout General Motors?

Dear editor:

We hear it every day. If the auto industry does not receive some bailout help from the federal government one or all three of the Big Three American automakers will go into bankruptcy. They are running out of money. General Motors alone, if bankrupt could threaten the livelihood of about 100,000 North American autoworkers. The failure of GM or one of the other companies could wipe out 2.5 million jobs, including associated industries, and $125 billion in personal income in the first 12 months, according to a report by the Center for Automotive Research. Needless to say, this is frightening news.

But, how did this happen? Is it all because of the meltdown of the financial markets and the tightening of credit? Is it all because of the loss of a million jobs that has caused a fear of buying in the American public that now is “playing it safe” and close to the vest? Or are these the final straws that broke the camel’s back after decades of poor management decisions? Did labor unions play a part in this by demands that tied the financial hands of management with the need to keep raising the prices of cars to cover retirement and health care for current and previous employees? Is it the fault of the American auto industry for not realizing the change in the desire of the purchasing public that drove them into the arms of foreign made cars? Is the problem exacerbated by the fact that Japanese and Korean cars have taken the lead in making fuel efficient cars with American manufacturers playing follow the leader? The answer to all of these questions is a resounding “YES.” All of the above.

So where do we go from here? Will a $50 billion bailout loan to the industry from Congress and the President solve these problems? Or will it be throwing good money after bad into a deep hole that will change nothing? Will it be “business as usual” in Detroit that won’t be solved by a meaningless cut in executive pay? What will our government be buying with this hard earned taxpayer money? Why is this day different than all other days?

Perhaps $50 Billion should be loaned with the stipulation that the old management and decision makers are swept out of the control, put on the unemployment lines, and a new hand-picked group of experienced executives be named by the government (not political insiders and big donators) to take these companies into a new direction.

Or perhaps, and you’ll pardon my cynicism, we should let GM go bankrupt, put those new executives in, free them from the old contracts and debts and let them start out fresh. Maybe by doing this, 2.5 million jobs can be saved and American ingenuity can once again gain the upper hand and we can rescue our most important manufacturing industry. I know this is a rather simplistic solution, but it might work and be the cheapest way to handle things.

Socialism Not A Stranger in U.S.

Dear editor:

Socialism. A word, along with Marxism, that has been bandied about in accusations against the President-elect of the United States. Does anyone using that word know the meaning of it? Has it ever existed, and successfully, in the United States? Are parts of it good or bad?

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary the word socialism means: “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration.” Once again, has it ever existed, and successfully, in the United States? Do any of our laws and actions fit this classic definition?

Let’s see. There’s Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, FHA loans, VA loans, the building and administration of the Hoover Dan, the building and administration of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the WPA which put millions to work during the depression, FICA, Unemployment Insurance, a progressive tax system that takes a higher income tax percentage from the wealthy than from the middle and lower classes, and the latest forms of socialism used by the current administration, exchanging $700 billion in bailout for stock ownership of banks, lending billions to AIG and companies of that same ilk to stave off possible bankruptcies, and all the bailouts (like GM/Chrysler) yet to come as our economy goes deeper into recession. Were they all good or all bad ideas? Were they all perfect in their execution? Of course not. But, they all have one thing in common, as they fit the classic definition of socialism and they represent efforts to improve the financial life of our country and its citizens, even though I may not agree with all those actions.

Also, let’s not forget the quasi-governmental corporations that our federal/state/local governments either own, administer or control, such as the U.S. Postal System, Conrail, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, utilities, transportation systems such as MARTA, BART and the New York Subway System. Under a pure, perfect capitalistic society these would not exist and it would have to be provided for by private industry. All of these entities effect our daily lives and are socialistic in nature.

Ours is not a perfect financial system. If it were, there would be no highs and lows to our economy. We have a system that mixes many models of economy with an effort to find the middle ground that in one way or another fits our financial needs, whether they be capitalistic or socialistic.. Have we been 100% successful yet? No! Will we ever have a perfect system? The odds are against it. Are we threatened with a financial meltdown due to our huge national debt of over $11 trillion (and growing?) In the words of a recent candidate for national office, “You betcha.”

So do we have to somehow change course and find small solutions that add up to big ones? Absolutely! But throwing around charges of “socialism” and “Marxism” at someone trying to help the country (and Lord knows we need help) accomplishes nothing. Especially when you don’t know what in the world you are talking about.