Gingrich, Wildmon and Judicial Activism, Oh My!

Newt Gingrich secured a major endorsement from the social conservative community Tuesday with a nod from Mississippi-based Rev. Donald E. Wildmon, founder and chairman of American Family Association.

"Newt Gingrich recognizes the threat to our country posed by judges and lawyers imposing values upon the country inconsistent with our religious heritage, and has proposed constitutional steps to bring the courts back in balance under the constitution," Wildmon said in a statement. "We need someone in the White House who can balance the budget and get the economy moving again. Newt has done it before and I believe he can do it again."

Gingrich accepted Wildom's endorsement, calling him "one of the most important leaders in the country in the battle to uphold our founding principles."

For those who aren’t familiar with this organization, listed as a right wing organization by RightWatch, the AFA fights against less than wholesome television programming, the separation of church and state, pornography, "the homosexual agenda," premarital sex, legal abortion, the National Endowment for the Arts, gambling, unfiltered internet access in libraries, and the removal of school-sponsored religious worship from public schools, while opposing workplace equality.

Until 2005, a major target of AFA's had been Disney and its subsidiaries; "Disney's attack on America's families has become so blatant, so intentional, so obvious, that American Family Association has called for a boycott of all Disney products until such time as this activity ceases."  The AFA called off the boycott conveniently when Eisner resigned as CEO to focus on other causes.

The American Family Association (AFA) alerts its members to companies who are supportive of GLBT employees and asks "Christian consumers…to think twice before they patronize companies that support the homosexual agenda."  AFA list includes major corporations that have non-discrimination policies that include sexual orientation or that offer domestic-partner benefits for same-sex couples, including Eastman Kodak, Citigroup, PepsiCo., American Airlines, Allstate Insurance, and the Coca-Cola Company. In fact, it isn’t hard to find these policies at most Fortune 500 companies keeping the AFA busy alerting its members.  

Workplace equality is a focus for most, if not all, successful large companies to avoid legal battles, recruit the best employees, and create an environment of success for its shareholders.  Creatively this target of attacking large companies provides Wildmon a continuous income stream from donors, tax-deductible in most cases, for his efforts while he rarely has to answer for his lack of success.  If an assessment were done, the AFA, while having momentary successes along the way, has consistently lost ground to his opposition in nearly every political cause.  He would be replaced in corporate America to retire in obscurity, angry, and watching Faux News.

Wildmon has created a draconian empire by reinterpreting Biblical teachings to adhere to traditional beliefs of censorship and discrimination.  His lifetime dedication to opposing the homosexual agenda suggests that only he knows what that agenda is.  He and his employees articulate discredited information as fact when it comes to gays and lesbians thus creating poisonous political environments where his organization flourishes.

The sole reason Wildmon is endorsing Gingrich is in the belief that Gingrich will actively pursue impeachment of judges who are deemed “activist”.  Examples of judicial activism include:

·                    Brown v. Board of Education - 1954 Supreme Court ruling ordering the desegregation of public schools.^[15]

·                    Roe v. Wade - 1973 Supreme Court ruling decriminalizing abortion.^[16]

·                    Bush v. Gore - The landmark United States Supreme Court case between the major-party candidates in the 2000 presidential election, George W. Bush and Al Gore. The judges voted along ideological lines, 5-4, to halt the recount of ballots in Florida and, in effect, elect Bush President.^[17]

·                    Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - 2010 Supreme Court decision overturning Congressionally enacted limitations on corporate political spending and transparency.^[18]

·                    Perry v. Schwarzenegger - 2010 decision by federal judge Vaughn R. Walker overturning California's constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.^[19]

Judicial activism is used as a pejorative normally reserved by conservatives when they lose an argument in court.  The Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that corporations were individuals thus giving corporations the rights to donate to political action committees, thus greatly changing the financing of political elections.  This court wasn’t called activist.   Yet, judges who identify people as having more rights than voters felt they deserved are called activist.  Robert Green articulates the importance of Judicial Activism “is vital to any legal system that (like ours) contains broad judicial discretion.”  Judicial activism has no inherent link to boosting liberty over the majority or curbs governmental power specifically.

To quell the idea of judicial activism, as Gingrich is demanding, is to refuse to consider how inclusive the concept of “We, the People” has become over time, since its initial writing of the Preamble.  At its origin, it included land owning individuals.  Later it include Blacks, then women, then those others who identified that certain rights were being denied them.  This process of the progression of law would end under Gingrich. 

Allison Kilkenny in 2009, during Sotomayor’s Senate hearing to become a Supreme Court Justice, Senator Jeff Sessions complained Sotomayor would bring empathy to the court and be an activist jurist.   Kilkenny identifies Scalia and Thomas as wildly ideologically partisan yet they escape being labeled “activist”.   Certainly, conservative judges are as activist as liberal judges — just for different causes.

Wildmon’s political support of Gingrich is a last ditch effort of a crazy man to stop the progress in the fight for the legalization of Gay Marriage.  Several legal fights are headed to the Supreme Court where Gay Marriage could become legal.  In his panic, he endorses someone who clearly does not value Marriage as an institution, in the hopes of denying that institution to others.   Certainly, politics makes strange bed fellows. 

Wildom recognizes that demographically, he will continue to lose to the acceptance in America of the LGBT community.  His only hope is to radically reduce judiciary power through Presidential or Congressional action to stop the progress.  Rather than allow progress, he would endorse a democratic poison pill.  Placing the judiciary under Presidential review would destroy the liberal democracy that we currently enjoy.

Presidential Review of the Judiciary to hinder judges from using their own experience, perspective, and thought, while balancing it with the law, hinders what I define as mercy.  When a judge refrains from considering the personal and simply regurgitates politically compromised law with an accompanied punishment, without being mindful of the merits of mercy, then all that is left is judgment, not justice.  And, without justice, the people perish.

This is one more bad idea from Gingrich.  And, it only took Wildmon to support it for me to carefully consider it and understand it as a true threat to America’s future.

http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=roger_craig_green

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allison-kilkenny/every-judge-is-an-activis_b_230696.html

Three Trillion in Revenue and Savings - in Three Hours!

This last week the Super Committee made up of Republicans and Democrats surprised no one at their failure to identify revenue and cost cutting measures that would create a more responsible fiscal federal budget for the coming decade.  I was disgusted and greatly disappointed that these politicians chose to risk the poor, the elderly, and families for the traditional political football of special interests.

In an effort to identify places savings and revenue for a more balanced approach, I challenged myself to identify areas where a majority of Americans would agree to take action.  I avoided the issue of Social Security entitlements.  I ignored the argument about the Bush tax cuts, because with a do nothing Congress, I want to consider the elimination of this tax break for more wealthy Americans a strategy for 2012, and more of a bonus.  I avoided discussion of an income tax deduction on the top 1% of Americans, or an increase on the bottom 99%.  These three strategic discussions would create a budgetary impasse rather than a budgetary impact.  Each of these topics could individually be addressed in future blogs.

Yet, if I can identify over $1.2 Trillion in an evening, I reason, shouldn’t our elected leaders be accomplish the same in a few weeks?  My only requirement is that these items must be acceptable to at least 60% of the American Public.   My secret goal was $4 trillion.

My strategy included a time limit.  I would begin after enjoying a holiday movie with my sister and my mother.  This would assure that I would have a heart full of cheer and avoid the spirit of Scrooge.  As I saw “The End” on the flat screen, I started my endeavor.  I leapt to the internet and typed “Super Committee suggested cuts.”   I reviewed three different groups and their suggestions, writing down the reports and proposals from the White House, the House of Representatives, the Office of Management and Budget, the US Treasury, the IRS, The Department of Defense, the General Accounting Office, to name a few. 

While the numbers in these reports may only address one year of savings, or perhaps a four year stretch, I identify already reported amounts to be considered.  I used basic arithmetic (addition and subtraction).  In order to assure accurate savings over the next decade, I used basic multiplication to complete a 10 year savings or revenue stream.  So as not to confuse or use political fuzzy math, I did not use a net present value calculation or a future value calculation.  If that calculation was used in the original report, it is not corrected in my report.

To my surprise, I even identified a potential revenue stream under the EPA, a department Governor Perry could not even name in a national debate.  But, then again, I am for breathing clean air, having pothole free roads, and food that doesn’t kill you.  I like to consider myself a common sense American.

All of the subsidies, loopholes, and ‘deals’ eliminated are calculated over 10 years unless it was a lesser number of years, or a one time cost cutting.  It is assumed that if these expenses are currently being spent that it is likely the cost would be continued through the next 10 years, whether currently expected to be dropped or not, due to the impasse in Congress.  Please see the web site footnotes for further information…  And, I hope you will forgive the lack of professional columns.  I did have a time limit!

And in three hours, this is what I found I could either raise or reduce!

Federal Trade Commission – Eliminate pay-for-delay drug deals -   $   2.67 billion

Defense –

Reduce the Use of High-Risk Contracts, Increase Competition and Improve Contract Oversight per the White House                                      $400 Billion

End Orders for Obsolete Spare Parts and Supplies as determined by the GAO for:

The Defense Logistics Agency and the Armed Forces             $ 70 Billion

The Army                                                                    $ 36 Billion

The Navy                                                                     $ 74 Billion

The Air Force                                                              $ 186 Billion

                                                Defense Savings          $776 Billion

Medicare & Medicaid -

            Eliminate Payment Errors                               $   65 Billion Savings

            Reduce Geographic Disparities in Medicare Provider Payments

                                                                                    $   11 Billion Savings

            Better Align Payments to Teaching Hospitals Based on Actual Costs

                                                                                    $   48 Billion Savings

            Implement Information Technology Solutions

$   14 Billion Savings

            Allow Medicare to Pay Medicaid Prescription Drug Rates

$100 Billion Savings

                                                Medicare & Medicaid Savings $ 238 Billion

EPA

            Reinstate Superfund Fee on Polluters                        $ 8 billion in Revenues

Homeland Security

            Reduce the Use of Offshore Tax Havens for Tax Avoidance and Evasion

                                                $ 1 trillion Revenue (That’s a “T” for Tea Party)

Eliminate Homeland Security Contracts Already Identified as Wasteful by the House

$ 340 Billion

                                                Homeland Security Savings   $ 1,340 Billion

Department Energy

            Eliminate Oil & Gas Subsidies                   $ 38 billion

Tax Savings

            Close Carried Interest Loophole                     $   31 billion

            International Tax Reforms                              $ 557 billion

            Delinquent Taxes from Contractors                $   38 billion

                        Other Tax Savings                            $ 626 billion

Total Savings in first two hours of research          

$3 Trillion Dollars over the next decade!

Footnotes:

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM110_091221_reform_fact_sheet.html

http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2507&catid=44:legislation
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-469
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09199.pdf
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09103.pdf
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07232.pdf
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/tg506.htm
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/ftt-revenue-2009-12.pdf
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/tables.pdf
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08617.pdf
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07742t.pdf
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/tables.pdf
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2008/071708PSIReport.pdf
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/10/06/18/Do-Not-Pay-Do-Read-This-Post/
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=9925
http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2507&catid=44:legislation

Taxation Inequality, Income Inequality, and the Occupy Movement

I volunteer my time impacting communities that face discrimination.  I share my time, give from what I have, and contribute what I can.  I spend my time urging change, convince others to move beyond themselves, and plant ideas of hope, growth and opportunity.  I worry about the growing numbers of seniors living in poverty, the growing numbers of those in their 40s and 50s living just above poverty with no ability to save for their retirements.  I work to create opportunities through a chamber.

My fear is that the result of my efforts is effectively countered by the negative impact of the tax changes the federal government has assaulted Americans with over the last three decades continue.  Democrats and Republicans have been complicit in the effects

.

From 1979 and 2005, the mean after-tax income for the top 1% increased by 176%, compared to an increase of 69% for the top quintile overall, 20% for the fourth quintile, 21% for the middle quintile, 17% for the second quintile and 6% for the bottom quintile. (see http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=957)  Decreased labor union political clout, accompanied with major decreases in social services, redistribution programs and entitlements have exacerbated the trend.  Certainly there are determinants that economists would add but the dizzying drop of the tax rates to income and capital gains has created the most significant mayhem.

Americans have the highest income inequality in the rich world and over the past 20–30 years Americans have experienced the greatest increase in income inequality among developed nations. The more detailed the data, the more divergent the change appears.  If you weren’t aware, the richest are getting much richer.

Public policy and partisan politics are the root factors causing Americas growing inequality.  Education, labor force, and demographic changes can be ruled out as the causes of the widening gap between the rich and the poor.  Simply, the U.S. is unique in having experienced such a rise in inequality – a trend that, if caused by education, labor force, and demographic factors, would have manifested itself in other developed nations.

Congress needs to learn the art of sharing.  Reducing taxes on the wealthiest of Americans and receiving huge PAC donations isn’t sharing.  It is a simple transaction.  Sharing is a principle that should be applied to the tax debate more appropriately.  When Warren Buffett pays less of a percentage of his adjusted gross income than my mother, it is unfair.  The wealthy should not pay 15% when the poor pay more than 25%.   The wealthy should share in the burdens of America – the wars, the fight in global warming, the education of our young, and the responsibility to address the care of our seniors.  They should not require a discount simply because of their wealth.

There is no question in my mind why the Occupy movement has started.  It is simply a poorly focused movement.  Consider occupying Congress, along with every Congressional office, every congressional meeting, and every meeting where a congressman will meet with constituents around the country until elected officials address tax policy to the betterment of the American majority.  That way Rep. Cantor can explain to Americans how he can allow more and more Americans to end up in poverty, simply by tax policy results, and yet he continues to advocate for it.

For years, I have worked with individuals and business owners to plan for their financial future.  I assist them to invest what they have earned, after the costs of living.  I work with them to address future risks and help them insure against the unexpected.  Unfortunately, current federal tax policy and the widening gap continues to diminish the group of people I can serve and inevitably everyone but the richest will join the growing group of individuals and professionals who have become the victims of this sad strategic policy of Congressional tax policy.

The Pope, The Church, Continuing the legacy of discrimination

Pope Benedict said on Saturday the Catholic Church could not accept gay marriage and urged young people to root out evil in society and shun a "lukewarm" faith that damages their Church.

The 84-year-old pope ended the third day in his homeland with a rally telling young people, “The world in which we live, in spite of its technical progress, does not seem to be getting any better. There is still war and terror, hunger and disease, bitter poverty and merciless oppression."

He urged them to root out all forms of evil in society and not to be "lukewarm Christians," saying that lack of commitment to faith did more damage to their Church than its sworn enemies. Most can agree with vague anti-war/anti-hunger statements. What to put on an “evil” list is another matter.
Unfortunately, gay marriage is near the top on his “evil” list, right beneath gays and lesbians themselves. Pope Benedict continues to provide a layer of justification for violence, harm, and discrimination against gays and lesbians. He blames lukewarm faith for damaging the Church rather than its own mediocre layers of leadership within its ranks, years of official deception before pedophilia in the media and its long opposition to promoting safer sex for its adherents.

The Church is to be admired for its liturgy and mantras of peace, opposing war and terror, hunger and disease, bitter poverty and merciless oppression. It reminds the world, like a religious Successories company promoting noble ideas to fight evil and be kind. But, like so many institutions, the devil is in the details.

Pope Benedict regularly makes pronouncements opposing Gay Marriage. He now condones condoms to prevent the spread of HIV and other diseases, but only as a last resort, and after two decades of pressure and education from those within the church, from organizations and governments. It was essentially a move to help the Church save face. Brazil, a heavily catholic country, has now purchased millions of condoms to slow the spread of HIV in its country. The Pope is practical, if not prophetic. He still considered wearing a condom a sin, but it is a lesser sin than spreading HIV.

The Catholic of good and evil includes extensive nuances which are exhaustive, dated, and at times – by current independent thought, wrong. Should a conversation about good and evil occur between Pope Benedict and the Supreme Leader of Iran, there would be little in which to argue, except perhaps the prosecution of the sins.

The Pope’s opposition to Gay Marriage is based on scripture narrowly interpreted and history blinding him, rather than with a mind open to God. Research into psychology, physiology, sociology, and other studies have identified in recent decades that homosexuality is not disability or an abnormality. In fact, until the 1600s, the Church never used the term abnormal or unnatural in relation to anything that wasn’t spiritual in nature. It never used the word homosexual until the last century.

Much of the anti-gay angst is based on the ancient story of Sodom and Gomorrah. This is a short story in the Bible and the Quran which scholarly leaders use to justify the vilification of gays and lesbians. Scholars of the Bible and Quran insist that these cities were populated only by gay people. This is simply ludicrous.

The Pope could correct this mistake. The story was an indictment of people who were simply wicked, hateful, and inhospitable and should be destroyed. Instead, as with human nature, scholars had to find a scapegoat.

The failure of leadership in the thoughts and context where the Pope fails to grasp God’s intent for those who are gay and lesbian starts in the Genesis (1:27) and ends with a comment from Saint Paul (Galations 3:28). God created us (all of us) in His image. What is his image? Simply, it is Spirit and Truth. And, in the New Testament, if you are Christian, Christ is who’s we are, therefore arguments based on gender, status or bloodline are inconsequential. Therefore to whom you are married is inconsequential, what is of import is that we love.

The actions of the Catholic Church demonstrate an entrenched strategy promoting priestly pedophiles and out of touch statements of belief. Advances in education, research and science continue to correct doctrinal teaching of many of the Catholic edicts of the last 5 centuries. The values of Love, Charity, Peace, and Faith don’t change, but the rules imposed in the interpretation of those values can.

The Pope and the Church supports discrimination against gays and lesbians. The Pope opposes the decriminalization of homosexuality at the UN. He opposes gay marriage. He opposes gays in leadership within his organization. With these values, he provides cover for countries, political leaders, and individuals to persecute or prosecute those who simply were made in God’s image, and found themselves born in the wrong country to express their love.

The Pope could reduce merciless oppression, war and terror tremendously by merely practicing acts of compassion and inclusion. He could reduce oppression by openly including gays and lesbians into the Catholic family. He could travel throughout Africa preaching inclusion, peace and acceptance. He could perform a gay wedding.

I pray for the day when a Pope, dressed in the garb he wears, starts to sing “We are Family”. That would be a day when life truly would get better.

Tea Party Policy Goals Will Lead to Economic Slavery

I have been observing the impact and results of the Tea Party Movement since its development by Fox News, the Kohn brothers, and other neo-conservatives who had lost their positions of power. In 2009, I watched, with curiosity, the passion of everyday families willing to push for a new agenda. I hoped that their public education would win out over the media manipulation of special interests from the most extreme within our country. Their policies of desperation and deficit spending denial could cause a recession within a year.

Tea Party activists believe they are moving into a world where they will have less than their parents. They want to do something drastic to change America's direction. They know major changes have to occur and that special interests must be curbed. They want to save America. And, they are right. Unfortunately their strategies, goals, and focus - if successful - will only lead to America's destruction or a return to a distant past we left. They have bought the snake oil salesman's elixir and have nothing but poison in a bottle.

The calls for major cuts in every area of the government's budget is welcome. Forcing governmental agencies to review where and how they spend tax dollars is necessary. Reviewing decades old regulations and updating those regulations, upgrading benefit calculations, and curtailing spending should be done. It should be done based on community priorities, updated information, changes in expectations, and national strategy. Simply demanding Cut, Cap And Balance doesn't provide incentives, change, or development of a concrete conversation for America. Nor does it allow America the flexibility to make creative and inventive solutions that it needs to remain in leadership in the future.

Cutting safety nets for Americans will increase volatility of economic cycles, create larger pools of poverty in America, increase mortality, devastate families barely managing to remain in the Middle Class. Simply capping the growth of some expenses won't make those expenses disappear, it will simply create a growing "haves and have not" class in America. And, forcing the government to balance the budget without being a party willing to raise income taxes on the most affluent in America reduces America to a third world country in a matter of decades.

Attacking social programs that support the most needy, being uncompromising at the expense of stability, the growing support for a more racist, less diverse agenda, and stronger "might is right" process abhors me.

I applaud the Tea Party focus on the checkbook. Yet, the attack on medicare and social security shows they would sell out their mother if the budget couldn't afford it. That is immoral. They also tend to forget investment is necessary in any budget or you kill your future. And, the attacks on unions is the ultimate exposure of the tea party. Unions were what assisted in the growth of the great middle class of America. The disgust by which Tea Party leaders have for unions, in and out of government, shows the true distaste for American workers, the middle class and 90% of Americans.

It is clear that the god of the Tea Party is Ann Rand. She may be the Anti-christ many in America have been awaiting. Ann Rand considers employees to be parasites! It is elitism to its darkest capitalistic conclusion. Eric Cantor is her current high priest. Do we want an America based on an ant structure? This belief should not be a part of the American make up. America honors the idea that all people are equal, no matter who they are. No matter their social status or status in business (whether employer or employee). If the Tea Party Agenda moves forward America will be longer be able to be called a society for and by the people when it's social policy becomes "everyone out for themselves". To worship "job creators" and despise workers is immoral. It is the reverse of Communism and the most extreme expression of Capitalism. It is a return to slavery.

Stop Calling Immigrants Illegal. Unless you want to be called Traitor to the American Dream.

Written March 27, 2011

Recently, a friend of the family wrote, “I am all for foreigners coming to this country, but they better do it legally. There have been many foreigners in the past who have had to pay a great price to become legal aliens. If we just left anybody in, that makes a mockery of how much the legals had to sacrifice to come here legally...”

For awhile, I was completely confused by the statement. Then I started to unravel it. Without realizing it, this friend of my family had exposed the very war currently being waged within America. While I won't address my concerns about calling any naturalized citizen a legal alien, instead of an American, there is a bigger issue.

When I was growing up, I watched movies with my parents that included “In the Army” which starred Ronald Reagan. It was a movie showcasing the diversity of America, the power of its communities, its inclusiveness in a dream. It showcased people who served in World War I, and their families serving in World War II. And, the diverse immigrants that were in the movie was dizzying for that time.

In a world where Ronald Reagan has replaced the Statue of Liberty as our most cherished of symbols, America is quickly returning to its glory days before the rise of the populist movement. We have embraced a strategy of lowering taxes on those making billions, while raising the real costs of living for those who are less fortunate. Rising gas prices and food prices continue to erode the bottom 100 million working in America today. Yet, many continue to believe in a failed 30 year strategy of lowering income taxes in hopes the economy will respond and the rich will save America.

Currently the top 400 richest families earned what the bottom 100 million families earned combined. In America, 400 should not equal 100 million. Not by any math. It is easy to understand. Everyone wants to keep what they earn and pay a fair share to maintain this great land. Yet, these two groups have targeted different areas to achieve a greater share for themselves. The 400 families have focused on tax policy and reducing to 35% the national income tax from a top 94% (to help pay for World War II), while the bottom 100 million are clamoring to defend our borders, and shut out those who enter our society at the bottom to keep what little they have.

The poem associated with the Statue of Liberty includes the phrase,
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Our policy of immigration led to the great growth of America. People moved here who yearned for freedom. Were there challenges? Yes. Were they discriminated against? Yes.

Yet today, we rebuff them, dehumanize them, and politicians use them as fodder for their political ends. The light of Liberty remains a beacon to all of those who live under the worst of conditions outside of this great country. But, many of those who come to our land are unaware how America has created hurdles to the land of the free.

How can those from other countries, lacking education, yet desiring a better life for their children, know that we can legally impoverish others, force them to access medical assistance via the most expensive sources, and deny them redress if they don’t have financial resources?

America opens its banquet of plenty for every major emergency, but we don’t want transplants. If your home is too dangerous to live in, stay there and fix it. In fact, we’ll send our military to help, even if we helped create the problem. We are the land that coined the phrase, “Give me liberty or give me death”. And, we mean it. If you don’t have liberty where you are, we are fine with the idea that you may be persecuted and die.

It is an unchristian thing we, as a country do. We are proud as Americans for being a beacon of hope, yet, for those who now come to us poor and speaking Spanish, we ask them to return home. I believe America is capable of so much more. Yet, instead, we are more worried about billionaires keeping 2% more off their wealth, rather than feeding the hungry, clothing the sick, comforting the weak, or addressing our infrastructure.

We must stop attacking those who come to America seeking hope, health and a new life. We should develop an immigration policy that includes a process for those who are undocumented that is not punitive or out of reach of those who are poor. The current policy is broken. It is simply a policy of “sorry, go home”.

America faces a shortage in the Social Security Trust Fund, Medicare is hemorrhaging, there are limited resources to address long term care issues for an aging population, and a shrinking workforce. While immigration cannot fix everything (changes in tax policy would be needed), addressing immigration with our South American neighbors could restore the beacon of hope.

America has abundant resources and enough initiative and strength to accommodate those who want to join in the dream. Those who think America is limited in our abilities or would deny them to those who want to join are simply Un-American.

I am a proud compromiser.

I am a proud compromiser.

I allow people to pull ahead of me in traffic.  I may flip them off because they cut me off, but I don't drive headlong into their rear bumper.

I allow women to go ahead of me, as I open a door.  Not because they need to go before me, but because my dad would come back from the dead and give me a severe spanking if I didn't.

I often don't get my way.  I don't get the first parking spot, I don't get to attend the concert of my dreams and sit in the front row, I don't get to go on a cruise every year.  But, I don't attack those who focus on those benefits as necessary for their lives to be complete.  I don't reject the idea that concert halls, sports arenas, and schools need to be built even when I can't afford the events and won't every have children that attend them.

If I wasn't a compromiser, I would vote down every school bond issue, saying I don't get a benefit, and that my taxes shouldn't go to where I don't get a direct benefit.  Families should pay for their children, and not get a tax break for them.  If they are stupid enough to have four children, let them be charged a surtax for any about two.  But, I don't go around attacking school budgets.  In fact, I would prefer that my share of school taxes go to music programs.  But, unfortunately few music programs have survived.

I am comfortable paying into social security, knowing others who haven't been as successful have safety nets for themselves.  I think everyone should have to save for their retirement, but I understand that people sometimes have life events that destroy their hopes and dreams.  I would require that companies be forced to contribute 6% of all salaries, and that employees were forced to contribute 8% into a retirement plan.  And, rather than simply wish them dead, I am proud I belong to a country that will help those who need assistance throughout their lifetimes.  I am proud that social security provides living assistance to women who are old, who weren't given chances to compete with men only 20 years ago, and that social security - while discriminating against those women based on their incomes, or their dead husbands, still provides something.

I felt the implementation of Medicare Part D was a terrible idea, with many problems, which have been supported by the data.  Yet, I still provided education about it to my clients. And helped 90 year olds understand they had to use the internet.  And, I did it for free.

I felt that Medicare Part D should be improved by allowing Medicare to negotiate for all drugs, not just at the insurance company level, which would provide a better benefit to seniors.  But I am glad that seniors now have an updated Medicare solution, though the costs could be reduced.  I would compromise by creating  more efficient solutions that benefit all Americans, not just those who are related to the Pharmaceutical companies.

I don't always agree with the majority (in fact rarely - because stupidity normally wins in a democracy), but I work toward a community of shared values, giving freely of my time.  I opposed both wars, even to the point when others called me a traitor, and experienced suspicion for my beliefs.  I was placed on the terrorist watch list for over four years by the Bush Administration.  Yet, everyone who knows me knows that I would never be violent.

I opposed the creation of Homeland Security because I felt it was the seedling of a new introverted America that does no good in the globalization efforts that are in the best interests of America.  I feel that it creates a suspicious environment where every American is suspect who doesn't goose step to the majority party in power.   And, it was the most costly increase in government spending in 30 years.  Yet, I continue to participate in America.  Will we start consolidating all those Homeland security departments for savings?

I oppose demonizing of latinos, mexicans, and other darker skinned people from south of the American border who want to participate in the greatest country on the earth.  I refuse to call them "illegals" as I know that is a term intended to make them feel little more than slaves in our country. I oppose ignoring their plight, refusing them charity, hope, or help.

I want my taxes to go toward fixing our immigration policies so that everyone can benefit from an amazing America of diversity.  I want my taxes to address social ills.  I want hate mongers to go to jail, yet I want those who aren't hurting people to receive treatment not isolation, education not prison.

I want a social safety net for those who need it.  I want America to stop going to war every single time that a politician wants to go to war.  I want our military out of Afghanistan and Iraq, Korea and Germany, as well as Japan.  And, I want a draft reinstated.

I want a Federal Investment into the cure for AIDS and Cancer, not just a profit focused response from multi-national Companies, because I don't believe there is an incentive for cures, when companies can provide pills to simply maintain or keep the disease at bay.

I want a tax policy that actually creates jobs.  In the 50s and 60s, tax policy encouraged owners to create jobs.  With the reduction of taxation on income, reduction in dividends, reductions in capital gains, the encouragement to create jobs has been reduced 70%.  Tax reduction doesn't create jobs.  Economic history proves that.  Drastic tax reduction increases wealth disparity which in turn causes social class warfare.  A strong middle class creates a stronger peace, less volatility in markets, and a more certain future.  Since the 1980's, America has damaged the relationship between owner and worker, eliminated 90% of all pensions, left most retirement up to the individual at the expense of the community, transferred extraordinary wealth to the top 10%, and created a struggling poverty class that our country hasn't seen since the 1890s.  If Social Security and Medicare are extensively destroyed, America will effectively return its population into similar demographics as we had in the 1890s which were abhorred by those at the turn of the 20th century.

So, I still pay taxes, I don't threaten America's future by destroying its present.  I work for solutions even though people get elected who couldn't pass a basic economics class.  I still believe in America even when corporations are allowed to own media centers and call it journalism.  I still believe in America, even when it doesn't recognize that it discriminates against me, denies me basic rights, and often threatens my ability to make an income.

So, yes, I am a proud to compromise.  I believe even stupid people should be allowed to live in America.  I accept that even churches that preach that I should be killed can exist in America.

Because I believe that as an American, we can live together in peace.  I pay my taxes, even though taxes are spent in ways I would oppose.  I simply want everyone to pay 20%, no matter their write offs.  My mom shouldn't pay 23%, and the super wealthy only 18, as it stands now.

But, I would be willing to compromise.

When You See A Need (The Impact Doris Bond Has)

I learned as a child a principle that I have lived by my entire life.  “When you see a need, you become responsible to address that need” and the corollary to that principle is “When you are asked, determine how you will say yes.”

When I swam on a swim team in La Grande, Oregon, I raised money for the team through asking for donations per lap.  Every year we knocked on doors, asking for community support.  And, at La Grande First Baptist Church, we learned how to tithe to our Church and raise money for summer camp visits.

Since my college years, I have served communities where I have lived for over two decades.  I have worked in grassroots organizations striving for equality among different groups, helping youth receive services they desperately needed, led business organizations when other leaders needed to focus elsewhere.  I have recruited volunteers and board members for many organizations.  One organization is still running 17 years after I developed its bylaws and recruited a board, yet I have often been a part of other organizations that are no longer needed, or were merged into other organizations for a myriad of reasons.

I have followed those two principles.  When I see a need, I am responsible in some way to address it.  And, when I am asked to serve, I determine how I may serve.

Beyond the thousands of volunteer hours I have contributed to my communities, there are few who match my passion, but those who do, I fear at times I may never achieve the level of influence they have through their caring, their consistency, their vision, and their wisdom.

Fortunately, one of them is someone who for years, I simply knew as my Aunt Doris.  She is a woman who taught preschool kids.  A woman my mom not so secretly revered.  And, for my mother to revere someone, well, let’s just say, a son takes note.

I didn’t know what made my Aunt so special.  She seems like any other woman who raises kids, gets frustrated with kids, has a husband who didn’t turn out to be superman, who certainly has her own idiosyncrasies.   Like anyone else, she worked, she loved, and she cared for her family.  Yet, she has done more.

After retiring from her work of influencing preschool children most of her adult life, she stayed involved.  She joined the Friends or Quakers, served as the Clerk of the Quakers group in Redding, CA.  If you have lived or been through Redding, I am sure you just took a step back to consider that position.  Not the center of liberal thought, I will tell you.

Yet, she has served on additional boards, from serving to address multicultural issues in Redding, to making sure access for children less privileged have access to facilities where they can learn to think, could learn to interact, and may one day become the leaders of tomorrow.

But, she moved me recently, this Aunt of 77. 

Background of Eric in relation to Aunt

Many years ago, nearly 20 years ago, I was filmed driving Portland Chief of Police Potter in a Gay Pride Parade.  It was one of my earliest volunteer assignments with an organization.   No one else could drive a stick shift on the committee.  And, considering one of my first driving experiences was a 1963 International Scout, I can pretty much drive anything with four wheels.   Originally, I thought nothing of driving an old classic car in the parade.  And, it wasn’t for someone that significant.  It wasn’t someone I thought would be important to my life.  In fact, wasn’t a police chief the guy you saw on old Batman reruns?  He didn’t have any impact in my life.  In fact, it was going to be a great parade; no one would even notice I was there.

I was just slightly wrong.  Tom Potter, the Chief of Police in Portland at the time, was in fact making a stand.  His daughter, a lesbian, needed his support.  And, he saw the need, he was asked, and he did determined what he could do best.  He became the highest ranking uniformed police official in the country to participate in a gay pride parade.  And, in the political environment of the anti-gay initiatives of Portland, it made a very big impact.  That evening, the news anchors howled about a Chief of Police endorsing the Parade, but what was missed by them, was the exposure a 23 year old who wasn’t out to his family, much less a community.  When the Oregon Citizens Alliance demanded Police Potter’s resignation, and didn’t get it, the same 5 seconds of film rolled for over three weeks.

But, after all the exposure, there was not a sound from my family. 

In October 1991, I was asked to debate the media director of the OCA, Scott Lively, on cable access.  I thought, “No big Deal.”  It would be a Thursday night.  No one watches cable access.  And, even if they did, my parents would be at Choir Practice.  The debate was a success, and not until two weeks later did I learn how cable access areas share media, thus an entire state watched a debate on whether gays and lesbians should be allowed to teach in school, have state licenses, or be given any level of equality of protection.

But, after all the exposure, there was not a sound from my family.  Except, with the exposure, I knew I had to honor my parents, and inform them of my political stance of inclusion, and my religious belief about gays, and my own self discovery process to accept my orientation.  All something we couldn’t do by providing a book at that time.

The first years were atrociously harsh.  My mother said nothing and my dad used every holiday as a forum for attacking my faith, my politics, and worse, my orientation.  By the end of 1993, I was prepared to divorce my family, both sides, so as not to have to deal with the silence, the judgment and the anger.

But, after some intense discussions, our family agreed to a truce of sorts.  The wounds might never heal, the views may never change, but we could once again see each other as family.  But, the lack of acceptance was still there.  The silence could be deafening.  But, the values we held did not allow for us to leave, to abandon or to avoid each other. 

My Aunt’s Influence

Then, after years of being a bystander, caring for her own children, my Aunt entered my life.  For years, living a state away, she began visiting, reaching out to family beyond her kids, and I began to learn about her.  She learned my history, my hurt, my background.  And, she listened, she began to serve, and she extended her love.

Where my parents weren’t able to accept, she did.  Where my parents haven’t been able to acknowledge, she acknowledged.  And, where I couldn’t understand, she agreed that she couldn’t understand, either.  And, she was related!  No way!

Where I had no family relation who related, she has stood up, grabbed hold, and moved forward. 

In the last 10 years, without asking, I have started to organize the family reunions.  And, my Aunt is the one who sends a note to express her appreciation that I care about keeping such a diverse family together.  See, in our family, we have warriors and pacifists, liberal democrats and right wing republicans.  In our family, we have several Catholics, Baptists, Quakers, and Lutherans.  So, diving into debate requires a tad bit more wine and beer than many might think.  For without these gatherings, it would be more difficult for her to maintain her connection with family.

My family is frustrating in one very interesting way.  They don’t know how to use a phone.  They can pick it up, but they can’t seem to dial.  Since I am in sales, apparently this disability has been driven from my natural DNA, so I am an exception.  I make a lot of outbound calls.  But, since my Aunt has lost her husband, her DNA has adjusted somewhat as well.  Our 45 minute visits monthly keep us informed about the four families on my mother’s side.  And, with my sister, we keep everyone in touch.

See, my sister and I vie for our Aunt’s position of “favorite”.  And, while I know my sister may achieve the title instead of me, I am happy to be a runner up.  I can’t compete with a sister who has mastered the art of Home Depot remodeling.  I cannot reorganize a garage in 2 days, and a garage sale in one more.  While my sister can argue with the best construction worker about how to complete a project, that isn’t my expertise.

My only skill is my ability to pick up the phone, listens, and see a future.  And, seeing a future, make plans to help it along the way.  And, I think my Aunt understands that just a little, seeing that she has helped thousands of people see their futures.

Yes, my Aunt Doris is an amazing woman.  But, she continues to amaze me with her ability to see what I need, when I don’t think I have a need any longer.  Recently, she got on the phone to tell me that she attended the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus when they visited Redding, CA.  It was in response to the Proposition 8 issue that has divided Californians over gay marriage.  She was thrilled to be in attendance, in a sold out venue. 

And, at the end of the story while sharing this event, she shared something even more impactful to me.  At 77, she joined the Redding, CA Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.

She, without a request from me, without me expressing a need or desire, she perceived an unmet need.  She must have sensed a need that family accept and support family.  Without a word, or an expression of encouragement from me, she heard a secret hope that I have had since being in a Gay Pride Parade in 1991.  At Gay Prides since 1989, I have watched this group, PFLAG, and have wished I could see a family member of mine walking with them.  But, then reality would set in, and I would push that wish down deep, and not let the disappointment chill the very air at the parade.

She demonstrated her acceptance and favor for me.  And, she must have deduced that my biggest desire would be that family would stand with me, yet my parents could not and would not.  So she has determined how she could meet that secret desire.    At 77, Doris Bond, one of my favorite people, did what I didn’t even know I needed her to do.  She did something that for me can heal hearts and hurts, bring family together, and change views that create division.

She does what I have wished since I saw a group of mothers and fathers walk in partnership with their children, supporting their children’s right to love whom they chose.  And, when my mother couldn’t do it, for whatever reason my Aunt could.  My Aunt has done what I felt no one would ever do.  She represented me, in the one organization in which I am the benefactor, but could never be a member.

She quietly stands as a leader in her home, her family and her community – and can miraculously see a need, determines how to say yes, and is amazing in her ability to do both.

And to Aunt Doris:

Thank you, Aunt Doris, for a life of loving, caring, and continued impact on myself, my family, and communities from San Diego, CA to Portland, Oregon, to La Grande, Oregon. 

I hope your next 10 years are as impactful as your last 78.  Because the last 15 have brought tears of hope, smiles of joy, and at least one heart that can see a brighter future because of what you do, out of love.

Your Nephew (and favorite nephew)

Eric Brown