Sunday, March 26, 2017

Trump looking to destroy ACA from within

With the spectacular failure of the recent GOP healthcare bill which did not even reach the House for a vote, President Trump has warned that he will let the Affordable Care Act (ACA) implode on itself and then attempt to blame the Democrats for its failure. This is quite possible now that Trump controls Health and Human Services (HHS) via his newly appointed head of the agency, Tom Price. Since people's lives are literally at stake when it comes to medical care, it is important that his threats are taken seriously.

When news stories begin to surface about services related to the ACA being unfunded or purposely mismanaged, it is we, the people, who will need to make sure that these not-so-sexy news stories are not hidden or under-reported by the media, mainstream or otherwise. Petitions must be created and organized political actions must be taken to pressure local congresspersons and senators to not ignore Trump's agenda to destroy the ACA from within for political gain.

It is clear that constituents confronting lawmakers via phone calls, emails and at town hall meetings had an impact on lawmakers and their stances on the recently failed GOP bill. There's no reason to doubt that the same strategies would also be effective in helping to prevent the sabotage of the ACA by the Trump administration. However, because it is not known exactly what the Trump administration will do, activists need to be vigilant in order to respond in a timely manner.

Monday, January 9, 2017

Wall Street-friendly Trump may be looking to delay or repeal 'fiduciary rule'

One of the most pivotal issues of the recent presidential election was how an unregulated Wall Street is able to gain massive record profits through fraudulent and criminal behavior while wealth inequality is at all-time highs. The Obama administration had recently passed a bill, known as the “fiduciary rule,” aimed at curbing this phenomenon within the financial adviser industry. However, with the election of Donald Trump to the White House this rule may face a delay in implementation or possibly a repeal.

The rule which goes into effect April 2017 is set to put a fiduciary duty on any financial advisers giving advice to consumers. This means that a financial adviser has to make recommendations that put the interests of the client ahead of all other interests, including commissions received by the financial adviser for recommending financial products of specific companies. A majority of Americans believe Wall Street needs to be held accountable for its actions, which is what the fiduciary rule aims to do.

Donald Trump even ran his campaign on promises to reign in Wall Street. On the other hand, his cabinet picks of Wall Street insiders put serious doubt on whether or not he was being honest when making these promises. His choice for Labor secretary, Andrew Puzder, a fast food CEO, has not offered his opinion on the fiduciary rule, according to an article published by Investment News. However, Pudzer's conservative slant towards smaller government and his radical belief that there should be no minimum wage makes it highly likely he would not be looking out for the everyday person and would not likely be a friendly supporter of the fiduciary rule.

As head of the Department of Labor, which is in charge of implementing the rule, Puzder will have significant power to delay implementation of the rule. Delaying implementation is a viable alternative to a straight out repeal of the rule for Trump and the GOP, reported The National Law Journal. A repeal of the rule may also be possible, especially with the Republicans controlling both the House and Senate. GOP House leader Congressman Paul Ryan has been vociferous in his harsh criticism of the fiduciary rule in the recent past, according to an article published on TheStreet.com.

Delay or repeal of the fiduciary rule when combined with the GOP plan to privatize Social Security can put senior citizens especially at risk of being defrauded by unscrupulous financial advisers salivating over privatized, self-directed retirement accounts. Therefore, it is essential the American public voices its disapproval of any delay or attempt to repeal the fiduciary rule. Please contact your local congressional representatives and senators and let them know your concerns about the fiduciary rule. You can also sign CREDO's petition to tell Senate Democrats to hold the line and not help Republicans delay or repeal the fiduciary rule.

Monday, January 2, 2017

Will Trump oppose GOP and keep his promise to maintain Social Security and Medicare?

Donald Trump made many promises as a candidate. Most of them he hopefully does not keep, such as banning immigrants and refugees based upon their religious beliefs or breaking up families through mass deportations. On the other hand, one promise he should keep is his promise to not cut funding for Medicare and Social Security, which millions of senior citizens depend on to survive in an environment of ever-increasing costs of living and medical care.

Trump vs. GOP

However, many Republican lawmakers' positions on Social Security are diametrically opposed to Trump's stated position. GOP lawmakers, led by Congressman Paul Ryan, have repeatedly worked towards cutting Medicare and Social Security and ultimately want to privatize the program. This would result in healthier seniors dropping out of traditional medicare causing increased Medicare spending as well as higher costs for seniors remaining in traditional Medicare, according to an article published by the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM). It is likely the GOP will test Trump's resolve to keep his campaign promise to look after America's senior citizens.

Broken promises not uncommon for Trump

Unfortunately, Trump has a habit of not keeping his campaign promises which can already be seen through his cabinet selections. Trump promised to “drain the swamp,” meaning to rid Washington D.C. of Wall Street influence. But, instead of looking out for the everyday American on Main Street, Trump has packed his cabinet full of Wall Street insiders. With this in mind, one has to wonder what the chances are that he will again turn his back on everyday Americans, particularly seniors who depend on benefits from the government.

Promise to repeal ACA contradictory to promise to maintain Medicare

Another factor which could cause an issue is that Trump and his Republican colleagues have promised to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA), otherwise known as Obamacare. The problem with this is that the ACA has greatly helped in refilling the Social Security trust fund, according to an article published by the NCPSSM. If the ACA is repealed without replacing it with another similar program it would be difficult to avoid having to cut the meager benefits that seniors are already receiving without raising taxes. An increase in taxes to fund government programs is now significantly less likely with the GOP in control of both the House and Senate.

Continue the pressure on Trump and GOP

It is essential that we keep up the political pressure on Trump and the Republicans to honor the wishes of the majority of Americans and steer clear of making cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Along with contacting your Congressperson or Senator one can help to apply political pressure against cutting these important social welfare programs through supporting already-existent organizations dedicated to preserving Social Security and Medicare. The NCPSSM has an outstanding record of success in lobbying lawmakers to not cut benefits. Another excellent organization is Social Security Works. If you have the financial ability to help, please consider these organizations for charitable donations.


Monday, December 26, 2016

Trump could turn DOJ against civil rights, courts now critical battleground

Since the election of Donald Trump, many have been left worrying about what will happen if his administration actually turns his campaign promises into policy. One of the areas of most concern will be civil rights. Trump's threats to ban Muslims on the basis of religion, initiate mass deportations of Mexicans and to punish women for having abortions have ignited alarm among civil rights advocates and activists all around the country who are deciding where best to employ their resources in the resistance against Trump.

Although it is difficult to predict what the Trump administration actually plans to do, one can obtain a broad brush view of its intentions by Trump's recent choice of anti-civil rights advocate Jeff Sessions to lead the Department of Justice (DOJ) as Attorney General. It may be helpful to take a look at how past Republican presidents have taken action in rolling back civil rights. Past Republican presidents have used their power over the DOJ in order to weaken its ability to protect civil rights via strategic personnel changes and redirecting the priorities of the civil rights division within the department, according to Samuel Bagenstos, law professor and former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ in a recent interview on The Majority Report.

A White House administration utilizing its power over the DOJ in order to serve its own ideological and political leanings is nothing new. In fact this has been going on since at least when Ronald Reagan was president, according to an article in the Los Angeles Times. President George W. Bush's administration had run into controversy in his firing of a group of attorneys from the DOJ which was largely seen as politically motivated. During the Bush years the administration ordered the DOJ to prioritize fighting voter fraud while deprioritizing other civil rights litigation efforts, despite little evidence of significant amounts of fraudulent voting occurring. This was obviously a desperate attempt to find any shred of evidence that could be useful in propping up the false GOP narrative of undocumented immigrants casting illegal votes for Democrats.

There is no indication to suggest the Trump administration will not use this same power over the DOJ in order to further its campaign promises to squash the civil rights of minorities and disenfranchised people. The administration could possibly fire all attorneys in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ, which has been done by past administrations, and refill those positions with individuals who are more aligned with derailing civil rights expansion rather than enforcing civil rights laws. This will leave a large glaring hole in society's apparatus for resisting attacks on civil liberties, including hate crimes, voter suppression and repression of women's reproductive rights.

With Republicans controlling all three branches of the federal government, the courts will become an even more essential battleground in the fight to protect civil liberties. Luckily, besides relying on the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ, activists have already developed infrastructure which will be critical in the battle for civil rights via various organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR). Although these organizations have already been active in pursuing civil rights litigation their efforts are now central in engaging with the Trump administration's attacks on civil rights. Please consider supporting these organizations with donations, volunteering and whatever other means that are available.


Saturday, July 23, 2016

Trump: A Psychological Profile of a Narcissistic Madman Liar

The office of the President of the United States requires patience, open mindedness and the ability to make prudent and well thought out decisions. Several professionals in the field of psychology have gone on record stating that Donald Trump not only lacks these qualities but also displays personality traits which suggest he is severely psychologically unfit to be the head of the most powerful nation in the world.

Psychology professor Dan P. Adams in his article titled “The Mind of Trump,” published in The Atlantic, describes Trump as a narcissist whose psychology is mainly geared towards seeking praise and reward while being extremely closed-minded to new ideas and experiences. He also states that Trump seems to have an abnormally low amount of empathy for others. Additionally he states that Trump is mostly motivated by anger. Read the entire article HERE.

Trump is prone to making rash decisions due to his lack of prudence, according to an article titled “The Personality of Donald Trump” written by assistant professor of psychology Ryne A. Sherman, Ph.D. He also goes on to say that Trump may have serious problems handling negative feedback, which can be a huge disadvantage when having to make important unemotional decisions based upon unbiased logic. Read the entire article HERE.

Clinical psychologist and professor Dr. Bilal Ghandour in his article titled “A Psychological Analysis of Donald Trump,” published on Shrink Tank, suggests that Trump may be a habitual liar who is suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Read his entire article HERE.

Remember that the POTUS will be in charge of extreme power, including the entire U.S. Military and the codes to launching nuclear weapons. Somebody with Trump's serious psychological problems and personality disorders cannot be trusted to make these types of decisions while under pressure.






Wednesday, June 29, 2016

White supremacists infiltrate Brexit and Trump campaigns

The same white supremacist movement that supports Donald Trump and has been emboldened by Trump's campaign has also played a significant role in pushing the “yes” vote on Brexit. The Leave campaign was significantly based upon Islamophobia and nativist sentiments, similar to Trump's campaign. Even their slogans are quite similar. The Trump campaign regularly uses the slogan “America first” as a way to drum up anti-immigrant sentiment, while Britain First is the name of a pro-Brexit, anti-immigrant political party in the U.K. Also, just like with Trump's campaign, anti-immigrant messaging is attractive to neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups in Great Britain which had already been experiencing a resurgence.

Islamophobia and nativism

The Leave campaign significantly used Islamophobic and nativist sentiments in order to rally supporters to the cause. Similar to Trump supporters, the Leave activists blamed immigrants for Great Britain's problems. Former London mayor, Boris Johnson was one of the leading proponents of leaving the EU. Johnson had been regularly demonizing Islam for years leading up to the Brexit referendum. In a 2005 editorial, he blamed the religion of Islam for terrorist violence, despite millions of Muslims and numerous Muslim groups condemning the use of Islam by terrorists as an excuse to commit horrendous violence (1).

This type of rhetoric inflamed and encouraged Leave supporters, mirroring Trump supporters, to act out their racist tendencies through speech, threats and even physical and deadly violence. Baroness Warsi, who had been a supporter of the Leave campaign faced an onslaught of racist attacks on social media after changing her position on Brexit. She was specifically targeted for being Muslim (2).

White supremacists infiltrate the Leave campaign

The fact that the Leave campaign's ideology in Great Britain parallels the Trump campaign in the U.S. is more than just a coincidence. Both campaigns have been infiltrated by white supremacists and neo-Nazis who are all part of one global hate network of propagandists, militants and violent right wing extremists. Leading up to the Brexit vote, Jo Cox, a U.K. lawmaker who was a proponent of the Remain campaign was shot and killed by a man who was upset with her position on Brexit and refugees. He was apparently a supporter of the National Alliance, which is considered one of the most dangerous white supremacist groups in the U.S. (3). The accused murderer used a gun-building guide published by the U.S.-based group in order to skirt British guns laws (4).

The Leave victory will certainly further embolden white supremacists in the U.K. as well as the U.S. Immediately following the Brexit decision there was a sharp increase in racial incidences and attacks, many specifically referencing the Brexit vote (8). Trump has commented on the Brexit decision, citing it as a sign that his anti-immigrant message, cloaked in the guise of populism, may prevail in the U.S. despite the seeming odds against him. The surprise results of the Brexit referendum should serve as a message to those who oppose Trump in the U.S. to continue to vigorously denounce the Trump campaign since in today's political environment anything can happen and nothing should be taken for granted.

Sources





Monday, June 27, 2016

Trust Trump on Brexit? He has been dead wrong on economics for the last 25 years

Trump has been vocal with his opinions regarding Brexit.  Too bad his opinions are worthless, since his record shows that he has no idea when it comes to economics.