(Photos by Robin Holland)

This week on the JOURNAL, Bill Moyers talked with conservative authors Mickey Edwards and Ross Douthat about the state of American conservatism and the Republican party. Edwards said that in recent years the GOP has abandoned conservative principles:

“Republicans used to believe in a certain set of basic principles about divided powers, limited government. What’s happened is with the Bush presidency, we have become the exact opposite of what we used to stand for.”

Similarly, Bill Moyers suggested that the Democratic party may have become compromised:

“I look at the [Democratic] party in Congress and realize how beholden it is to wealthy interests, corporate interests, the blue dogs, and all of that. And I think, well, maybe there’s fervor in the country but there seems to be ossification in Congress.”

The charge that both parties have drifted from their core ideological principles, and may even have become similar to each other, has become popular among outsider candidates for the presidency. Speaking with Bill Moyers in January, libertarian Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) said that the Republican Party is no longer truly conservative:

“I've been elected as a Republican for ten times, and Republicans have a platform – and had a better platform in the past... It's not like I'm completely a stranger to the Republican ideas – they talk about balanced budgets and they're strict Constitutionalists. I think the ones who are in charge right now have left the Republican Party and the platform, which makes it more difficult, because people in the party, the hard core base, which unfortunately for the Republicans is getting smaller, stick loyal to the leader. And they're loyal to maintaining power... I think I can be a good Republican and fight for these ideals, because they have been in the Republican Party in the past. And the question is, will these ideas be revived once again in the Republican Party?”

Furthermore, some critics like Ralph Nader see little difference between the parties at all. When asked by THE NEW YORK TIMES, "So you really believe that the parties are the same?", Nader responded:

“Yes, on most issues. On the most basic issues of cordoning power from people as voters, consumers and taxpayers, [the two parties are] very similar. Look at the massive mergers that went on during Clinton-Gore. GATT, Nafta, corporate crime, corporate welfare -- the same.”

What do you think?

Have America’s major political parties abandoned the political philosophies they claim to represent?

Tag(s): Congress , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (68) | TrackBacks (0)

This week on the JOURNAL, Bill Moyers spoke with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, about her efforts to advance “cap and trade” legislation as a response to climate change.

“We have to have a bill that gets the job done, that reduces greenhouse gas emissions so that temperatures don’t go up, you know, much above a couple of degrees over time, because if they do we’re in a lot of trouble here... There’s never going to be a good time. This is hard, we have to deal with it, and so we have to act. You cannot hide under the covers and say ‘wake me up when gas prices go under a dollar a gallon and then I’ll bring up global warming legislation’... I believe this can be structured in such a way that it actually brings around an economic renaissance.”

An article from the WASHINGTON POST highlights some of the challenges the “cap and trade” model has faced since its implementation in Europe and could encounter in the United States.

“What the snappy name ‘cap and trade’ means is that the market will put a price on something that’s always been free: the right of a factory to emit carbon gases. That could affect the cost of everything from windowpanes to airline tickets to electricity... In some ways, Europe’s program has been a success... in other ways, the approach has been a bureaucratic morass with a host of unexpected and costly side effects and a much smaller effect on carbon emissions than planned...

One key issue is how to deal with imports from countries that don’t price carbon. A U.S. system that raised costs for U.S. firms would make imported goods, especially from India and China, even more competitive, adding to the trade deficit and possibly driving U.S. companies out of business”

What do you think?

Should the government act on climate change? If so, should it pursue a "cap and trade" policy, or would you suggest alternative legislation?

Tag(s): Congress , Economy , environment , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 3:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (62) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photos by Robin Holland)

Are we living in a second gilded age? Yes, according to historian Steven Fraser, one of Bill Moyers’ guests on the JOURNAL this week.

“Basically, we left the financial marketplace largely unregulated – a tendency which had begun under Reagan and continued at an accelerated pace all through the years since Reagan, including under the Clinton administration... When push comes to shove, businessmen and their financial enablers may talk the talk about the free market. But when times get tough, they turn to the government to bail them out... That is this close, almost incestuous relationship between business and government.”

Bill Moyers also spoke with columnist Holly Sklar about the difficulties many workers face in trying to earn a living wage. She said:

“We’ve been living the American dream in reverse... Adjusting for inflation, average wages are lower than they were in the 1970s. Our minimum wage, adjusting for inflation, is lower than it was in the 1950s. One of the things going on is that income and wealth inequality have gone back to the 1920s. We are back at levels that we saw right before the Great Depression.”

On the ground in Los Angeles, the JOURNAL introduced Jaron Quetel, a young union member struggling to make ends meet. He said:

“Working the best job I’ve ever had in my whole life, I’m still a breath away from drowning. I’m $20 away from being on the street. I am one car payment away from being re-poed. I’m barely surviving. I’m leading a substandard lifestyle because I make substandard wages... If I wasn’t trying, if I was a screw-up, if I was taking advantage of things, I couldn’t complain. But what more can I do at this point?”

What economic policies would you like to see put into place? Do you expect politicians to enact any of them?

[Please note we have provided a list of sites related to clean elections and you can find sites and research related to economic disparity and the work of Holly Sklar.]

Tag(s): Economy , class , democracy , government , poverty , unions , workers
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 1:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (371) | TrackBacks (0)

Tag(s): democracy , government , media , speech
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 2:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (0)

We thank reporters Cary Spivak, Susanne Rust and Meg Kissinger for taking time to answer your questions about Exposé's story on their work following the chemical Bisphenol A.

Please note that the views and opinions expressed by the reporters are not necessarily the views and opinions held by Bill Moyers or BILL MOYERS JOURNAL.

I would very much like to know what is happening in the European Union regarding Bisphenol A. Is the EU addressing the safety of BPA? Thank you so much.

The European Union's food safety watchdog, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), may review the chemical Bisphenol A, the agency website says.
"EFSA is aware of the studies on bisphenol published in the United States and Canada. The agency will examine whether it should review its opinion on this product, which dates from January 2007," spokeswoman Anne-Laure Gassin said.

Bravo! Wonderful reporting. Can you please tell me which plastics contain the toxic substances? Are they marked in any way, i.e. by the number in the triangle on the bottom? Many thanks to you for such a wonderful expose.

Plastic containers with the recycling number 7 often contain polycarbonate, which contains Bisphenol A. You should know that not all plastic containers have recycling labels on them, including baby bottles and sippy cups. Those with the no. 3 on them are made of polyvinyl chloride which may contain Bisphenol A as well as phthalates, another kind of endocrine disruptor.

In your opinion, if the government does decide to act and announces that Bisphenol A poses enough of a risk to ban it from products such as water bottles an the linings of metal cans, what will the fall-out or repercussions be? Will the millions(?) of products inflate in cost along with the regular inflating? Will we see certain products being recalled? What other chemicals are we being exposed to that could cause great health risks that the government has ignored due to corporate manipulation and interests?

Several companies are removing bisphenol A from their products or merchandise, including Nalgene, Wal-Mart and Toys R Us. Many are working to develop alternatives to Bisphenol A. We'll be watching to see what the effects on the marketplace will be.
There still are many chemicals in use that scientists are suspicious of and others that are known to be dangerous that remain in the marketplace.

Do you think that there will be more reporters like yourselves -- with specialized science backgrounds? Does the consumer's ability to access more and more information hampering or helping beat journalism?

There probably will be more reporters with specialized backgrounds in science -- also law, education, the arts, etc. It's a really interesting question to wonder if more information by consumers hampers or helps beat reporters. It probably helps. The more consumers know, the better their questions will be. They will be pushing us to ask more and tougher questions.

The report says that from 1996 to 2007 --- a period that had both parties in the White House --- the EPA hadn't screened a single chemical. Are both parties compromised by the chemical lobby's influence?

We will let the educated viewers of PBS figure that out.

What was the $80 million for endocrine research actually spent on, if not chemical testing?

The $80 million went for "payroll and program support" to develop the screening program, according to the EPA spokespeople. They had a lot of meetings to discuss how to screen these chemicals. They went through no fewer than three different permutations of the program.

It's always heartening to see good, relevant journalism. Thank you. How does one determine what plastic items contain Bisphenol A? Can it be purged from the body once ingested?

Look for recycling no. 7 -- and generally any hard, non-disposable clear plastic is likely to contain Bisphenol A. Children and adults break down Bisphenol A pretty quickly. But there is nearly constant exposure. So, the body gets inundated. Research shows that very young babies and fetuses may not be able to break it down because they lack an enzyme that allows them to do so.

Tag(s): Exposé , government , health , journalism
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 2:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

This week on the JOURNAL, Bill Moyers spoke with author Jeffrey Toobin about appointees to the Supreme Court should Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) win the Presidency in November.

Toobin also addressed the topic in this week's NEW YORKER:

"McCain plans to continue, and perhaps even accelerate, George W. Bush's conservative counter-revolution at the Supreme Court... [McCain said] 'For decades now, some federal judges have taken it upon themselves to pronounce and rule on matters that were never intended to be heard in courts or decided by judges... in the tradition of "penumbras," "emanations," and other airy constructs the Court has employed over the years as poor substitutes for clear and rigorous constitutional reasoning.'... When it comes to the Constitution, McCain is on the wrong side of the voters, and of history."

Toobin's argument reflects one side of a long-running philosophical dispute about judicial activism, a term meant to describe when judges derive their legal interpretations and rulings from something other than the precise written language of the law.

Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution takes the other side, arguing for judicial restraint:

"At the heart of the concern over judicial activism is the fear that the judge will impose his own personal preferences in his decisions, to such an extent as to ultimately negate the very meaning of law as a body of known rules to guide individual and social conduct... Judicial activists who depict the Constitution as a morally groping document, crying out plaintively for the aid of judges, have nothing on which to base this vision, other than their own self-serving assumptions... A dependable framework of legal expectations, achieved after centuries of painful and bloody struggles, would be sacrificed, while a whole society retrogressed toward a world where edicts are simply issued by whoever has the power at the moment... The question for today is whether one chooses to continue to live under the existing constitutional government, which includes the right to urge changes, or to usurp the power to make changes unilaterally."

What do you think?

Do you agree with Sowell's concerns that judicial activism undermines constitutional government and subjects the country to the ideologies of unelected judges? Why or why not?

Tag(s): government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBacks (0)

Tag(s): Bill Moyers Essay , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

In his conversation with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL this week, international lawyer Philippe Sands discussed the Bush Administration’s view of international law:

“They don't like international rules. It goes back to a project back in the 1990s, a Project for the New American Century, in which the very same people who came into the administration said, 'International rules impose constraints on the United States, undermine America's sovereignty, make America unable to protect itself. And we're going to get rid of them.' And they came into office, I think, with that as a policy objective. And 9/11 provided a useful way of taking that forward.”

The argument that international laws endanger national sovereignty can be heard from diverse voices across the political spectrum with regard to a variety of issues.

Regarding trade policy, for instance, progressive stalwart Ralph Nader warned against “sovereignty shredding” and said:

“The decisions are now in Geneva, bypassing our courts, our regulatory agencies, our legislatures.”

The conservative John Birch Society objects to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, which is purportedly a non-binding initiative to build “cooperative relations” between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The Society argues:

“Plans include a 'free trade zone with a common security perimeter,' thus erasing established international borders. U.S. citizens would then effectively surrender their citizenship to the North American Union (NAU)... The John Birch Society believes the American people should oppose any programs or projects that would replace our constitutional system and/or combine our government with the very different Canadian and Mexican governmental systems — effectively destroying the United States of America.”

What do you think?

Since international officials are not voted into office, can international law be democratic? Why or why not?

Tag(s): democracy , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 3:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (39) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

We'd like to thank Rev. Beckmann of Bread for the World for his additional thoughts on aiding America's hungry and his hopes for new farm bill legislation.

Please note that the views and opinions expressed by Rev. Beckmann are not necessarily the views and opinions held by Bill Moyers or BILL MOYERS JOURNAL.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Chance to Help Those Who Need It Most

Rev. David Beckmann
President, Bread for the World

I have been reflecting on the increasing challenges our nation’s low-income families face in their struggle to have enough to eat each day, especially in light of the negotiations going on in Congress for a new farm bill.

Continue reading "Guest Blogger: "A Chance to Help Those Who Need It Most" by David Beckmann" »

Tag(s): government , guest blogger , poverty
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 1:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (66) | TrackBacks (0)

This week, BILL MOYERS JOURNAL collaborated with EXPOSÉ: AMERICA'S INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS to examine wasteful and unnecessary spending in farm subsidies.

EXPOSÉ reports:

"[In 1996] the Republican controlled Congress -- critical of what it termed 'big government' -- wanted to wean farmers off subsidies and to encourage them to grow whatever the market demanded. But to get votes, the reformers had to make trade-offs with farm state congressional Democrats and Republicans bent on maintaining payments to their farmers. The result was a classic Washington compromise: one kind of subsidy was ended but, in exchange, a new subsidy was created, one that paid farmers not for the crops they grew but for the land they owned. That compromise now costs taxpayers billions."

What do you think?

Given that Congress is made up of lawmakers who represent individual districts and states, is it capable of creating a sensible and fiscally prudent national policy for farm subsidies?

Tag(s): government , poverty
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 1:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (60) | TrackBacks (0)

(Harris photo by Robin Holland)

This week on the JOURNAL, Bill Moyers spoke with former Senator Fred Harris (D-OK), one of the original members of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, better known as the Kerner Commission.

Convened by President Lyndon Johnson in the wake of 1967’s riots among inner-city blacks in Detroit and dozens of other cities, the Kerner Commission sought to learn what had happened, why the riots had occurred, and what could be done to prevent similar events from happening again. The resulting (and immediately controversial) 1968 Kerner Report concluded that the riots emerged from severe poverty and limited opportunity in America’s urban ghettoes, for which the Report blamed institutional racism.

The report recommended a series of measures to try and change the situation, including using the government to create jobs, expanding affirmative action, and beefing up welfare and other social services. Regarding the Commission’s recommendations, Harris said:

“I think virtually everything [the Kerner Commission recommended] was right... one of the awfulest things that came out of the Reagan presidency and later was the feeling that government can’t do anything right and that everything it does is wrong. The truth is that virtually everything we tried worked. We just quit trying it. Or we didn’t try it hard enough. And that’s what we need to get back to.

We made progress on virtually every aspect of race and poverty for about a decade after the Kerner Commission report and then, particularly with the advent of the Reagan administration and so forth, that progress stopped. And we began to go backwards... When we cut out a lot of these social programs, or the money for them... [and] we don’t emphasize jobs and training and education and so forth as we had been doing, there are bad consequences from that... I think what you need to do is to help people up, give ‘em a hand up. And recognize the kind of terrible conditions that they’re grown up in.”

Moyers also interviewed Newark Mayor Cory Booker, who offered his own perspective:

"The knee jerk reaction [is] to spend more money. Well, you know what? I can show you places in the city of Newark where we're doing more with less simply because we have good people stepping forward and saying, "I'm not gonna tolerate this any more in my nation, in my community, on my block." They're doing mentoring programs. You have grassroots leaders... Because it's all about the spirit. It all comes down to a spiritual transformation... At some point in America, we're going to have to get beyond blame and start accepting responsibility."

What do you think?

Which do you think is the more effective approach to tackling the problems of the inner city --- Fred Harris' top-down government strategy or Cory Booker's emphasis on individual and grassroots responsibility?

Tag(s): class , government , race
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (94) | TrackBacks (0)

This week, the JOURNAL returned to the distressingly familiar topic of government waste – in this story through the perspective of Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Waxman said:

“People work hard for their money. And whether you're a liberal or a conservative or whatever you call yourself, you shouldn't want to see it wasted.”

Various measures have been enacted on the state and local levels to limit government spending. Some hope they'll help reduce the waste that often accompanies earmarks and non-competitive government contracts.

The most prominent of these is the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR), a voter-enacted 1992 amendment to Colorado’s constitution that strictly ties government revenues to previous years’ spending levels adjusted for population growth and inflation.

TABOR's advocates point to Colorado's low taxes and strong economic growth and assert that, since the policy was directly enacted by voters rather than legislators, it is more democratic than a legislature influenced by special interests and prone to pork. Opponents say that Colorado's infrastructure is being neglected, that legislators' hands are tied regarding necessary programs, and that TABOR is too complex a topic for most of the voters who supported it to fully understand.

Controversial from the beginning, TABOR has been loosened on a number of occasions to increase educational funding and to compensate for periods of economic recession.

What do you think?

Is the sort of oversight practiced by Rep. Waxman’s committee a better strategy than a strict limitation on spending? Why or why not? If so, who oversees the overseers?

Tag(s): government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (22) | TrackBacks (0)

In her conversation with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL this week, media expert Kathleen Hall Jamieson suggested that politicians' campaign ads and other media appearances are akin to puzzle pieces that together form a larger, albeit ambiguous, narrative of the candidates' lives, characters, and campaigns:

"We elect a person, not a set of issues... The strength of an underlying biographical narrative is extraordinarily important. You can't underestimate its importance when you're attacked, as every candidate will be, with a counter story... One of the things that advertising is able to do is to make some things more important in your decision about who should be president. And so ads are always a contest about what is important as an issue and what is important as an attribute about the candidate... There's an element of emotion in all of this... And we shouldn't lose track of the fact that advertising doesn't exist in isolation. People are drawing material from news, from what they are talking with their friends about, from the front pages into advertising to create a composite message"

What do you think?

How would you like to see candidates and issue groups use the media to elevate political discourse?

Tag(s): America , campaign , democracy , election '08 , government , media
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 4:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (42) | TrackBacks (0)

In the JOURNAL this week, WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO? authors and budget scrutinizers Scott Bittle and Jean Johnson contend that Washington’s fiscal irresponsibility is propelling America toward troubled times.

Scott Bittle said:

“Eventually, if nothing is done, by 2040 every dollar the federal government has will be taken in by Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the money we’ve already borrowed... Right now, one of the few areas of bipartisanship in Washington is the willingness not to deal with the problem... The war is certainly making our financial problems worse. But it’s not the sole cause and it’s not the sole answer."

Jean Johnson said:

“People don’t realize that the country has been in the red 31 out of the last 35 years, in good times and bad... There is no way to solve this problem without either raising taxes or cutting programs, or doing some of both. Right now that is a political death sentence, and we have to change that... We’re all gonna have to give a little and we’re all gonna have to live with some things that are not our first choice, but not doing anything is so much worse.”

What do you think?

What other suggestions do you have to bring the federal budget into the black?

Tag(s): America , Congress , Economy , democracy , earmarks , government , lobbying
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 1:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (107) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

Last week, media expert Kathleen Hall Jamieson, accepted viewer questions regarding the road to November.

Her response is as follows, and we invite you comment below:

Continue reading "Kathleen Hall Jamieson Answers Your Questions" »

Tag(s): America , campaign , democracy , election '08 , government , guest blogger , journalism , media
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 7:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBacks (0)

You may have been familiar with the scrutiny of Blackwater¹s mercenary army, or followed the troubles with oversight at the State Department, but chances are you hadn¹t heard of Lurita Doan. She isn¹t exactly a household name. So it might be surprising that, as head of the General Services Administration, Doan oversees $500 billion dollars worth of federal assets.

On the JOURNAL, Rep.Henry Waxman explains how an investigation that started with leaks about possible favoritism in awarding government contracts eventually uncovered documents and testimony that convinced Waxman that Doan had violated the Hatch Act, a law prohibiting federal employees from using government resources for partisan purposes. Waxman was so shocked by what the Committee found that he took the unusual step of asking Doan to resign at the end of the hearings. The Office of Special Counsel, which conducted a separate investigation of Doan, concluded that Doan should be "disciplined to the fullest extent for her serious violation of the Hatch Act and insensitivity to cooperating fully and honestly in the course of our investigation." Yet today Doan still heads the GSA.

Be sure to check out Exposé's coverage of the scandal.

What do you think about the Doan case? Do you think there should be another avenue of recourse for the American people to hold political appointees accountable for their behavior?

Tag(s): America , democracy , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 3:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (96) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

Conversing with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL this week, author John Grisham said:

“We still have two million people in prison in this country right now. Two million. Our prisons are choked, they’re so full. And most of them are non-violent. Most of them – and we’re spending between $40,000 and $80,000 somewhere to house them, every guy in prison. Now, somebody’s not doing the math here... Lock the bad ones away. But you gotta rethink everybody else. You gotta rethink the young kids who are in there because of crack cocaine. They need help. And if they serve five years they get out there and do the same thing over and over again. The system’s getting worse.”

What do you think?

What reforms to our criminal justice system would you recommend?

Tag(s): America , culture , democracy , government , prison , reason
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 5:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (32) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

Ordinary Americans and the media alike have been astir this week with discussions of the looming recession and the “economic growth package” Washington quickly assembled in response. In her conversation with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL, sociologist Katherine Newman shared her thoughts about their plan:

“It's a bad news situation out there for millions of Americans who are really going to worry about their futures and their children's futures... I think they'll be pleased to hear that Congress and the President have found some way to cooperate with one another. But a lot of people will be left out and left in the cold.

I'm more encouraged than I thought I would be, because it provides rebates for people lower down the income spectrum that I thought it would. But I am very concerned about the long-term unemployed, which is rising, not only in general, but as a proportion of the unemployed. And that's one of the disappointments of the stimulus package... I think if we built more infrastructure, we would see a greater long term benefit from the money we're investing, because we will improve our roads, our schools. And you know, that's exactly what Franklin Roosevelt thought. And that’s why he put millions of Americans to work.”

What do YOU think?

Do you think it is a good idea for government to expand public employment in areas like infrastructure maintenance and education as a means to mend our economy?

Tag(s): Congress , Economy , class , government , workers
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 5:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (36) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

Conversing with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL this week, investigative reporter David Cay Johnston said:

"Get rich by working hard, working smarter, coming up with a better mouse-trap. Don’t get rich by getting the government to pass a law that sticks the government’s hand into my pocket, takes money out of it, and gives it to you. That’s not right. That’s not a fair playing field. Adam Smith warned again and again that it is the nature and tendency of business people to want to put their thumb on the scale and, even better, to get the government to put the thumb on the scale for their benefit... You need entrepreneurs to have a good society. I don’t have any problem with entrepreneurs. But we need to have a system that also fairly distributes... When we have people who make billon-dollar-a-year incomes and pay 15 percent taxes and janitors who pay the same tax rate and school teachers who pay a 25 percent tax rate, something’s amiss."

What do you think?

Does government have the responsibility to pursue redistribution of wealth? If so, what are reasonable expectations for such a policy?

Tag(s): America , Congress , Economy , class , democracy , government , lobbying
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 4:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (38) | TrackBacks (0)

We invite you to respond by commenting below.

Tag(s): America , Bill's Column , LBJ , democracy , government , race
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (52) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

By Kathleen Hall Jamieson

1) I recommend not watching the coverage immediately before the debate and, when the debate is finished, turn the television off and talk with your family about what you saw and what was important to you. And think about what you saw.

2) Candidates make different assumptions about government's role, about economic policy, about the value of government regulation, about the role of the US in the world, about appropriate use of military power, about US relationships with other countries... and the like. What are the governing philosophies of the candidates?

3) Come to a debate with a list of the issues that matter to you and ask what you learned about each candidate's record and promises on those issues. Where are they similar and how do they differ?

4) When a candidate promises a new program or any move that will reduce government revenue -- how will the candidate pay for it? Increase the deficit? Cut spending elesewhere and if so where? Raise taxes? On whom?

5) How accurate are candidates' descriptions of opponents' programs? And how accurate are a candidate's descriptions of his or her own record?

6) Is the candidate willing to tell voters things they don't want to hear about the challenges facing the country and what is required to address them?

7) If the country were faced with a crisis, what can you know from the candidates' past performance, character, and dispositions about whether the country would be in good hands?

Continue reading "Guest Blogger: Debate Watching 101 with Kathleen Hall Jamieson" »

Tag(s): democracy , election '08 , government , guest blogger
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (38) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photos by Robin Holland)

Discussing elections with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL this week, Kathleen Hall Jamieson highlighted the importance of citizens left out by the polarized and exclusive process of selecting Presidential nominees:

“You could say that at issue in both Iowa and New Hampshire is going to be: Where are the independents going and what does that say about the country? We tend to think, because the primaries are so structured around party, that this is about Republicans and it's about Democrats. And Ron Paul only gets into this discussion because he comes in as a libertarian but runs as a Republican in the party... But we forget in the press that people who vote and the people who are governed are not only Democrats and Republicans. There are libertarians there. There are undecideds there. There are people who legitimately say ‘I don’t identify with any of this. I’ll call myself independent.’”

In his interview with Moyers, Ron Paul suggested that America’s two-party system belies our democratic rhetoric.

“We send boys over there to promote democracy in Iraq, but we don’t really have democracy here. If you’re in a third party, if you’re in the Green Party or Libertarian Party, you don’t get any credibility. You can’t get on debates. You can’t get on ballots hardly at all. It’s very, very difficult. And the two parties are the same. You don’t really have a democratic choice here.

Foreign policy never changes. Domestic fiscal policy, the welfare entitlement system never changes. Monetary policy won’t even be discussed. And that’s both parties. The vehicle that you use I think is not as relevant as the message. And that has been what has driven me, the fact that we need to change course in this country.”

What do you think?

As Ron Paul’s Web-based, grassroots-driven campaign has seen some success, do you think the Internet can democratize the political process and/or the two-party system?

Tag(s): America , democracy , election '08 , government , grassroots
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 6:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (240) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photos by Robin Holland)

In her conversation with Bill Moyers on this week’s JOURNAL, Kathleen Hall Jamieson discussed the media's influence on ‘outsider’ candidates like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich:

"Those two have provided a clear alternative in the debates and expanded the range of discourse within each political party. Alternative parties don’t get to have debates. They don’t get that kind of television coverage. We don’t have any way to have those ideas percolate back into the mainstream. We don’t have any way for the public to see that those are legitimate and viable options and as a result, potentially, to rally behind them. And so, when those voices are marginalized, where people are taken out of the debate, that’s problematic for the process.”

Dennis Kucinich agrees. Having been rejected from THE DES MOINES REGISTER debate before the Iowa caucuses and now the ABC News debate before New Hampshire, Kucinich tells Moyers:

"How can you have a debate if you don’t have a voice that challenges all the others? Right now every other Democrat on that stage will be for keeping our troops in Iraq through at least 2013. Every other Democrat on the stage will be there to keep a for-profit healthcare system going with all of these Americans who don’t have coverage. Everyone else on the stage will be there for the continuation of NAFTA and the WTO. I mean, my position on the American political scene is to show people there’s a whole different direction that America can take here at home and in the world. And the Democratic Party in narrowing the choices and the media in trying to block the point of view that I represent is really doing a disservice to the American people.”

What do you think?

Do you think we have too many or too few debates? Are we including enough participants in the debates?

Tag(s): Polls , democracy , election '08 , government , grassroots , journalism , media
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 4:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (104) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

In his appearance on this week's BILL MOYERS JOURNAL, legal scholar Sanford V. Levinson suggested that various challenges that face our nation, including political gridlock, can be traced to issues with our 220 year-old Constitution and might best be addressed with a new Constitutional convention. Levinson discussed his vision of such a scenario:

"I would have 700 or so of our fellow citizens chosen at random. Meet for two years, pay them the salary for those two years of a Justice of the Supreme Court [or] United States Senator because they would be fulfilling the highest possible function of citizenship. Give them time to reflect and learn about these issues... The only way you would ever get significant change is if you convince people across the political spectrum... If, on the other hand, you had a convention taken over by single issue zealots, whatever the single issue is, then the most likely thing is that the convention would just break down. People would simply start shouting at one another, and then it would never be ratified."

What do you think?

If there were to be another Constitutional convention, which issues would you like to see addressed?

Tag(s): America , democracy , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 11:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (62) | TrackBacks (0)

By Rick Karr

(photo by Robin Holland)

Next Tuesday (December 18), the five members of the Federal Communications Commission will decide whether or not the U.S. will go through another frenzy of media consolidation: They'll vote on Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's proposal to let newspapers buy radio and TV stations. Martin's plan is opposed by minority groups, a majority (pdf) of the public, and, as we report on this week's edition of THE JOURNAL, Capitol Hill lawmakers from both parties.

I tell my students at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism that reporters shouldn't make predictions because if they turn out to be wrong, the reporter loses credibility. But I'm throwing caution to the wind to make some predictions about Tuesday's FCC vote, anyway:

Continue reading "Media Consolidation: What happens after the FCC vote?" »

Tag(s): Congress , democracy , government , media , speech
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 10:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (38) | TrackBacks (0)

(Photo by Robin Holland)

In her conversation with Bill Moyers this week, Kathleen Hall Jamieson has this to say about some of the impact of the Internet on the political process:

"There’s more information available than there ever has been, and it’s more easily retrievable. So we can, within minutes, locate candidates’ issue positions, contrast them to other positions, search news interviews with the candidates where they’re held accountable for discrepancies between past and current positions… And you can hear in the candidates’ own voices their arguments for those issue positions, sometimes at great length – greater than you’re going to find in ads or greater than you’re going to find in news."

And new media is having other effects as well. Barack Obama has a formidable presence on Facebook, including one group with more than 400,000 members - while the largest opposing Hillary Clinton has more than 600,000. And in a development that stunned many analysts, Ron Paul used the Internet to raise more than $4 million in a single day despite minimal coverage from the mainstream media. In fact, this week a new-media driven grassroots movement for Dr. Paul announced that it has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to launch a blimp in hopes of garnering media attention.

What do you think?

Is new media a net positive or negative for the nation’s political discourse?

Tag(s): America , blogging , democracy , government , journalism , media
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 3:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (56) | TrackBacks (0)

In this week’s edition of the JOURNAL, Bill Moyers asked Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Melissa Rogers about Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s high-profile speech regarding his Mormonism, highlighting the following quote:

"Given our grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, some wonder whether there are any questions regarding an aspiring candidate’s religion that are appropriate. I believe there are."

This is a debate with deep historical roots that has long defied easy categorization into "left" vs. "right" terms. While some liberal figures - like Jimmy Carter - have embraced linking religious principles to their political values, a number of conservative statesmen have taken stands arguing for the stringent separation of church and state. In 1981, Republican U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater said:

"On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.'"

(For more on Barry Goldwater and Bill Moyers' interview with Goldwater staffer Victor Gold, click here)

What do you think?

What is the proper relationship between candidates’ religion and their decisions when they reach office?

Tag(s): America , atheism , belief , democracy , faith , government , journalism , media , religion , speech
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 3:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (43) | TrackBacks (0)

In their conversation this week with Bill Moyers, economic journalist Robert Kuttner and former SEC chairman William H. Donaldson questioned the wisdom of Federal Reserve heads Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke’s interest rate cuts in times of economic crisis - most recently the half-point cut on September 18 in response to the sub-prime mortgage collapse.

Robert Kuttner suggests that the resulting flow of cheap money is a quick-fix that obscures the root causes of economic woes and, perhaps, makes them worse:

The Fed cheapens money and bails the economy out and then invites the next round of speculative excess…The risk is that every time we repeat this cycle, we get bigger and riskier bubbles. And with the dollar being in the tank, it’s not a costless kind of bailout… We’re going to see inflationary pressures as a result of the cheap dollar.

“The sub-prime crisis was the result of the Fed’s failure to enforce lending standards…On the one hand, [Alan Greenspan] did not use a lot of the regulatory power that he had. On the other hand, every time there was a credit crunch he would race to the rescue…It seems to me if you’re going to bail out problems after the fact, you have an obligation to prevent some of them before they start.”

William H. Donaldson argues that rate cuts can lead to a “moral hazard,” in which the presumption of a Federal Reserve bailout might actually encourage some to make irresponsible and/or ill-considered investment decisions:

The Federal Reserve, the central bank, has an ability to reverse a downturn, but at great cost… Insofar as they do, we run into a moral hazard, i.e. we bail out the people who made bad or devious – whatever you want to call them – investment decisions. So you sort of are saying “Go ahead and do whatever you want, and you can count on the good old Fed to bail you out."

Between widespread controversy over Chairman Bernanke’s recent interest rate cut, Alan Greenspan’s recent best-selling book, and criticism of the Federal Reserve on the campaign trail (including some suggestions that it be eliminated altogether), the Fed has become a hot topic.

What do you think?

Will the Fed’s actions ultimately be a boon for the U.S. economy?

Photos: Robin Holland

Tag(s): Economy , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (24) | TrackBacks (0)

There's no question that the Christian Zionist movement in United States is growing strong. As CUFI founder John Hagee, who already claims two million members in his young organization, and would like to align all American evangelicals to his cause, recently exclaimed at CUFIs annual A Night to Honor Israel:

When 50 million evangelical bible-believing Christians unite with five million American Jews standing together on behalf of Israel, it is a match made in heaven.

But why has this movement had such a profound allure for many Americans?

In his conversation with Bill Moyers this week, Rabbi Michael Lerner offers one explanation, discussing the appeal of dispensationalism, or the religious view held by many Christian Zionists, that the second coming of Jesus is incumbent upon the Jews being in Israel. He offers this reasoning:

Dispensationalists are onto something. They are onto the growing depression that people are feeling, a deep emotional depression in the United States. A lack of any hopeful picture of what the world could be - and that failure is not a failure of dispensationalists. It's a failure of the mainstream political framework in this country that to address the major questions facing the world in the 21st century.

What do you think?

Besides Christian Zionism, do you see any signs of other movements beginning to fill this void?

Tag(s): belief , faith , government , grassroots
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (214) | TrackBacks (0)

In his interview with John Bogle, Bill Moyers cites this article from THE NEW YORK TIMES. which examines more than 1,200 nursing homes purchased by large private investment groups.

The piece, "At Many Homes, More Profit and Less Nursing" reports that:

"The TIMES analysis shows that managers at many other nursing homes acquired by large private investors have cut expenses and staff, sometimes below minimum legal requirements..."

"...In recent years, large private investment groups have agreed to buy 6 of the nation's 10 largest nursing home chains, containing over 141,000 beds, or 9 percent of the nation's total."

The article further details residents from one home who died from what family members call negligent care, while investors profited millions.

Bogle calls this a "national disgrace," contending that:

"There are some things that must be entrusted to government and some things that must be entrusted to private enterprise. "

Do you agree?

How do we determine what falls into the responsibility of private investment and what is better handled by government?

Photo: Robin Holland

Tag(s): America , Economy , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 5:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (71) | TrackBacks (0)

Alberto Gonzales announced today that effective September 17, he would step down as Attorney General. THE NEW YORK TIMES writes that his "tenure has been marred by controversy and accusations of perjury before Congress," and THE WALL STREET JOURNAL remarks that his resignation ended "a monthslong standoff over his honesty and competence at the helm of the Justice Department...Republicans and Democrats alike had demanded his resignation over the botched handling of FBI terror investigations and the firings of U.S. attorneys."

For more information about Gonzales and the U.S. Attorney controversy, watch this piece from BILL MOYERS JOURNAL featuring Josh Marshall from talkingpointsmemo.com, which aired April 27, 2007.

What implications, if any, does the resignation have on the remainder of the Bush Presidency and the upcoming presidential election?

Tag(s): Congress , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 2:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBacks (0)

The tremendous response from our recent impeachment panel broadcast tells us this is a conversation that is important to you. Here are a few of the thousands responses we've been receiving:

Ethel, July 13, 2007:

After watching tonight's Bill Moyers program, I think for the first time in a long time, I feel hopeful. There is a solution! For the last five years, I have been watching and listening and feeling rather isolated in my frustration and disgust. Impeachment is the solution for this federal insanity.

Carol Taylor, July 14, 2007:

Thank you Mr. Moyers for the re-education about the Constitution. I have already written to Nancy Pelosi. This program is just what we need to hear.

Lee Partide, July 14, 2007:

One sided and misleading. Bill Moyers is a good presenter and very smooth, but what is frightening is the power he and the media exercise by presenting information that neglects so many facts, and does not present rebuttal by the myriad others who can refute claims made on this show, and point out their dangers. I am NO Bush fan, but your show edges on appalling by misrepresentations. One can see how far this has gone by reading how many people in media (and thus among the population) compare Bush to such people as Hitler. That kind of extremism presented under the guise of objective journalism is what is MOST scary in our culture.

SR, July 15, 2007:

I am not nearly as articulate as your bloggers, however, I was compelled to say something...I was raised to respect our leaders, our elders and one another. To trust in our government and have faith in our religion...What has happened to the America we once knew?...We the American people can no LONGER hide our heads in the sand-- we cannot rely on our political leaders to help us out of this peril...Thank you SO MUCH for airing this show.

Ken, July 14, 2007:

I just caught the end of your show waiting for the British comedies to come on. What a bunch of crap! The democrats don't have the guts to stop the war or impeach Bush or Cheney. What congress should do is remove public funding for this show and send it to the troops in the war.

We invite you to continue to the conversation by commenting below.

Tag(s): Cheney , Congress , Iraq , democracy , government , impeachment , secrecy
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 9:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (495) | TrackBacks (0)

Constitutional scholar, Bruce Fein states:

“Most important thing for the American people to know is that the great genius of the founding fathers, their revolutionary idea, with the chief mission of the state is to make you and them free to pursue their ambitions and faculties. Not to build empires, not to aggrandize government. That's the mission of the state, to make them free, chart their own destiny. And the burden is on the government to try to understand why that freedom has to be curtailed for a security purpose or otherwise.”

Photo: Robin Holland

Answer our poll question, then debate the topic below.

Tag(s): Cheney , Congress , Iraq , Polls , democracy , government , war
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 8:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (322) | TrackBacks (0)

Cultural critic, Clive James, has gathered 106 biographical essays in his recent collection, CULTURAL AMNESIA: NECESSARY MEMORIES FROM HISTORY AND THE ARTS, with the hope that future generations will learn from the lives and interconnections of these individuals; how they each contributed to our collective story, for good or bad.

You can read many of his essays here at Slate.com including commentaries on Duke Ellington, Adolph Hitler, and Leon Trotsky.

But since we all have different lives, and inhabit various circles, we are each affected by a diverse group of people.

• So who do you believe is worth remembering?
  
• Which individual, for good or ill, do you believe is most important for generations to come to understand and learn from? And why?

Tag(s): culture , democracy , government , media
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 2:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (72) | TrackBacks (0)

by Ryan Alexander, President of Taxpayers for Common Sense

At Taxpayers for Common Sense, we believe that the impact of earmarks is greater than the billions of dollars they cost the federal treasury. With a federal budget close to $3 trillion, we know that earmarks are not the only source of government waste. But the earmarking process is a breakdown in democratic decision-making in the Congress. We are putting the unprecedented amount of power to direct billions of dollars of projects in the hands of very small group of legislators and lobbyists. The all-consuming chase for earmarks distracts Congress and takes time away from important policy debates.

This year alone, there were more than 30,000 requests for earmarks in the House of Representatives – all of which had to be reviewed by staff on the Appropriations Committee. That’s a tremendous amount of effort and time to bring $100,000 for a theater renovation or $150,000 for Robotics Training Equipment at a local community college to a local congressional district. Don’t get me wrong, these and other projects may deserve federal support, but most of us don’t get a chance to ask why these projects are better than others or why they should be funded first before other projects. The lack of a competitive or a meritorious process means that projects may be ignored in favor of those backed by the politically powerful.

Continue reading "Why Earmarks Matter" »

Tag(s): Congress , democracy , earmarks , government
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 11:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (32) | TrackBacks (0)

Click the picture above to watch Bill Moyers' essay on the ongoing war debate in Congress.

Then tell us what you think by commenting below.

Tag(s): America , Bill's Column , Cheney , Congress , Iraq , democracy , government , war
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 2:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (533) | TrackBacks (0)

More Capitol Crimes...
Yesterday, U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle sentenced J. Steven Griles to 10 months in prison for obstructing an investigation into the Jack Abramoff scandal. As you probably remember, Griles is the former energy lobbyist that became the Deputy Secretary of the Interior in 2001, until he resigned the post in 2004 to set up his own lobbing firm. From a recent WASHINGTON POST story:

Griles asked Abramoff for favors for the women in his life, prosecutors said, and in exchange helped Abramoff's clients with their government business. One of Griles's girlfriends, Italia Federici, got $500,000 for her nonprofit from Abramoff's Indian tribes.

"I concealed the nature and extent of my true relationship with Italia Federici," Griles confessed to the judge yesterday in a statement interrupted by stifled sobs. Choking out the words, a burly, red-faced Griles told Huvelle that "this has been the most difficult time in my life. My guilty plea has brought me great shame and embarrassment."

Capitol Crimes, the recent Moyers report about Jack Abramoff and the dark side of American politics, can be viewed online in its entirety here. Also, for information about Griles and the revolving door, check out this story from NOW with Bill Moyers from May 30, 2003.

Continue reading "Story Updates" »

Tag(s): Afghanistan , Taliban , democracy , government , lobbying , update
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 12:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

From Sunday's THE WASHINGTON POST feature, "Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency," reported by Barton Gellman and Jo Becker:

"Across the board, the vice president's office goes to unusual lengths to avoid transparency. Cheney declines to disclose the names or even the size of his staff, generally releases no public calendar and ordered the Secret Service to destroy his visitor logs. His general counsel has asserted that 'the vice presidency is a unique office that is neither a part of the executive branch nor a part of the legislative branch,' and is therefore exempt from rules governing either. Cheney is refusing to observe an executive order on the handling of national security secrets, and he proposed to abolish a federal office that insisted on auditing his compliance."

While the media may be covering this story all week through television and radio reports from many angles, we at THE JOURNAL thought we'd step back and remind you that this is an old story.

Check out this Bill Moyers essay from 2002 on The Freedom of Information Act:

Continue reading "It's an Old Story..." »

Tag(s): Cheney , LBJ , Libby , democracy , government , secrecy
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBacks (0)