So Much Accomplished!

More funding for endless wars. Check.
Escalation of Afghan War. Check.
Taking military cuts off the table for deficit reduction. Check.
Inability to pass arms treaties. Check.
Closed-door meetings in the White House with CEOs. Check.
Taxpayer funding for massive giveaway to health insurance companies. Check.
Billions for banks (and not Americans threatened by foreclosure). Check.
Billions for corporations (and not small businesses and workers). Check.
Free trade agreements (that benefit corporations at the expense of workers and small business).  Check.
Continued tax cuts for the well-to-do. Check.
Tax cuts on the estate tax on millionaires. Check.
Continued tax cuts for the wealthy. Check.
Still more tax breaks for the wealthiest with their investment income. Check.
No climate change legislation. Check.
No immigration reform and more funding for border guards. Check.

Boy, they got a lot done in two years! At least the minority in Congress got scraps from the table on health care, unemployment, and tax breaks for the neediest. Don't worry, things will get better once Dems get the Congressional majority and we get McCain out of office.
Oh, wait a minute....

America needs trains.

Chinese Passenger Train Tops 300 MPH During Test Run : The Two-Way : NPR

We need more affordable, reliable, safe, clean transportation in this country. Trains offer us all of the above, compared to both cars and planes, which are relatively dirty, expensive, unsafe, and unreliable. (To those who say trains are unreliable in this country, I say: they do it well in Europe, while cars will always be plagued by traffic jams, accidents, and breakdowns, while planes are now saddled with security.)

Attaining the American Dream requires affordability, especially in this day and age with a disrupted and unreliable economy, declining competitiveness via other countries, and higher unemployment. Trains (especially when combined with good public transit in cities) offers this to us. It is more sustainable both as individuals and as a society. We then have more time and resources to pursue our American Dreams....

The Voter Fraud Myth

Voter fraud would be a real threat to our democracy. That is, if it existed.

The truth is, it hardly exists at all (let alone systemically, as some would have us believe with their accusations towards those of us who worked to register voters in our with ACORN.)

This piece nicely sums us the facts and the argument:

Why would anyone commit voter fraud? - By Christopher Beam - Slate Magazine

Debunking any myths about voter fraud helps to pave the way towards good reforms like universal voter registration, something truly worth our time, attention, and efforts if we truly care about ensuring fair, secure, and genuinely democratic elections in this country. It would be a real step towards strengthening American democracy....and securing the American Dream.

Letter to Voinovich: Global Warming, Nuclear Energy, and Renewable Alternatives

Clean, renewable, sustainable energy sources are essential if we are to continue and renew the American Dream.

A recent e-newsletter from our Ohio Senator George Voinovich prompted me to send a brief email his office on the subject (text below).  As part of his "legacy," he is strongly supporting (re)development of nuclear energy.  In addition to addressing what would be a horrid mistake, I addressed a related issue:  All of his earlier e-newsletters began with the headline "The REAL Inconvenient Truth" followed by the current budget deficit amount.  I felt a need to address this misguided feature.

We'll see if a get a response from the Senator's office.

Email text:

"Two items:

1. E-Newsletter

As a recipient of the newsletter, I am glad to see that you no longer headline it with the phrase "The REAL Inconvenient Truth."  I agree wholeheartedly that the budget deficit is a real problem.  But there is no reason to denigrate another real problem -- global warming -- while bringing attention to the budget concern.  They both need attention.

2.  Nuclear Power

I hope that if the Senator supports pursuit of nuclear energy, that he also believes in folding the FULL cost of safe storage, transport and disposal of the waste, as well as the cost of adequately protecting facilities from terrorist attack (by ground or air), into the cost of the electricity to the consumer.  Anything less would be an unfair subsidy to be borne by the taxpayer.

Alternatively, I would encourage the Senator to redirect his efforts towards renewable sources that do not have the ill effects of extremely dangerous radioactive waste: wind, solar, geothermal, and tidal power.

Thank you.

Nathan Ruggles"

A Note on Third Parties: The Goal Must Be to "Spoil"!

"Power never concedes anything without a demand; it never has and it never will."
- Frederick Douglas

I have believed for some time that one of the essential reforms needed to Save Our Democracy -- and therefore the American Dream -- is a multiparty political system in this country.  We are too big and diverse for being restricted to "Coke vs. Pepsi" choices at election time when so many people may demand tea, or coffee, or some other "beverage" to quench their thirst for a responsive representative democratic system.

I engaged in a recent Facebook exchange on the recent election, and the question of the impact of third party candidates was broached, them being accused of "messing up" the election (for Dems). 

With all due respect, we really need to stop with the third party blame game.  I have grown so weary of Dems and Dem supporters wining about third party candidates (i.e. Nader, Greens) of spoiling their time.  It is borne out of a rather arrogant and elitist attitude that someone their (major) party candidates automatically "own" or are "due" the votes from people who hold certain view or values (which mean they are reinforcing one of the key problems with the existing two party system).  Furthermore, they essentially are complaining at fellow voters for not voting for their Dem candidates.  Well, if you want someone to vote for your preferred candidate, my first response to that is: that's is the purpose of the campaign!  You have your chance to convince people that your candidate is worthy of their vote.  I say, take advantage of that opportunity (and frankly, for the two major parties, this is much easier than third parties).  It you can't or won't, that's your own fault.  If your candidate is essentially unworthy, blame them.  It is unfair to scold people for voting for candidates that they actually like, and candidates for running on values and issues that are underrepresented.

If there is blame to be cast in this electoral system, the blame falls on the Reps and Dems for continuing a system that excludes third parties when they easily could allow us to rank candidates 1, 2, 3 (and thereby eliminate "spoilers.")  The truth is that third party candidates wouldn't run if the major party (candidates) actually stood up for what the people wanted.  And what better way to force major parties to rethink things than to deny them a seat that they somehow think that they own.

The sad fact is that we might wish third parties candidate to be able to "compete" first, but history and facts show that they will never be able to really compete in the system as it stand today, with the rules stacked against them.  Also, in "safe" races third party candidates are seen as irrelevant by both the two major parties and the media.

The rules must change.  But the Reps and Dems won't change a system that serves them well.  They must perceive it's in their interest to change. I see the only way that that may happen is if third party candidates "spoil" their elections enough so that they will change the election rules to prevent it (by instituting Instant Runoff/ranked preference/choice voting).  It may mean short term pain, but it is in the service of reform for the long term.

I am speaking as someone who has been on both sides, actively campaigning for third party as well as Democratic candidates.  My conclusion is the same.  Even having served the campaign of a Dem I understand the desire to vote third party.  Even after dedicating my life for a time to getting a Democratic governor and congressional rep elected.  Don't get me wrong; I believed strongly in my cause.  At that time I tried my best to convince everyone -- including those considering third party candidates -- to voter our way.  However, in the end, I do not "blame" anyone for voting third party. If I failed to convince, that's on me.  If there are legitimate criticisms of my candidate(s) from the left, I have to acknowledge them and not cast stones.  Anything else on my part would be sour grapes.

One benefit of third parties on the left is that is makes the Dems listen to progressives (and counter our overall rightward slide in this country).   The recent gubernatorial election is a case in point.  Strickland pulled out the rug from progressives when he torpedoed the ballot initiative for sick days in Ohio.  He didn't pay attention to progressive forces (who helped get him elected the first time), leaving people to turn to third party candidates, or not vote at all out of lack of enthisiasm, or outright disgust (believe me, I talked to dozens of such people at the doors of their homes as part of my campaign job.)  A strong third party in Ohio on the left might have helped wake Strickland up (and save him from himself electorally.)

Historically, third parties have also served an important purpose in our democracy, of being the originators of many reforms that are eventually adopted/coopted by the two major parties (witness Social Security and other reforms from the Socialists, and others from the Populists).

If those who whine about third parties (or actively try to illegitimately torpedo their efforts, as the Dems did to Nader in Ohio in '04) would spend their time pushing their candidates to listen to progressives, and get out there trying to convince voters that their candidates are worthwhile, we'd all be a lot better off.

Kasich Derails Our Future

Passenger Rail would help take us into a better future in Ohio. Too bad our Governor-elect doesn't realize this:

Kasich to Strickland: Cancel all passenger rail contracts | Politics Extra

Even worse, his letter to Obama is nothing but political grandstanding. It's a poor attempt to try to cover himself from inevitable criticism for refusing $400 million from the feds, and getting in a plug on deficit reduction and highway funds. He knows that this money only can go towards high speed passenger rail projects, according to the law, the stimulus package passed by Congress. He knows that Obama can't change that. He knows that Governor elect Cuomo of New York has already asked for the funds to be sent to his state after he heard of Kasich's rejection:

http://online.wsj.com/article/APe7a07d45af0f46b9a850f2f7be2263ca.html

If this type of poor decision-making and political posturing is any foreshadowing of things to come under this new governor, we will see further cracks in the American Dream for Ohioans.

For some good info on Ohio high-speed rail:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ohio-3C-Quick-Start-Passenger-Rail-Plan/134456767470?v=wall

Energy-Independent Future for the American Dream....by the way of comedy.

Once again, Jon Stewart provides a little bit of brilliance. Insightful. Enlightening. And of course, funny:

An Energy-Independent Future - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 6/16/2010 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

And I cannot resist sharing some choice quotes from it:
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me eight times...am I a %#$@ing idiot?"
"%$&! it, let's just use oil....I will not allow the dinosaurs to have died in vain."
"WE ARE AN UNSTOPPABLE OIL-DEPENDENCY BREAKING MACHINE! Unfortunately, that machine runs on oil."

The only think lacking is an answer to the question: how do we get out of this "sad, somewhat Groundhog-Dayish saga"?

For the American Dream to be fulfilled, for our country to know economic health and success -- not to mention (possibly, hopefully) freedom from entangling wars in oil-rich regions of the globe, and for the future health of our Earth -- it is clear we need to end our oil dependence. However, it is also clear that the rhetoric from both sides of our political partisans has not been matched by real action. The fact that it has gone on so long forces us to ask: why? For one thing, it must go beyond the issues or idosyncracies of any one Presidential Administration, or one decade. Our political system is broken when it cannot accomplish those tasks which we agree are necessary for our own prosperity, nay, survival. Our democracy is dysfunctional. Fixing it is the key to moving forward on this issue (and many others....but that is a discussion for another time).

There are some people who feel and know the power of the American Dream: immigrants

A friend posted this to facebook recently and I'm so glad I took the time to watch it.

30 Days: Immigration on Vimeo

Morgan Spurlock has done some good work, but never has one touched my like this one, or caused me to reflect so much.

It brought a few things to mind, and now into words.

First, that there is something beyond our impersonal principles and politics, our theoretical polemics and postulates, our lofty ideas about how we think the world works or our often black and white view of how things should be. For these things can be so far removed from the reality of the world and the truth of our existence. Beyond them, there is something that can contain so much more truth, and holds greater importance: that is, our relationships with people, what we learn from the interaction with others, the understanding we gain from human experience, the connection we have as we look someone in the eye and really listen and realize who they are.

To paraphrase Frank, the central character in this excellent short program: "you can cling to political ideas, but an idea does not laugh, an idea does not cry, an idea doesn't have memories....an idea is not a human being." This is a story of human beings. And it is well worth watching.

Second, this program reminds me of the power of the American Dream. Frank has a powerful idea of what American is, and what it should be. Armida has her own idea of what she whats to accomplish in life; it is something deeply tied to the American Dream. It is interesting -- and shouldn't be surprising -- that people who have risked so much, tied so much of themselves and their hopes for a better life to this country, would have a particularly strong idea of what the American Dream is. It brings to mind how this country has been shaped by immigrants, and an immigrant spirit, one which has created and defined that American Dream. And these people in this program, give the American Dream life, a reality that goes beyond that idea to something deep in the human spirit.

The Decade: What Have We Wrought?

The following chart, in stark terms, reveals to us what we have wrought during the last decade:

In Iraq, Still A Relative – And Deadly – Universe | CommonDreams.org

Nine years after 9/11, and nearing the end of this decade, this causes me to reflect. What began (at least from the point of view of most Americans) with 19 hijackers and 3000 victims, has escalated to hundreds of thousands of combatants and approaching a million innocent lives lost. (I take note -- a fact absent from the chart -- that a majority of those lives lost have been as a direct result of American military action, and not from that of al-Qaeda, terrorists, insurgents, etc). The response was ostensibly directed at exacting revenge against the director of the attacks, along with his organization, allies, and sympathizers. This number, mostly unacknowledged, certainly encompassed a relatively small number of individuals. This response soon exploded into massive military invasions costing billions in dollars. A response exacted upon peoples having nothing to do with the perpetrators of the attack on 9/11, other than possibly sharing a religious affiliation, perhaps a language, or maybe living in the neighborhood. And it continues on, despite rhetoric proclaiming otherwise.

What does this mean? What have we learned? What are the long-term consequences for our country? For our budget deficit, for how we are viewed around the world, or for the very soul of America? For the American Dream? Unfortunately, while what it means for us is inestimable, I fear we have not learned much. Or, at least, we have not learned the right lessons, beyond the aching hearts of the families of lost service members, and the lost hopes of those at home who suffer while our tax dollars are spent on death and destruction abroad. Beyond that, we rarely seem to think about these ongoing wars anymore, let alone discuss them, and would much rather forget about them. But the body counts and budget woes will not allow us to do that completely.

History is unfortunately littered with the carcasses and lost souls of civilizations who wasted themselves on military misadventures (as well as materialistic excess), at the expense of their economic and spiritual health. I hope that we can avoid that fate, and find our way again. I believe that path and inspiration comes may come with a change focus upon our American Dream.

Home Ownership is an Integral Part of the American Dream!

Government Guarantees and Mortgage Loans | The Diane Rehm Show from WAMU and NPR

It seemed disgustingly easy for the program guests -- who undoubtedly own their homes -- to relegate numbers of their fellow citizens to a lifetime of rental housing. I find that abhorrent. It is not only an American value to own your own home, but it (generally) produces stability both in families, neighborhoods, communities, and the country as a whole. Why must we discard this bedrock American value because of mismanagement by private and pseudo-private entities? Perhaps it mean smaller homes, or more condos rather than houses, but why throw the home ownership baby out with the market mismanagement bathwater?

Military Still Failing To Diagnose, Treat Brain Injuries : NPR

Military Still Failing To Diagnose, Treat Brain Injuries : NPR

This is disgusting. Men and women willing to give their lives for our country, for something bigger than themselves, and this is how they are repaid: with disregard and substandard care. Meanwhile we spend billions on weapons systems that we neither need nor the Pentagon really wants. There is something wrong with this picture....

The State Ground Zero is Grounds for Shame and a Sad Commentary on the Condition of our State

Ground Zero - 60 Minutes - CBS News

We should be ashamed.

There is no excuse.

As the report said, they built the Empire State Building in a year in the middle of the Great Depression.

We went to the Moon in a decade.

When the ten year anniversary of 9/11 rolls around we'll be lucky if there's anything more than a big hole of dirt.

This is an unfortunate sign and symbol of the decay that has set in in this country.  We have not headed warnings from the founders about the corrupting influences of corporate power and monied interests.  We have ignored words of caution from the likes of Eisenhower ("beware the military-industrial complex") and MLK ("A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.") and wise political scientists (Paul Kennedy's "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" of two decades ago warned of US "imperial overstretch).  Comparisons with the Roman Empire are current and apt.

We not only don't make things of substance much anymore, it also seems we can't build anything anymore.  Numerous countries build new skyscrapers while we can't even get our act together at an important site like this.

We are doomed and the American Dream will die a horrible death if we don't turn this ship around.

Fear Mongering with "15 Facts About China That Will Blow Your Mind"

The American Dream is unfortunately being replaced by fear.

15 Facts About China That Will Blow Your Mind

While much of this is just interesting facts, the thing that blows my mind is ridiculous fear-mongering in fact #8:

"China has 150% more soldiers than America does, plus a high tech 'Kill Weapon' the U.S. can't deal with."

What this doesn't go into is whether these troops are active duty or simply some kind of reserves. Or how well trained or equipped they are. Or what kind of missions they are prepared for. I am sure we best them on all counts....

As for some kind of special weapon, it's almost laughable. The USSR spent decades spending a hell of a lot more making all kinds of antiship missles aimed at our aircraft carriers. Carrier battle groups are defended by the most sophisticated air defense radar and missiles systems in the world. Besides, if you compare the US military to China's, it's not even a contest: we spend almost 8 times as much as China (and btw true estimates put us now at more than the rest of the world combined). We have probably hundreds of times as many nuclear weapons. We have dozens of nuclear subs; they have none. We have like a dozen aircraft carriers; they have none. We have experienced troops while the only thing Chinese troops have done since Korea is beat up on poor Tibetan civilians, and fly too close to a US spy plane. We have hundreds of bases around the world and the ability to project real power globally. They do not.

To pump up some perceived threat from China would be really funny if it weren't to seriously dangerous. That's all we need is a new arms race.

We have to stop allowing unsubstantial fears dictate our foreign policy if this country is ever going to get back on its feet.

Zero Diversity of Opinion: Diane Rehm Gives Free Air Time to NATO Apologists

Mission of NATO

(Comments I send to the Programming Department at WAMU, which produces the Diane Rehm Show)

I am disappointed and frankly horrified at the poor quality of the second half of Diane Rehm Show program on this date.  I don't know what she and your producers were thinking by inviting on three individuals who are all apologists for NATO and its member governments.  There are many and strong alternative points of view that do not have a place at the table today.  You have deprived your listeners of the expert knowledge and opinions that could be presented by alternate guests.  The reasonable discussion of the issues that results from a panel that gives a fair representation of the spectrum of opinion was impossible.

I hope that you will follow up with a program with three guests representing the following points of view not represented formally today: (1) the problematic modern history of NATO and reasons for its abolishment; (2) the historical and current problems caused by militarism and colonialism by Europe and the United States, and; (3) the unwise, illegal, and immoral nature of the continued occupation and war in Afghanistan.

Nathan Ruggles
Cincinnati, Ohio

*********

(I recognize that the Diane Rehm Show is not formally an NPR program.  However, it does appear on many of the same public radio stations.)

Charlotte Would Have Insisted on Antibiotics for Wilbur the Pig in Today's Corporate Web

The American Dream has so often in the past invoked the idea of a family homestead, or farm.  It also would indicate a desire for security and confidence in our food supply.

This piece involves both.

Facebook | Champaign County Farm Bureau: American Farm Bureau Federation Voices Concerns to CBS News, Katie Couric

I must first mention that I have not seen the original CBS report.  However, I hardly think it matters to the points below.

First, we must recognize that this letter comes from industry groups. They represent livestock companies and large factory farms.

(As an aside, I enjoy how they reject the terms "factory farms" and "industrial farms" yet they claim to represent an "industry" – some even have "industry" in their titles. The term they use – "modern" farm -- does not adequately describe the farms they represent, since there is a very big difference from the small family farm and the gigantic industrial farms in this country. The other terms, on the other hand, are indeed accurate; they just don't like them because they have expensive market research studies -- not to mention common sense -- that tells them that they don't play well in the public relations/marketing world. But I digress...)

In any case, the goal of these companies (and the groups that represent them) is to make money. Period. And as it should be. Naturally. They are businesses, after all. Money is the one and only thing we can count on them to value. However, if we recognize that fact, we also must understand that if any other things are to be valued -- public health, animal rights, human life, worker's rights, the environment, public safety -- then the public either as consumers or through their government have to introduce and enforce those values upon industry. Consumers are starting to speak by buying organic, for instance. And all those pesky regulations that industry hates so much -- because it costs them money, naturally -- are what keeps us and our families safe and allows us to sleep at night.

With that in mind, we have to remain ever skeptical of absolutely anything that these industry groups say, understanding that it will ever be in the self-interest of the industry, and therefore in the service of the almighty dollar. (The companies pay these industry groups handsomely to represent them and they darn well want their money's worth) Other values and the interests of us the citizens – let alone truth -- may well be damned, if it doesn't suit their interests. We must take everything they say -- including this letter -- with a grain of salt. (Hell, a whole salt mine wouldn't be a bad idea).

It also must be made clear that these industry groups only really represent the factory farms. Not the average family farm that built this country and created sustainable agriculture. Not the average farmer who works and cares for their own land.  They could care less about them -- except when the interests of the factory farms and the family farms happen to coincide -- and would just as soon put them out to pasture by buying them out or crushing them as to represent them.  Though of course, they love to claim to represent them, and play to American's love of the family farm when they do so (I especially love this photo on the homepage of the Livestock Marketing Assocation).  As an example, the Ohio Farm Bureau (made up mostly of larger corporate farms) is not the Ohio Family Farm Coalition (which represents real people), though they may claim otherwise.

(As another aside, by representing factor farms they also claim to represent "conventional" farms.  Which begs the question: as opposed to what?  Family farms?  Organic farms?  One would assume "unconventional" farms at least.  However -- in support of this term it seems -- they cite that antibiotics have been "used in livestock for half a century," implying it has been a lengthy time.  On the other hand, agriculture has existed for thousands of years without antibiotics.  Now, who is really being "unconventional?")

With that being said, there is an inescapable logic that this letter and the industry ignores (because it is not in their interest). That is, it has been conclusively shown without a doubt that overuse of antibiotics -- whether in humans or in livestock -- promotes the growth of antibiotic resistant bacteria. This is more conclusive in humans, I believe, but what is good for the goose, in this case, is good for the swine. It has become more widely accepted that physicians for this very reason should avoid prescribing antibiotics unless they know that an illness is driven by a bacteria that can be combated by that antibiotic. This has not always been the practice in the past. Physicians have (and still do) prescribe antibiotics for patients begging for medication but who suffer from viruses that only time and rest will cure. And it is not even the case that we give antibiotics to people who aren't even sick, but whom we merely suspect might have been exposed. Or even given to people that have not even been expose, as a mere preventative. To suggest such a thing would be laughable in the medical community. Yet this is regular practice now in the livestock industry. There is a  study in which the Union of Concerned Scientists -- a well-respected non-profit organization with no financial stake in the outcome -- found that 70% of antibiotics are given to livestock that are perfectly healthy.  This is a recipe for disaster. That is, if we value the long-term public health.

But this is not what industry values. As a reminder, they (and rightly so) value the dollar above all. They perceive that antibiotics in the short term seem to promote healthier livestock. They see results of all these and other chemicals and methods in terms of fatter, larger pigs. They have also bought into the sales pitches of other industries that produce and sell the antibiotics and the alleged benefits they produce. This may be good for the bottom line, but is it good for the average American?

Just as pharmaceutical companies can trot out study after study that they pay for and which seem to show that their drugs are wonderful so therefore we all should buy them, the livestock industry can do the same. They can make all kinds of claims about this strain or that strain, and whether it has shown up or not, or been actually proven to spread between livestock and humans. But what if we actually wait for the proof? How many would have had to die of the Black Death before the rat lobby would have admitted that the proof existed that rodents were indeed the ones guilty of spreading the disease? How much of the ice cap has to melt before we have the "proof" we need to show that global warming exists? Does the rising ocean waters actually have to reach our bottom lips? Likewise, with the knowledge that bacteria routinely mutates into hardier and more deadly strains, and that they evolve to jump species from animal to human, how much proof do we need that the next lethal bacteria has actually spread to humans before we take action to prevent what could be the worst health crisis to hit humankind since smallpox and polio reigned or before penicillin existed?

I also know that all of Europe has now adopted the Danish methods that these American industry groups attempt to trash. It hardly makes sense that they would do so if the results weren't worthwhile.

I do not claim to be an expert on this subject. And I do know that antibiotics can be used safely, responsibly, and beneficially in livestock (and humans). However, I will forever remain wary of the claims made by self-interested money-worshipping industries – whether borne in a letter, in a "scientific study," or by the lips of Rush Limbaugh -- that have shown time and again that they are far from truthful and will lie, deceive, and fabricate if it benefits them (can we say the cigarette industry, for but one example), and that money is really all that they love. If I care about values other than money and the welfare of myself and the ones that I love, then it is the only responsible thing to do.

Racism is alive and well in the U.S.: Part 1

So. Very. Offensive.

Not to mention dangerous.

Tancredo Says Obama Won Because We Lack a ‘Literacy Test Before People Can Vote’ « SpeakEasy

(I actually find the grassroots concerns of average working people -- expressing their genuine hopes and fears -- which are reflected by some of the Tea Party activists both interesting and powerful. But these are not the people at this convention, by and large, which was populated by elites that could afford the pricey entry ticket.)

Op-Ed Columnist - America Is Not Yet Lost - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - America Is Not Yet Lost - NYTimes.com

Klugman makes some good points here. A response and the implications for the American Dream.

1. If we keep it up, despite what Klugman says, we will indeed emulate the Romans (and the Hapsburgs, and the French, and the British, and the Russian Soviets....), both in terms of imperial overstretch, and the non-functioning and the corruption of the Senate -- along with their ceded of power to the executive -- which was an integral part of it's downfall. Poland was never an Empire...

2. We should separate the sources of the current problems. Some stem from the current Senate as it stands today in terms of how it operates. Then there are those whose source is traceable to the institution as it was formed and evolved.

In terms of today, our Congress is wholly owned by monied interests, who demand these special favors that Krugman mentions in return for all the financial support they provide candidates. This will only get worse with the recent Supreme Court rulings. Founders foresaw some of this: Jefferson warned of monied interests. However, I don't think they could have seen how incredibly powerful and corrupting it could be.

As an aside, this prompts the question: so even without Republican obstructionism, would something gloriously substantial be happening? Passage of so-called health care reform?

In terms of the Senate institutionally, it always has been fundamentally undemocratic. Even following reforms from a century ago, it still violates the basic principle of one person one vote. A Senator from Wyoming represents the voices of like a half a million people, and on from CA like 30 some million. This creates a core problem.

If these issues are not addressed -- the current corruption and fundamental undemocratic structures -- then the American Dream will continue to be in jeopardy.