Con: AARP’s tacit endorsement of Medicare cuts line its pockets, but shortchanges seniors
By GRACE-MARIE TURNER - Thursday, Nov. 5, 2009
ALEXANDRIA, VA --
Why would AARP, sworn to protect the interests of senior citizens, watch silently as Congress plans to cut Medicare spending by $400 billion to pay for its health reform legislation? Could it be that the interests of seniors and AARP are not exactly aligned?
Pro: AARP’s apolitical efforts spurred many reforms that aid today’s seniors
By WAYNE MADSEN - Thursday, Nov. 5, 2009
WASHINGTON -- For supporting health care reform, AARP suddenly finds itself under attack by the vociferous voices of the far right.
Con: The EPA wants to put a time bomb in America’s gas tanks
By ANDREW P. MORRISS - Saturday, Oct. 31, 2009
CHAMPAIGN, IL. -- Corn-based ethanol, the type currently used in the United States, is a terrible transportation fuel whose production has serious environmental consequences and raises food prices for the world’s poor while delivering few net environmental benefits. Requiring higher blends of it to be put into engines not designed to handle those levels of the corrosive, water-attracting fuel without adequate testing is a gamble on a grand scale.
Pro: Increasing ethanol use is key to attaining goal of a cleaner planet
By BOB STALLMAN - Saturday, Oct. 31, 2009
WASHINGTON --
Increased ethanol blend rates can further reduce the price of gasoline and ensure the availability of fuel to keep America moving.
Pro: We need to vaccinate all emergency workers
By JEFFREY AXELRAD - Saturday, Oct. 17, 2009
WASHINGTON --
Policy for the potential 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic should not be based on what did not happen in 1976; we should not act like generals fighting the last war.
Con: Forcing untested vaccines on any American directly violates everyone’s civil liberties
By WAYNE MADSEN - Saturday, Oct. 17, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The rush of the Food and Drug Administration, Centers for Disease Control, Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health in endorsing the swine flu vaccine has created fear, suspicion and angst among both the general public and the health provider community.
Pro: Occupying Afghanistan will make things worse
By MARK WEISBROT - Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009
WASHINGTON -- President Obama should go with the people and set a timetable to get our troops out of Afghanistan as soon as is practically possible, which should be less than one year. Their presence cannot contribute to bringing peace and security to that country, nor does it contribute to the security of the United States. In fact, the occupation of Afghanistan is making things worse on both counts.
Con: Obama must go for a knockout in Afghanistan
By BOGDAN KIPLING - Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009
WASHINGTON --
One thing is already crystal-clear: Americans and the NATO allies cannot win by hesitation or huddling in fortified enclaves—even if Obama sends the additional 40,000 troops that Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has requested.
Pro: Green jobs are springing up daily
By KATHY E. READ - Saturday, Oct. 3, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The sun seems an ideal place to tap for the clean energy that will eventually reduce greenhouse gases and turn today’s gray sky to tomorrow’s blue. The flurry of green energy activity should multiply if and when Congress enacts its pending omnibus climate change legislation.
Con: Green job subsidies will destroy far more jobs than they create
By BEN LIEBERMAN - Saturday, Oct. 3, 2009
WASHINGTON --
A study by The Heritage Foundation estimates a loss of 1,145,000 jobs from the Waxman-Markey bill. These are net job losses, after any “new” green jobs are taken into account. The three analyses of the bill done by the federal government also predict net job losses.
Con: Congress should ensure consumers get quality financial protection
By SARAH JANE HUGHES - Saturday, Sept. 19, 2009
BLOOMINGTON, IND. --
To solve the “consumer protection problem,” Congress should do three things: (1) identify what did not work, and what did; (2) fit the solution to the actual problems found; and (3) keep functioning consumer protection agencies working—so that people won’t wait years for a new agency to get down to work.
Pro: Congress should scrap consumer protection agency and start over
By THOMAS J. DONOHUE - Saturday, Sept. 19, 2009
WASHINGTON --
There are four major problems with the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency: It would hand unprecedented power to a massive new government bureaucracy; it would restrict access to credit and consumer choice; it would add layer upon layer of new regulations to an already confusing regulatory regime; and it would undermine privacy.
Con: Obama must pass health and energy acts to restore prosperity and retain his efficacy
By WAYNE MADSEN - Saturday, Sept. 12, 2009
WASHINGTON -- There is no indication that if industries such as Big Coal or Big Oil received a pass to continue business as usual it would save any jobs, but numerous studies suggest it would exacerbate catastrophic global warming by the end of the century—and perhaps before.
Pro: Cost of cap-and-trade would devastate economy
By DAVID A. RIDENOUR - Saturday, Sept. 12, 2009
WASHINGTON --
Nearly 15 million Americans are looking for work, bringing the official unemployment rate to 9.7—the highest in 26 years. If the Senate passes the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, that rate will go much higher. Employment and access to health insurance are inextricably linked.
Con: A return to prosperity is light-years away if we follow Obama’s road map
By ELAINE CHAO - Saturday, Sept. 5, 2009
WASHINGTON -- On Labor Day, millions of Americans will consult their Rand McNally Road Atlas before hitting the highway. But those seeking the quickest route to Lost Jobs and Delayed Recovery need only to follow the Obama-Pelosi Policy Atlas
- « Older
- Newer »
