Go Home

Head Start

3 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

Your Budget Represents Your Values

Jim Wallis repeats the words of Martin Luther King Jr.: "A budget is a moral document."

In the first three years of the Clinton White House, there were two memorable budget wars, in 1993 and 1995. The open fights with the Republicans were brutal, highest-of-high stakes white-knuckle showdowns where Clinton’s entire Presidency was on the line. Behind the scenes, though, our internal fights inside the White House were almost as intense. One thing I will never forget was a meeting where my old friend Bob Boorstin, one of the earliest staffers to join Clinton’s campaign, was fighting to keep some important line items in place that would help the poor, and bluntly told President Clinton, “Your budget represents your values.”

While those of us fighting for more spending to help low- and middle-income people lost a few rounds in these internal debates, we won more than we lost, and in both 1993 and 1995 the budgets Clinton presented and the ones he ended up negotiating with Congress were quite progressive. The 1993 budget raised taxes on the wealthy, lowered taxes on the poor through a big expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit, and increased investment in programs like education, the environment, Head Start, and Student Grants and Loans. In the 1995 budget showdown with the Republicans in Congress, Clinton rejected the advice of people like Mark Penn that he avoid a showdown, and decided to draw a line in the sand to save “Medicare, Medicaid, Education, and the Environment” from cuts Gingrich wanted to impose, and he decisively won that battle. In all of the budgets that Clinton proposed and negotiated with Congress while President, he (for the most part) embraced Democratic values.

Twenty years after Clinton’s first epic budget battle, our current Democratic president is wrestling with what budget to propose to Congress. The House and the Senate have already proposed radically different ideas of what a budget should look like, so obviously what Obama proposes is just one part of a much longer budget debate, but symbolically, as a presentation of his values, it remains a very important moment. The president has been spending the last year and a half talking about how he wants to fight for the middle class, and his budget should reflect those values.

This is why it is so deeply troubling, as the Wall Street Journal and other news outlets are now reporting, that Obama is strongly considering putting a Social Security cut into his budget document. By doing this, the President can no longer fall back on what he has been telling progressives and Democrats in Congress, that he doesn’t want to cut Social Security but is willing to trade it for some good things that the Republicans would give up in a budget deal. By embracing- embracing! Social Security cuts as part of his budget, his statement of values, the President is telling the American public, senior citizens, and progressives that he wants to cut what they overwhelmingly and passionately support.

Continue reading »



The Next Self-Made Crisis

There is a great deal of angst and worry among progressives about what is going to happen in two months, when the Republicans will once again try to hold the economy hostage so they can cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education, and everything else in the federal budget that helps low- and middle-income folks. It is of course a bad situation when you have one branch of the government eager to blow up the economy to do bad things that more than 80 percent of Americans oppose, but we need to spend a lot less time worrying and a lot more time organizing.

We can beat these guys, and beat them badly, if we have a focused and aggressive strategy.

There are four things progressives should do right now. The first relates to the President. I understand the disappointment we're feeling about his kicking the can down the road another two months, and the leverage lost on the revenue side. And I was very critical of the President’s willingness to swap cuts in Social Security benefits for a deal in this last go-around, and will fight him with every ounce of energy if he proposes any such thing again. But right now is the worst possible time to be raising doubts about this President’s willingness to hang tough in a negotiation as some of my friends in the progressive movement are doing.

The Republicans need to know that the President is deadly serious when he says he won’t negotiate on the debt ceiling, and that the entire progressive movement and Democratic party have his back on this. No negotiation whatsoever. Period and end of sentence.

Continue reading »



On Hannity Monday night Bob Beckel got really ticked off after Neal Boortz said that Head Start was a failure, and dropped the F bomb - without realizing they were still on the air. Of course, it's not such a surprise, considering the wild antics that are such a big part of Fox News, I can see why he'd have trouble telling the difference:

Bob Beckel didn’t realize when the commercial break ended during tonight’s final segment of Hannity, caught in a heated off-camera argument with fellow panelist Neal Boortz. Off-air debates, we thus learned, are granted a much more colorful range of vocabulary than on-air debates, and as the cameras started rolling, the first words on national television were, “You don’t know what the f*ck you’re talking about.”

In a blooper that is as hilarious as it increasingly becomes painful, it slowly dawns on Beckel what actually happened, as Hannity insists he apologize and Beckel, after saying he won’t several times, finally realizes the cameras are actually rolling. When he finally figured it out, he told Hannity to “run your show better,” then covered his head in shame and refused to speak, other than to say “I’m going to be fired.”

Hannity explained the situation– the two were in a heated debate while he and Tea Party activist Jennifer Stefano played catch with the famed Hannity show football. Beckel didn’t look over at the producer giving a five-second warning and inadvertently went off on-screen. When he finally realized what happened, Beckel was beyond contrite, instead saying he was going to get fired and refusing to speak for the rest of the segment. Both Stefano and Boortz tried to comfort him– Stefano trying to continue the policy debate, Boortz adding, “if they try to fire you, we’ll defend you.”

Well, sure. Because you can say just about anything when you work in the circus.

Fox edited out Beckel's cursing during their re-air of the show. Video of more of the damage control after they realized what he'd done below the fold.

Continue reading »