Tag Archives: poverty

FISCAL CLIFF OVER BENGHAZI,By Louise Annarino,November 29,2012

29 Nov

FISCAL CLIFF OVER BENGHAZI , By Louise Annarino, November 29,2012


On September 11, 2012 4 Americans in the diplomatic service of the United States, at one of the most dangerous postings in the Middle East were murdered in Benghazi, Libya.


During the first 2 weeks of September 2012, 32 Americans were killed in Detroit; one of them and Iraq Vet and father of five children named Davis Nelson, who pushed aside a woman neighbor about to be shot by her husband in a domestic dispute and took the bullet himself. (http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/19568205/32-people-murdered-over-15-day-period-in-detroit ).


By the time of the Benghazi murders,Chicago had already seen 400 Americans murdered within its borders during 2012. During August 2012 alone, 38 persons were killed.( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/chicago-homicides-reach-4_n_1929015.html ).


In Columbus,Ohio 83 Americans had been murdered between January 1 and  November 29, 2012.  The breakdown: 88% male, 70.7% African-American, 56.5% age 20-39, 79.3% shooting victims. ( http://www.dispatch.com/content/pages/data/crime-safety/homicide/homicides.html ).


During the past year, more than a 1,000 children died before their first birthdays in Ohio. The breakdown: 6.3% white, 5.7% Latino, and 15.8% African-American; likely the highest in the nation for African-American babies. ( http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/11/29/black-infant-deaths-worst-of-bad-news.html ).


More than 1 in 5 of all American children live in poverty; 1 in 3 American children of color live in poverty. As a result, America loses half a trillion dollars per year in lost productivity, increased health care costs, and increased crime. ( http://www.childrensdefense.org/newsroom/child-watch-columns/child-watch-documents/forward-for-children.html ).

Excuse me for finding American’s obsessive concern about fiscal cliffs and the terrorist attack in Benghazi nothing short of ridiculous. Many Americans live on the fiscal cliff, just over its edge struggling to hang on, or at the bottom of the cliff all of their lives. Many Americans face the threat of violence and death daily in American cities and towns. The silence has been deafening in addressing these issues. It is not that Americans have been unaware of the problem; but, their solution has been to flee to suburbs and gated communities rather than addressing the needs of fellow Americans they identify as “the other”.

Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) and others warn us that we must protect the low tax rate of the richest of the rich and their investments. To do so he insists we cut  redefined entitlements. Entitlements are those things to which one is entitled; over which one has ownership rights. These same small-government proponents propose taking away our property rights, our entitlement to the Social Security and Medicare benefits we paid for through payroll deductions from every paycheck we have ever earned by reason of our labor. They have redefined entitlements as gifts from our socialist president, and socialist Democratic party. Please, spare us the hypocrisy. You spare us very little else.

And John McCain reminds us daily that 4 Americans died in Ben Gahzi. Mr. Cain, where is your outrage over the Americans killed by violence in the hearts of our cities every night? Over the infant mortality rate for our babies? Over the 3532 American Iraq War dead? Which you supported despite the obvious lies used to justify it. Forgive me if I find your outrageous disdain for Ambassador Rice the farce it is.

It has been difficult for me to write because it has been difficult to channel my anger toward those who continue to obstruct the people’s business in Congress, who continue to filter their world view through a racist and sexist lens, who believe they lost the 2012 election simply because they mistakenly and incompetently marketed their party platform to the public, and who only regret the failure, but not the use, of their voter suppression efforts.

I admire President Obama’s ability to tolerate such hypocrisy and continue to seek workable agreements with persons whose words twist reality, whose motives cannot be trusted, and whose sexist and racist world view is potentially harmful to so many Americans. We must demand  that President Obama, Rep.Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC)and Sen.Harry Reid(D-NEV) ask more of their Republican colleagues, not less, in their negotiations. At the very least they must demand respect for people of color and women (including Ambassador Rice), adherence to truth, and a firm commitment to openly support any agreements they reach.

I grieve the loss of life in Ben Ghazi, and continued threats to those Americans who represent our country abroad. But, I also grieve the the daily threats to America’s children and families who face on-going threats of economic loss and violence, especially within the African-American community. Where is our outrage on their behalf? Who will speak for these Americans? Will you?




DEFICIT LIVES,By Louise Annarino, October 14, 2012

14 Oct

DEFICIT LIVES, By Louise Annarino, October 14, 2012

The effort to make Americans fear deficit-spending could be better used discussing what we should do to stop deficit-living. Core areas of our cities, small towns and rural areas are struggling to survive. Poverty has dug a hole, a social and personal deficit, in which large groups of our populace reside. The stimulus has stopped the slide into the hole for most, offered a hand up and out for many, but too many see no way out.

How did we get here, with holes so deeply torn in our social fabric that the middle class has fallen through those holes along with the impoverished? When we did we stop building and strengthening America so all of us could keep the American Dream alive? Instead we allowed charlatans in the think-tanks, lobbyist firms, and the media to paper over the holes, and keep us entertained so we would not notice that the pretty prints they used were mere paper. It started out slowly, but with fall after fall widening the holes entire sections of the fabric split wide open, until the entire fabric was in danger of slipping out of our hands. President Obama took a firm grip, and sewed stimulus patches made of strong material over the holes, all the while warning us that the cloth was worn and need to be replaced; that the holes had so weakened the fabric that major change was needed,and that the fabric could otherwise tear again. But those who met secretly during his inauguration to plot his own down-fall through those holes, pledged to keep them open.

Republicans blocked President Obama’s efforts to select and install a new fabric to support our lives. Many confuse this fabric with the ‘safety net’ strung below it; but, it is not just the safety net which is in danger from Republican policies and the Romney-Ryan Budget, it is the entire fabric strung above the net. Yes, the safety net is struggling; but, not because it was not well-designed, nor well-built, but because it is overloaded by those who fell through holes in our social fabric. It was never intended to hold so many of us. The one way we can relieve stress on our safety net is to replace the social fabric and pull as many Americans off the safety net and back up into the middle class as we possibly can. This is what President Obama intends to do, what he has been doing, and what he will continue to do if re-elected. We must cast our vote to re-elect him president, and cast our vote to elect Democrats to the U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and to state offices who support his vision and will work with him to get the job done. What we do not need are those who insist we cannot replace nor repair the whole cloth; but, must simply remove people from the safety net through privatization of medicare, social security etc.

The National Poverty Center reports that the poverty rate was  22.4 percent, or 39.5 individuals during the 1950’s. “These numbers declined steadily throughout the 1960s, reaching a low of 11.1 percent, or 22.9 million individuals, in 1973. Over the next decade, the poverty rate fluctuated between 11.1 and 12.6 percent, but it began to rise steadily again in 1980. By 1983, the number of poor individuals had risen to 35.3 million individuals, or 15.2 percent.” http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/.

I still recall the photos of starving children, eyes wide with uncertainty, on the porches of Appalachia and the Mississippi Delta which stirred President Lyndon Johnson to declare a War on Poverty in the 1960s, which led to the decline of poverty. President Ronald Reagan’s stance in the 1980’s was that we had lost the War on Poverty;and, that social safety net benefits did not justify its cost. We soon saw poverty levels increase.This Reaganomics view of poverty prevails today. But a new paper from Bruce D. Meyer and James X. Sullivan says it’s missing everything. “We may not have won the war on poverty, but we are certainly winning,” they write. When they looked at poorer families’ consumption rather than income, accounted for changes in the tax code that benefit the poor, and included “noncash benefits” such as food stamps and government-provided medical care, they found poverty fell 12.5 percentage points between 1972 and 2010.” In effect, they are explaining that the safety net does work.

The problem is NOT the safety net but growing income inequality in our social fabrichttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-12/record-u-dot-s-dot-poverty-rate-holds-as-inequality-grows During the last decade the highest quintile of earners saw their real income rise 1.6% and the top 5% saw their incomes rise 4.9%, while the middle class saw their incomes decline 1.9%. The very lowest incomes, those in the safety net, saw their incomes stay the same. None of this data means the income of those in the safety net is adequate. Nevertheless, the extremely poor (those with less than 1/2 of official poverty level earnings), remained at 6.6% of the population. The middle class has not fallen that low because President Obama’s policies stopped the fall. As more people returned to work in a steady rise over the past nearly 4 years, the fabric of America grows stronger as well.

More is yet to be done, as President Obama reminds us. We cannot reduce the deficit and continue Bush tax breaks for top earners. In fact we must increase their income tax rate,including an increase on capital gains. The estate tax must not be eliminated but increased for those at the highest earning bracket, who are the only persons currently required to pay estate tax, it having been eliminated for lower income earners decades ago. And we must end the round of ceaseless war which benefits military contractors, and corrupt government officials at home and abroad. President Obama, as Vice-President Biden affirmed in his recent debate with Congressman Paul Ryan insists that American troops will be out of Afghanistan in 2014. He suggests that we instead, rebuild America’s education and transportation systems, repair and further develop American infrastructure, invest in small business development and manufacturing, research and develop green and innovative technologies, reduce and redesign our military capabilities for more cost effective security at home and abroad.

We can do all this and reduce the economic deficit. But, we must also end our willingness to overlook poverty, especially for those most greatly affected by it, our women and children.We cannot grow our economy when our children are not given the tools they need to compete and succeed. The National Poverty Center reports: “The poverty rate for all persons masks considerable variation between racial/ethnic subgroups. Poverty rates for blacks and Hispanics greatly exceed the national average. In 2010, 27.4 percent of blacks and 26.6 percent of Hispanics were poor, compared to 9.9 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 12.1 percent of Asians.

Poverty rates are highest for families headed by single women, particularly if they are black or Hispanic. In 2010, 31.6 percent of households headed by single women were poor, while 15.8 percent of households headed by single men and 6.2 percent of married-couple households lived in poverty. (See the U.S. census chart below)

“There are also differences between native-born and foreign-born residents. In 2010, 19.9 percent of foreign-born residents lived in poverty, compared to 14.4 percent of residents born in the United States. Foreign-born, non-citizens had an even higher incidence of poverty, at a rate of 26.7 percent.” http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/.

Children Under 18 Living in Poverty, 2010
Category Number (in thousands) Percent
All children under 18 16, 401 22.0
White only, non-Hispanic 5,002 12.4
Black 4,817 38.2
Hispanic 6,110 35.0
Asian 547 13.6

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2010, Report P60, n. 238, Table B-2, pp. 68-73.

Those like Paul Ryan who argue we must reduce the deficit by reducing the safety net, decreasing income and benefits, weaken labor unions, reduce the size of government and lay-off government workers, privatizing government responsibilities as means to reduce government costs are “whistling Dixie” in more ways than one. Paul Ryan voted for unfunded Medicare Part D, which President Obama, unlike President Bush, has now included in his budget and improved through Obamacare by closing the donut hole. Including this expense within the Obama budget is really a disclosure of previously hidden Bush budget expenses. This is also true for the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which were passed as emergency measures, not budget items; included by President Obama in his budget and added to official budget deficit figures, but not done so by President Bush.

One must also note that Bush war-funding was historically unprecedented. To pay for World War II, Americans bought savings bonds and put extra notches in their belts. President Harry Truman raised taxes and cut nonmilitary spending to pay for the Korean conflict. During Vietnam, the US raised taxes but still watched deficits soar. President Bush did nothing to control the burgeoning deficits of war. Republicans and Democrats, unwilling to leave troops in the field without funding, settled with uncompromising Republican leadership and allowed this strategic undercounting of the deficit to go unabated and continued to vote for emergency war-funding, outside the regular budget bills. The willingness to kick the can down the road has become a hallmark of Republicans as they block every Democratic bill to increase jobs, reduce deficit, and stimulate the economy during the Obama administration. They are not ashamed , but proud of this tactic in their strategy to make  President Obama a one-term president. In the recently released video of Mitt Romney talking with his well-heeled donors in May he takes this tactic a step further,when he said the Palestinians were not interested in peace, the chances of a peace agreement was remote and the whole issue should be kicked down the field. Kicking problems down the field seems to have become an accepted Republican strategy. The Bush tax cuts added some $2.8 trillion to the national debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Congressman Paul Ryan voted for those cuts. To his credit, Ryan also backed the Troubled Asset Relief Program bailout, most of which has been paid back, and the auto bailout.http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/is-paul-ryan-really-a-fiscal-hawk/261170/. I mention this because it is disingenuous and hypocritical to blame the deficit on President Obama and democrats in Congress.

I first noticed this Republican disregard for current reality and for balanced budgets during 6 months of debate over Medicare reform in early 2003. I had falsely believed that Republicans were fiscally more conservative than Democrats. Clearly,I was wrong. Reagan, I was aware, had little to no regard for fiscal responsibility, but he had once been a Democrat after all !

Like many others, I saw the need for prescription coverage for seniors and hoped new legislation would allow the government to negotiate for lower costs and formulary control similar to V.A. cost-control efforts. Big Pharma lobbyists blocked, and continue to block such an effort. The bill came to a vote at 3 a.m., just minutes before it was scheduled to close, the clock was stopped for 3 hours with the bill losing, 219-215 while Republicans on the floor, and including President Bush by phone, strong-armed congressman to change their vote. “Then-Representative Nick Smith (R-MI) claimed he was offered campaign funds for his son, who was running to replace him, in return for a change in his vote from ‘nay’ to ‘yea.’ After controversy ensued, Smith clarified no explicit offer of campaign funds was made, but that he was offered ‘substantial and aggressive campaign support’ which he had assumed included financial support.” http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/is-paul-ryan-really-a-fiscal-hawk/261170/.

At about 5:50 a.m. the bill passed the House 220-215. The bill itself was finally passed in the Senate 54-44 on November 25, 2003, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on December 8. Now, Romney and Ryan threaten to eliminate Obamacare and its improvements of medicare, including Part D; plan to privatize medicare and social security. If these programs are more costly than they need be it is because of Republican refusal to rein in excess costs businesses extract from the program.

Medicare Part D did provide prescription coverage but did not reduce costs as much as it could have because of what it failed to include: it prohibits the Federal government from negotiating discounts with drug companies, and it prevents the government from establishing a formulary. It did, however, provide a subsidy for large employers to discourage them from eliminating private prescription coverage to retired workers (a key AARP goal). Obamacare now provides subsidies to small businesses which makes their overall provision of health care insurance affordable. Efforts to include negotiating costs for drugs under Obamacare was blocked by Republicans.

Clearly, it is not Obama’s efforts to reduce medical and insurance costs which makes these medial social fabric programs a drain on government coffers, but the effort of Republicans to protect and expand financial gain of private service providers. President Obama and Congressional Democrats do not seek unfair advantage over private providers; but seek to stop unfair advantage, fraud and abuse by such providers. Obamacare is already predicted to save medicare $716 billion in such provider and insurance company abuses. That money is being channeled to provide more preventive, cost-free health care services for medicare users. This is how we create a stronger social fabric for the middle class. Improving and increasing medicaid coverage is another part of strengthening American fabric.

During an economic downturn, individuals lose jobs, incomes drop, state revenues decline, and more individuals qualify and enroll in Medicaid which increases program spending. However,data indicate that declines in state revenues were a much more significant factor for state budget gaps than increases in Medicaid spending. “Total state revenues dropped by 30% in FY 2009 compared to total Medicaid spending increases of about 7.6% in that year,” http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7580-08.pdf.

Today, 50 states plan or are implementing a new policy to control medicaid costs in multiple areas. State revenues have shown positive growth fro the last 7 quarters, as the unemployment rate continues to drop (now 7.8%) and the GNP continues to improve. States must continue to make delivery of service changes designed to improve care and control costs, thanks to Obamacare. Its “maintenance of eligibility” requirements generally prohibit states from restricting Medicaid eligibility or tightening enrollment procedures. Obama’s focus on wise and educated restructuring of programs for maximum efficiency and best practices in care delivery are another part of strengthening the American fabric.

But, and this is important, these improvements take time. They must however occur if the American Dream is to survive. While government works to  balance budgets, streamline and improve services, reduces fraud and waste it must never forget the impact of income inequality on those African-American, Latino and immigrant single-mothers. we must help them raise their children out of the safety net and up onto the social fabric of the middle-class. We must provide preventive health care, women’s reproductive health care, and children’s health care to everyone in America. We must be certain every child is well-fed, provided with stimulating day-care and pre-schools to ready them for a top-notch education. They need warm clothes for winter, safe after school and summer programs, neighborhoods free of crime and violence. We must not only show them a way out of poverty, but strengthen and empower them to follow the path. I am reminded of the United Negro College Fund motto “ A Mind Is a Terrible Thing  to Waste.” Our American middle-class motto must be “ A Child is a Terrible Thing to Waste.”  President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden would weave this motto into the fabric of America. They will not kick American children down the road, until the deficit is paid off. They will not continue and increase income inequality with tax relief to those who don’t need it. They will reduce the economic deficit AND the human deficit, by reducing income inequality.  That is how we strengthen the American fabric for all of us.


11 Jun

A Day With Dad: Economic Lessons of the Working Class

Louise Annarino

June 11, 2012


Feet on the hassock, legs crossed at the ankle, lit pipe dangling over his left lower lip, Angelo lay back against the chair and closed his eyes, hoping the children would give him two minutes to rest.


“You shouldn’t sleep while smoking,” chided  5 year old Louise.


“I’m just resting my eyes,” her Dad responded with a sigh.


It was his questioning child who sat on the floor at his feet, the one who was never satisfied with a simple answer; who always followed each answer he gave with the question, “But why?”. He slowly opened his eyes and stared into his daughter’s questioning gaze. “What did you want?”, he asked.


“Can I have a horse?”




“Why not?”


“Horses need a lot of room to run. We don’t have enough property for a horse.”


“Why not?”


“We can’t afford a farm; we can’t even buy this house. And even if we could it would not be large enough for a horse.”


“Why can’t we buy a farm?”


“We don’t have enough money.”


“How do we get money?”


“You think money grows on trees; we have to work for it.”


“Can we work more so we can get more money?”


“I already work 14-16 hour days 7 days a week. I can’t work any more than I already do.”



“Oh. Well, if you work so hard why don’t you have enough to buy a house?”


“Because it takes money to make money, and we started our business with very little money.’


“Can I work?”


“No, you are too young.”


“If I can’t get money, then how can I make more money?”


“You can’t.”


“But, why not?”


“Ask the rich people.”


“How did they get rich?”


“They dad’s or grandads stole it from someone else, starting with the Indians, and used it to make more money.”


“It’s wrong to steal, isn’t it?”




“Why don’t rich people share their money so everyone can make more money? Then, no one would be poor.”


“Rich people never share anything. They don’t even pay their bills. I would rather cater a wedding for a poor man than a rich one. Poor people pay me right away. The rich people complain about every little thing and try to avoid paying the full bill. They delay,delay,delay. Some of them have never paid me.”


“But, why not?”


“They think they are entitled to my hard work;that they are better than us.”




“Because we are working stiffs.”




“Because we were poor.”






“But, why because.”






18 Mar

Louise Annarino
March 18,2012

Watching flood water inundate Hebron, Ohio his week reminded me of the 1959 flood which caused my family’s evacuation from our Newark, Ohio home. Our street lay between the railroad tracks and the Licking River, in a neighborhood where Italian immigrants displaced Germans who had come before them. It was rich in culture, if not in cash.

The Sisters sent us home from school early that morning to be with our families as the water continued to rise and flooding seemed certain. My 12 year old brother Angelo joined other neighborhood men and boys at the levee, filling sandbags to hold the rapidly rising river at bay. It was January, the ground still frozen, and the rain steady. It was cold.

My Mother had put her huge soup pot on the stove and was making enough beef stew to feed half the population of evacuees. She was ready for anyone who was forced to flee and needed shelter until the water receded. Dad called every hour or so to check on us; his restaurant open as an emergency station for local police officers, state highway patrol, National Guardsmen and fire personnel. He would be there throughout the ordeal offering hot coffee and meals to our rescuers.

While Mom hummed and cooked I packed every suitcase or satchel with clothes for my three brothers. I layered 6 year old Michael in every item I could fit over him, sat him on the couch with a few toys and told him to be ready to put on his coat because we would be leaving soon. I packed six month old Johnny’s diaper bag, dressed him in several layers, and prepared extra blankets to wrap him up when they time came. I knew we were leaving because the water was rising all around us; the sand-bagging temporarily safeguarding the few nearest streets.

Mom insisted I was overreacting when I piled every jar of baby food in the cupboard into brown grocery bags. While I was listening to geography on the radio, Mom was listening to the numbers of persons made homeless. It was not clear to either of us, each of us listening so hard, what we must do. I insisted we leave; Mom was determined to stay. Dad had told us the Army Corps of Engineers guy warned him that our entire south-end would be under water and we needed to prepare to leave. So, we prepared. When Mom called to tell the radio announcer she was offering our home as a shelter with plenty of hot food and a place to be warm and dry, she finally understood no one would be coming to our house. As she spoke he aired her information directly to his audience. When he asked her to provide the address for people, she told him and he responded to my satifaction, “Lady, you are in the evacuation area! You need to get out of there as soon as possible.”

Within minutes Angelo ran in announcing the levee was leaking and sure to break open, so everyone was fleeing. Things got serious then. Mom decided Michael still would need a birthday cake on his birthday the next day and began packing flour,sugar,cocoa,butter,eggs and vanilla. She filled containers with water, gathered milk and juice, fruit and vegetables. An Army ‘duck’ was patrolling the street,a soldier shouting from his bullhorn, “everyone, evacuate immediately…IMMEDIATELY!” We were ready, but need transportation. Dad had our only car. Luckily, Dad arrived within minutes, just behind the army personnel who had allowed him permission to enter our sealed-off neighborhood. He ran to the basement, turning off the gas, water and electric to avoid potential fire or explosion as water began rising in the basement. We were not able to put all we had packed into the car. Dad quickly prioritized food and water, baby supplies, the many layers of clothes we were wearing, and extra blankets. We were each allowed a pillow, but no toys. My new Shirley Temple doll, the love of my life,was to be left to fend for herself. I was crushed. I cried all the way to Grandpa Annarino’s house, where we would be staying. He lived on some of the highest ground in Newark.

The next day, despite every adult’s protest, but to the delight of us children Michael blew out the candles on his birthday cake. The adults opined it was a waste of precious water and eggs; the kids opined it was the best cake ever. We were safe. Mom and I were contentedly happy women. After dropping us off, Dad had talked his way past the guards telling them he had forgotten to turn off the gas and he would just be in and out.He rescued Shirley and the long leather coat he had recently given Mom as a Christmas gift.

I asked Dad about a report I had heard on the radio that the reason Newark flooded was because the flood gates were opened at Buckeye Lake, allowing the lake water to flood those of us living downstream. Dad explained that the property values around the lakeside were so much higher, the decision was made to flood the poorer neighborhoods near the river, where property values were very low. It was clear to me what was going on. This protected the rich people who had summer homes at the lake, at our expense. We were collateral damage. This was not simply Mother Nature, but politics.

While I watched the people living in Hebron trailer parks, on a low-lying area near the river, drag soaked sofas out into the yard to dry in the sun and shovel mud out their front doors I did not need to ask myself, “Why is it that the poor are always hardest hit?” They are positioned to suffer the brunt of any natural disaster. Their homes are built on land the rich can afford to avoid. They can’t afford rental insurance. They have nowhere to run when things get tough. They cannot afford to hire clean-up companies; they are on their own. They cannot afford to miss work; recovery stretches into weeks, not days. The suffering of the poor is disproportionate to their loss when compared to the loss suffered by insured homeowners, or the rich whose neighborhoods are so well protected.

I am not pointing this out as a declaration of class warfare. I knew from an early age that the well-being of my class was already threatened by those with money and power who would always protect themselves at my expense. I was chosen by the powerful and rich to suffer the possibility of becoming collateral damage. Now what would you call that? While Gingrich, Santorum, Romney and Paul decry the collateral damage caused by American drones they continue to espouse policies which would cause collateral and direct damage on our middle class and on our poor.

Is there a Republican war on women? No, women are merely collateral damage in the war on President Obama and the Democratic Party, Is there a Republican war on immigrants? No, immigrants are merely collateral damage. Is there a Republican war against gays? No, the LGBT community is merely collateral damage. Is there a Republican war against universal health care? No, health care for all is merely collateral damage. Is there a Republican war against labor unions, union and non-union workers, immigrant and female workers? No, workers are merely collateral damage. I think Republicans truly believe this. Some collateral damage to Americans is permitted to protect the interests of the wealthy and powerful, and just to destroy the presidency of Barack Obama, who is dedicated to ending the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the war here at home against the 99% of Americans.

No more collateral damage, please.


8 Mar


Louise Annarino

March 8, 2012


When I attended the University of Cincinnati College of Law 1st year law students were not permitted to work; they had to devote full time to their studies. The Assoc. Dean granted me “special permission” to work. It was the only way I could afford to pay tuition,rent etc. Books were not a problem. I simply bought them as soon as they appeared on the shelves, read them within the 1st ten days of classes and returned them for full refund, after outlining each chapter. One does what one must. Most students had parental or spousal help. Those whose parents were poor, who were unmarried and in debt from undergraduate school were on our own, accumulating even more debt, but rich in dreams.


I first worked for the university in a federally subsidized job until funds were cut off. Next I worked for the I.R.S., driving to its Kentucky warehouse, 30 minutes south of Cincinnati off I-75, for a 3p.m. to 1a.m. shift. When the shift was extended to 3 a.m. it became even more difficult to tay awake through my 8 a.m.- 1p.m. classes. One morning, as I was leaving for my Saturday 9 a.m- 3 p.m. shift, my back went into spasms after bending over to pick up a carton of yogurt for my lunch. I could not stand upright. The pain was too severe.


After examining me my doctor asked with whom I was so angry that I wanted to hit him. The muscles one would use to strike out at someone or something were clenched tight. I explained my landlord had warned me that he would evict me should I entertain my African-American boyfriend in the future. Since he lived in Columbus and we both worked so many hours we rarely saw one another. During his recent and first visit, I was in Kentucky working most of the time. Since my landlord lived above me (I rented the lower level of his home), he knew who my few guests were. I wanted to hit my landlord, but knew I could not. Cheap apartments within walking distance of school were nearly impossible to find, especially after the semester started. I walked upright and pain free out of the doctor’s office after, protecting himself with a large pillow, he encouraged me to hit him as hard as I could, imaging he was my landlord. Not speaking out, not striking out, against injustice and racism is harmful. It is too high a price to pay.


But this was not the most significant discussion I had with the doctor. When he listened to my frustrations, he asked what I thought was a strange question, “Why do you hate money?” I assured him I did not. He assured me that anyone who worked so hard as I did, with the level of education and intelligence I had, should not be poor. Therefore he explained I was avoiding becoming rich. The proverbial light bulb opened my vision into my motives and I realized he was right. Growing up, I saw how disinterested persons of wealth were in my family and my neighbors in the south side of town near the railroad tracks. I saw how the wealthiest people in town disdained my neighbors and my neighborhood. I knew first hand how difficult it was to escape poverty, as rich people grasped all they could to keep it from my grasp, doling out pennies they earned off my labor and keeping rolls of dollars for themselves. I did not want to be like them. The doctor offered a simple solution. Don’t. Get rich and give it all away. From that moment on it became a goal to give away all I could earn.


I no longer dislike rich people. I put aside my prejudice that day in the doctor’s office, and opened my heart to many wonderful rich people. Not all rich people are greedy. Most are kind-hearted. Most are generous with their time and money. Our cities would not be able to survive without their generosity. But the rift between rich and poor is widening and the fear each group has of the other is less easy to control. This is a situation ripe for political manipulation. We see it every day.


Some Democrats mistrust President Obama because he works so closely with bankers, brokers, and business leaders. Some Republicans mistrust President Obama because he works so closely with Acorn, Planned Parenthood, and the NAACP. Palestinian supporters mistrust him when he has discussions with AIPAC; and Israel’s supporters mistrust him when he holds discussions with Arab leaders. It goes on and on. The truth is, he works with everyone who offers ideas to build an America of future promise. How can any problem be solved without talking to all parties to a solution? Must we continually let our fears and prejudices impede pragmatic and lasting outcomes? Are we so blind to the interest of others that we can no longer see our own interest? That is where I once was, and it nearly brought me to my knees. The doctor was right. I needed to  speak out and fight for my interest, but without disparaging those who had already figured that out. Rich people. So, stop blaming President Obama for opening our eyes to uncomfortable truths. Poor people need rich people. Rich people need poor people. America needs each of us, working together.President Obama represents all Americans, rich and poor. He should work closely with both. Thank you Mr. President. Do not bow before the weight of our prejudice. We cannot pile that on your shoulders. We need to carry it ourselves , or discard it and stand tall, ready to solve this nation’s problems alongside you.