WHO WILL WIN IN NOVEMBER?

Feds want to know: Did Mitt check tunnel?
By Casey Ross
Boston Herald Reporter
Saturday, October 14, 2006

Federal officials are probing scathing allegations that the Romney administration falsely claimed to conduct safety inspections in the Big Dig tunnel that collapsed and killed a woman in July.
The Securities and Exchange Commission is zeroing in on state financial documents from 2005 - cited in a new report by state Inspector General Gregory Sullivan - indicating that Gov. Mitt Romney was reviewing the safety of the Big Dig, when in fact the administration was only checking leaks in the Interstate 93 tunnel.
"Despite repeated assurances to bondholders, (MassHighway and Romney's Executive Office of Transportation) . . . did not inspect the I-90 connector tunnel section where the July 10, 2006, collapse occurred," Sullivan's report states. "It is clear that casual disregard for the truth was grossly inappropriate."
The federal probe threatens to undercut Romney's efforts to portray himself as a white knight for taxpayers on the problem-plagued $15 billion project as he lays the groundwork for a presidential run.
The SEC drafted a letter to several state agencies Aug. 23 requesting documents pertaining to safety reviews allegedly conducted in Big Dig tunnels between 2004 and the present. Sullivan's report said Romney administration officials repeatedly declined requests from the state's bond counsel to change language in financial documents about the Big Dig inspections. Romney finally said he would change the language in late July, after the fatal collapse and before the SEC probe.
A spokesman for the administration called Sullivan's report a "shoddy" piece of work. "No one fought harder and more aggressively than Gov. Romney to gain control of the Turnpike Authority," spokesman Jon Carlisle said.
The ceiling collapse in the I-90 Seaport connector tunnel killed Milena Del Valle and triggered attacks by Romney against former Turnpike Authority Chairman Matthew Amorello, who resigned rather than face termination by the governor.
While the inspector general's report also cites "an alarming lack of stewardship" by the Turnpike, it singles out the Romney administration for abdicating its responsibility to verify the safety of the project.

Among the findings in the report:

# The Romney administration ignored its oversight role on the Big Dig by designating its authority to review tunnel safety to a Turnpike official.

# Document requests to the Turnpike and Romney-controlled MassHighway failed to produce any documents showing maintenance was ever performed on the I-90 connector ceiling.

# No evidence could be found showing either the Turnpike Authority or the management firm Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff developed an inspection schedule for the I-90 connector tunnel. Big Dig records show B/PB officials were told by operators of a Maryland tunnel with similar ceiling supports that they inspected their tunnel annually.

Pelosi might have added to her to-do list closing down Guantánamo Bay, setting a date for troop withdrawal from Iraq, raising taxes on the top earners to help curb the deficit, and putting a stop to warrantless wiretapping. But the truth is that Democrats have no consistent or coherent position on Iraq, terrorism or anything else much. The last few months have told the tale of Republican demise, not a Democrat revival.

So while November 7 promises the possibility of electoral change, the prospect of real political change seems remote. The Democrats are standing for office, but little else.

From a commenatry in today's The Guardian
...
The Pew survey showed that the six issues of most concern to the electorate were Iraq, terrorism, the economy, healthcare, immigration and energy policy.

Last week, the Democrat minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, addressed some of these concerns. She pledged that in the first 100 hours of a Democrat majority she will increase the minimum wage, reduce interest rates on student loans, expand federal funding for stem-cell research, and require the government to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to lower the price of prescription drugs for Medicare.
...

The Pew survey did not include a survey of what "the electorate" want done about:
(1) Iraq,
(2) terrorism,
(3) the economy,
(4) healthcare,
(5) immigration,
(6) energy policy.

What do y'all want done?

ican711nm wrote:

The Pew survey did not include a survey of what "the electorate" want done about:
(1) Iraq,
(2) terrorism,
(3) the economy,
(4) healthcare,
(5) immigration,
(6) energy policy.

What do y'all want done?

It wasn't a report - just in case you missed that - but a comment.
(The difference between these two is easily to be found online.)

Quote:

Pelosi might have added to her to-do list closing down Guantánamo Bay, setting a date for troop withdrawal from Iraq, raising taxes on the top earners to help curb the deficit, and putting a stop to warrantless wiretapping. But the truth is that Democrats have no consistent or coherent position on Iraq, terrorism or anything else much. The last few months have told the tale of Republican demise, not a Democrat revival.

So while November 7 promises the possibility of electoral change, the prospect of real political change seems remote. The Democrats are standing for office, but little else.

Too sadly true, if Pelosi would have mentioned any of those issues, she may as well have put a sign on her back that said, "Leftist radical out of mainstream liberal" thereby giving the likes of Hannity or Imus all the ammunition they need to turn the tide of the election.

Ican, is there anything you would want done about these things?

Advocate wrote:

Ican, is there anything you would want done about these things?

Yes! There are things I want done about these things:
(1) Iraq,
(2) terrorism,
(3) the economy,
(4) healthcare,
(5) immigration,
(6) energy policy.

Here's some of those things I want done.

(1) Iraq

Persist in aiding the Iraqi people to exterminate the deliberate killers of non-combatants in Iraq. EASIER SAID THAN DONE. A CIVIL WAR IS IN PROGRESS, AND OUR INTERFERRENCE WILL BE DEEMED TAKING SIDES. WE WOULD THEN BE TARGETED MORE THAN WE ARE NOW. BTW, THIS IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT HAPPENED WHEN OUR MARINES WERE KILLED IN LEBANON.

(2) terrorism

Persist in aiding people in other countries to exterminate the deliberate killers of non-combatants in their countries. IN THE MEANTIME, BUSH HAS ALLOWED OUR BORDERS TO BE POUROUS, HAS NOT INSPECTED CONTAINERS COMING IN, CAPTURED BIN LADEN, ETC.

(3) the economy

Reduce federal spending on other than (1) and (2), and reduce federal taxes. TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY ARE DEEMED BY ECONOMISTS TO BE TAX EXPENDITURES, AND REPRESENT MOST OF OUR DEFICITS. WHAT LARGE FEDERAL SPENDING WOULD YOU REDUCE?

(4) healthcare

Privatize healthcare. IT IS PRIVATE NOW, AND IS NOT WORKING. WE NEED A SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM, BE THE PAYER IS THE GOVERNMENT OR A NONPROFIT.

(5) immigration

Legally require all non-citizen immigrants in the USA to possess federal identity cards. BUSH WON'T DO ANYTHING MEANINGFUL BECAUSE THEY ARE CHEAP LABOR FOR THE CORPS.

(6) energy policy.

Permit drilling for oil in ANWAR and in other USA areas discovered to possess significant oil reserves. IS THAT ALL? THAT WON'T HELP VERY MUCH AND WOULD TAKE MANY YEARS TO YIELD ANYTHING.

ican711nm wrote:

Advocate wrote:

Ican, is there anything you would want done about these things?

Yes! There are things I want done about these things:
(1) Iraq,
(2) terrorism,
(3) the economy,
(4) healthcare,
(5) immigration,
(6) energy policy.

Here's some of those things I want done.

(1) Iraq

Persist in aiding the Iraqi people to exterminate the deliberate killers of non-combatants in Iraq. EASIER SAID THAN DONE. A CIVIL WAR IS IN PROGRESS, AND OUR INTERFERRENCE WILL BE DEEMED TAKING SIDES. WE WOULD THEN BE TARGETED MORE THAN WE ARE NOW. BTW, THIS IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT HAPPENED WHEN OUR MARINES WERE KILLED IN LEBANON.

Yes, it is easier said then done, but that is not an argument for failing to persist. Most of all our successful worthwhile endeavors have been easier said than done, but we did them any way.

We have already taken sides and have already become hated by the al-Qaeda, and all the rest as a result. I'd rather they hate us than rule us. I'm not so desperate for being liked or being loved as to be willing to buy either with my subjugation or the subjugation of those I love.

No, it is not what happened in Lebanon after our marines were killed in Lebanon. We failed to persist in Lebanon and left the Lebanonese people to the tyranny of the Syrians who became deliberate killers of Lebanese non-combatants. Reagan screwed up!

(2) terrorism

Persist in aiding people in other countries to exterminate the deliberate killers of non-combatants in their countries. IN THE MEANTIME, BUSH HAS ALLOWED OUR BORDERS TO BE POUROUS, HAS NOT INSPECTED CONTAINERS COMING IN, CAPTURED BIN LADEN, ETC.

We have not persisted in aiding people in any other country than Afghanistan to exterminate the deliberate killers of non-combatants, and our future progress is uncertain but we should persist anyway, albeit a better way.

Yes our borders are pourous, we do not inspect containers coming in, and we have not captured bin Laden, etc. But so far we have not experienced any more 9/11s.

I think it improbable that we can make our borders non-pourous and keep terrorists from coming into our country any better way than attacking terrorists where they live and train. I think it improbable that we can keep terrorists, once in this country, from terrorizing us, unless we monitor all communications from outside and inside our country in order to detect terrorist plans before such plans are executed.

(3) the economy

Reduce federal spending on other than (1) and (2), and reduce federal taxes. TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY ARE DEEMED BY ECONOMISTS TO BE TAX EXPENDITURES, AND REPRESENT MOST OF OUR DEFICITS. WHAT LARGE FEDERAL SPENDING WOULD YOU REDUCE?

Depends on the economist. Laffer certainly doesn't agree with that stuff. Tax cuts for the wealthy as well as everyone else are considered by thinking people, and not parroting people, as a way to encourage economic growth, thereby producing on balance far more federal tax income than would tax increases which supress economic growth.

I first would terminate the federal health insurance program. The only thing such a program can really achieve is subsizing medical workers (in treatment and drug manufacture), and cause the cost of medical treatment to rise, or deteriorate if those costs don't rise (e.g., Canada, Cuba).

Then I would privatize social security for all workers who would prefer that to participating in the present social security program. That would only be the first step in curtailing a future massive deficit in the social security program.

Then I would terminate all federal aid to education except that provided former members of the military. The only thing our current program can really achieve is subsizing teacher's and their administrator's salaries and cause the cost of education to rise, and education to deteriorate like it is presently doing.

Me and my contemporaries were able to earn at least 80% of our college costs during summer breaks. After federal aid to education was enacted, my children could earn at most 40% of theirs that way. My grand kids will be able to earn less than 10% of theirs that way.

(4) healthcare

Privatize healthcare. IT IS PRIVATE NOW, AND IS NOT WORKING. WE NEED A SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM, BE THE PAYER IS THE GOVERNMENT OR A NONPROFIT.

Either you are gullible, or you have forgotten the federal programs called Medicare and Medicade, and the fact that hospitals cannot turn away patients unable to pay for their treatment?

The federal programs are not working. They are merely driving up medical treatment costs. The private ones were working fine until the federal programs were enacted. I'd much prefer a government program that buys private medical insurance for those people in real economic need.

The argument that 45 million people don't have medical insurance fails to take into account that most of those people prefer to be self-insured. If the government would stop screwing up the cost of medical treatment, the cost of private medical insurance would decrease..

(5) immigration

Legally require all non-citizen immigrants in the USA to possess federal identity cards. BUSH WON'T DO ANYTHING MEANINGFUL BECAUSE THEY ARE CHEAP LABOR FOR THE CORPS.

Bush advocates a certified guest worker program. He has so far been unable to convince either the Republicans or Democrats in Congress to support his program.

What do you want done?

(6) energy policy.

Permit drilling for oil in ANWAR and in other USA areas discovered to possess significant oil reserves. IS THAT ALL? THAT WON'T HELP VERY MUCH AND WOULD TAKE MANY YEARS TO YIELD ANYTHING.[/quote

[color=blue]No that is not all. But that will be a lot of help within ten years. In the mean time, let the price of fuel limit our consumption. I'm not seeking instant gratification like some. I am not seeking an instant solution to overcome the consequences of our past bad decisions.

The recent huge discovery of petroleum reserves in the Gulf of Mexico, when in production, will almost eliminate our dependency on mid east oil. Also, less than 0.1% of ANWAR need be put into production to equal more than 10% of Texas' current production. Not bad ... not bad at all. Every little bit helps.[/color]