Below you see exactly where the US is going under global corporate Clinton neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons----tag team for global corporate tribunal rule. The 1% are calling this NEW WORLD ORDER economic philosophy-----Libertarian Marxism. A friend says WTF! He is right----this is an oxymoron.
As Clinton and Obama move on and neo-liberalism is exposed as bad----these same pols are creating their own POPULIST REVOLUTION complete with their own neo-liberal pols. Now we are hearing lots of talk of socialism----we have Ron and Rand Paul Libertarians sounding like the sane approach to escaping naked neo-liberal and neo-con capitalism. Together you have LIBERTARIAN MARXISM. Keep in mind----libertarians are the face of wealth inequity and no rights as citizens except by the rich---but somehow this is going to be made socialist.
The attack on Greece by the banking autocratic fascism was symbolic ------Greece is the cradle of Western democracy and neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism is autocratic totalitarianism. This is why the current state of Greece is important ----it is what is coming to the US with this coming sovereign and municipal bond market crash. So, understand these political terms-----and you can see how the policies of the Clinton and Obama Administration advance to the political model of Libertarian Marxism. This is what all of the public private partnerships these few decades has been about----and it is Republican neo-con states like Texas that led the way so this is not a Democratic or Socialist policy----it is corporate takeover of all government functions---or corporate fascism.
We are seeing it exposed in Greece earlier because they are using these smaller economies to practice----just as they are using Detroit as practice for Bains Capital bankruptcy of our governments.
'In a discussion with Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz on invitation of U.S. economic think tank Institute for New Economic Thinking, Varoufakis stated on 9 April 2015 that "the Greek state does not have the capacity to develop public assets." Therefore, he announced that his government was "restarting the privatization process." However, unlike the former governments they would insist on establishing public–private partnerships with the state retaining a minority stake to generate state revenues. They would also require a minimum investment on behalf of the bidder, and "decent working conditions" for the workers'
Sound familiar? Varoufakis is the face of the new economic model of NEW WORLD ORDER. I am seeing Libertarian Marxism as a replacement for Clinton neo-liberalism. They are painting this as a socialist answer to global corporate rule where corporations own government operations with the public only having a small stake----This is what Global Corporate Tribunal Rule is about----so when we read of Varoufakis as a hero-----we need to remember that the goal of TROIKA was to bring Greece into default with US and European pensions tied to the default. This collapse will then be used as the excuse to do these public private partnerships Varoufakis embraces under the guise of socialism. Think how having the state with minority stake in government functions in global corporate partnerships will end well for the workers ----decent working conditions for the workers?????? REALLY?????
The Greek political scene is just as captured as the American so each election as people try to vote a REAL progressive labor and justice into office they get these same neo-liberal globalists. Think about here in America with Clinton neo-liberals pushing public private partnerships like crazy and Libertarian Ron Paul calling Libertarians the party of civil rights. ALL OF THIS IS NEW WORLD ORDER and as the article below states----Varoufakis does not like social capitalism-----which is where we want to go!
He describes himself as a 'libertarian Marxist': Libertarian Marxism is also critical of reformist positions, such as those held by social democrats.
IT LOOKS LIKE LIBERTARIAN MARXISM WILL BE THE TITLE OF GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNAL RULE!
Think about these political stances and how they feed on one another one stage at a time. The US did fine under social capitalism and we know libertarian marxism with governments having a minority control to that of global corporations will not end well for global workers. WE DO NOT WANT TO GO THERE AND WE DO NOT WANT TO BE FOOLED BY THIS PLAYING ON WORDS. THERE IS NOTHING SOCIALIST ABOUT GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNAL RULE.
It looks as though Varoufakis simply did what the TROIKA wanted----it gave reason to send Greece into default. The Greek people at this point had no other choice. Now, think about the fact that the US bond market crash is designed to take the US to Greece's status----and the answer for Americans will be ICELAND'S reaction----DEFAULT ON DEBT IMMEDIATELY! This is what your pols should be shouting NOW.
In the US these public private partnerships are made to look like corporate donations and the non-profits funded by corporations are made to look like they are community directed.....BUT THEY ARE NOT----THE DIRECTORS ARE MOVING FORWARD CORPORATE PUBLIC POLICY AS IN BALTIMORE. Look below at who is leading in this Libertarian Marxism-----REPUBLICANS THAT I BET ARE NEO-CONS JUST AS IN BALTIMORE. Republican voters are being made to believe that warm and fuzzy religious organizations and charity non-profits are better than PUBLIC SECTOR GOVERNMENT------while Democratic voters are being led to believe that corporations are donating as good community partners wanting to support the people!
WHILE THE ENTIRE PROCESS IS GEARED TOWARDS BUILDING THE GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNAL STRUCTURE THAT HAS THE US AS A COLONIAL ENTITY RULED BY A GLOBAL CORPORATE STRUCTURE. IT IS THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND RULING THE AMERICAN COLONIES ON STEROIDS!
Mayoral candidates share ideas on expanding public-private partnerships
- By Julie Mcclure - The Republic (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Published: 4/18/15 7:20 pm EDT
Updated: 4/18/15 7:23 pm EDT
Mayor Kristen Brown speaks during an interview Tuesday, March 24, 2015, at The Republic.
Mayoral candidate Jim Lienhoop speaks during an interview Thursday, March 19, 2015, at The Republic.
Columbus’ reputation has been built on public-private partnerships.
And as the two Republicans seeking the nomination for Columbus mayor approach the May 5 primary, they are looking for future partnerships to build on that legacy.
Both Mayor Kristen Brown and challenger Jim Lienhoop have ideas to spur economic development through partnering with private entities, but Lienhoop would also like to expand the concept into education and social issues.
Brown said she is leading an effort to find private partners to develop the city’s next industrial complex.
“We are out of shovel-ready land in the community, so this is a bottleneck to the community’s growth going forward,” Brown said.
The city is interested in a former air strip near Walesboro, more than 700 acres of land on the southwestern side of the city, Brown said.
Currently rented out by the city Board of Aviation Commissioners for farming as a revenue stream for the self-sufficient Columbus Municipal Airport, the land could be developed as a future industrial site, which could attract research and development facilities or technical testing companies, Brown said.
Brown said she understands the city is asking the airport board to “put their community hat on,” agreeing to sell the property to a private developer.
“The airport board could work out a deal in theory with a developer, where they get an annuity stream instead of a lump sum, to substitute that farming income, or they could take the proceeds and buy farmland up around the existing airport,” she said.
If the aviation board wanted to continue using farmland — which generated $132,814 from the Walesboro site in 2013 — as a revenue stream, it could take the money from sale of the airport land and buy more farmland elsewhere and contract that out, she said.
Lienhoop said he also would like to see future public-private partnerships focus on economic development.
Saying nearly 85 to 90 percent of economic development activities are privately funded through the Columbus Economic Development Board, Lienhoop contends Brown has disengaged from that organization.
Established as a nonprofit in 1976, the board focuses on attracting well-paying businesses to Columbus and helping existing businesses grow and expand.
Lienhoop pledged to reinvigorate the city’s relationship with the Economic Development Board with a focus of bringing more investment and jobs to the community.
Last fall, Lienhoop represented Columbus on the board’s trade mission to China and Japan to get the city’s name on a list for Asian companies that might be interested in American investment. The costs, about $11,000 for Lienhoop to attend, were covered in the city council’s budget.
Brown went on the Asia trip in 2012 but did not go or send a city representative in 2013. In an interview last fall, Brown said the cost of the trip was exorbitant, and there were more effective uses of her time and taxpayer money than making the two-week commitment.
Brown said Columbus has had tremendous success in attracting investment and expanding existing small and large businesses in the past three years, resulting in more than 150 new jobs. Brown said she frequently promotes Columbus outside the city, but existing local businesses’ prosperity remains her first priority.
Solving the city’s current and future transportation needs also should involve private partners, Lienhoop said.
That would include plans by the Louisville & Indiana Railroad and CSX Transportation to install high-speed a rail through Columbus, he said.
The railroads learned April 10 that they have received approval to upgrade L&I’s mainline track between Louisville and Indianapolis to increase train traffic by 13 to 15 trains per day. Those trains will be heavier and move faster, blocking the State Road 46 intersection on the west side multiple times over the course of a day when the improvements are made in about seven years. An overpass, estimated to cost as much as $35 million, has been mentioned as one solution to get around the train.
“My sense is that the railroad issue will require partnerships in all directions,” Lienhoop said. “It’s a big issue, and I’m sure some of the corporate interests are as interested in solving that problem as much as the city leadership,” he said.
In an interview after the announcement, Brown said federal officials vastly underestimated the plan’s impact on the intersection of State Roads 46 and 11 in Columbus, where train traffic delays cause daily problems for motorists.
“The crossing at 46 will be the most impacted crossing between Louisville and Indianapolis,” Brown said.
The project as approved would greatly exceed the federal threshold for supporting an overpass, a step that has been discussed locally as a way to overcome the delays caused an increase of trains coming through the city, Brown said.
However, coming up with an estimated $35 million price tag for a Columbus overpass will be a challenge because U.S. Rep. Luke Messer and U.S. Sen. Dan Coats, both Republicans from Indiana, told Brown that federal funding for an overpass would be unlikely, she said.
In a letter sent earlier to federal officials about the train proposal, Brown said that given the predicted impact, city officials feel the two railroads and federal agencies that govern road and railroad decisions should be required to cover the price tag for an overpass.
social issues Partnerships
Beyond economic development, Lienhoop also would like to see more partnerships working with schools through the United Way to address social problems affecting youth.
“When you look at Columbus, it’s pretty easy to see the economic success that we have had. But you need to remember the folks at the school system tell us that
50 percent of the kids here are on free and reduced lunch, and among first-graders it’s 60 percent,” Lienhoop said.
Bartholomew County ranks eighth the state in teen pregnancy, he said.
“I am thinking more along the lines of United Way, and the private support it receives and the support from industry,” Lienhoop said. “There are corporate players here who are very interested in the educational achievement of the workforce. Particularly with the purview of the school system, I think the mayor has the opportunity to gather people together to focus attention on critical issues.”
Brown cited her work to improve neighborhood parks in lower-income areas of the community, places she described as some of the city’s most distressed areas.
Race2Play, the city’s 2013 public-private partnership to rehab playgrounds, involved investing about $500,000 in improvements at the four parks, most of it through private donations and contributions.
The first major sponsors were the Tony Stewart Foundation and the Carter Oosterhouse Foundation. Their involvement drew other celebrity and community interest, including Subway spokesman Jared Fogle’s foundation.
The Race2Play initiative involves promoting healthy lifestyles, obesity prevention and safe neighborhoods.
A Tony Stewart-themed playground was built at Mead Village Park. New playground equipment and a shelter house was added at Pence Park. A new playground was added at Morningside, and new tables, benches and a playground was installed at the Ninth Street Playground.
“The condition of those parks was embarrassing when I came in (to office). They were unsafe,” Brown said.
The public-private partnerships allowed the city to make significant investments to clean them up and make the areas safer, she said.
Building on past success
Both candidates pointed to partnerships within the past four years as examples of how the city can continue to improve through agreements with private companies and organizations.
Brown pointed to successful partnerships in affordable housing, senior housing and the Hamilton Ice Center as examples of her administration working with the private sector to improve Columbus.
Lienhoop said the curbside recycling program, funded primarily by Cummins Inc. and 15 other area companies, and the Hamilton Ice Center renovation are examples of the city working best with private partners.
The city has invested slightly more than $200,000 in the 2015 city budget for the curbside recycling program, with nearly $1 million invested by Cummins and the other companies.
“Cummins’ contribution is what made the program go,” Lienhoop said. “What they’re doing is listening to their employees who are telling them this is what they’d like to see in the community. And so they became motivated to help.”
Both candidates said the Hamilton Center project, completed in 2014, shows what the city can do when the private sector steps up with financial support.
“It’s an architectural gem and it had gone into a total state of disrepair,” Brown said.
Hamilton Center had been left underfunded from a maintenance perspective for a number of years, she said.
“So I stepped in and proposed making a huge public investment, which the city council was on board (with) and approved,” she said.
The city agreed to invest $1.9 million to replace the facility’s roof and refrigeration equipment, while another $1.4 million in private donations finished the project, she said.
Having the private group approach the city about using some money from the failed sports complex bond to upgrade Hamilton Center started the process, Lienhoop said.
The council agreed to consider it as long as private fundraising was involved, he said.
“We weren’t going to tell them how much,” he said. “It needed to be significant and come close to matching what the city would spend. That was the genesis of the fundraising that the parks foundation did for the improvements. The notion was the city should maintain the building — the walls, the roof, the restrooms and such — and if groups want to use it for hockey or some other special purpose, that should be privately funded.”
The city, park foundation and private-sector contributors partnered to rehabilitate the structure, which opened in 1958 and was last renovated in 1974.
The Columbus Parks & Recreation Department is planning a public open house from 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Thursday for a ribbon cutting and tours of the revamped facility.
When I asked a community association leader to shout for public sector employees to take care of our school grounds and parks that are turning into vacant lots from weeds and lack of care----he said ----they will not allow public sector employees. I said----THAT IS FOR WHAT WE PAY TAXES!
Detroit under a Republican Rick Snyder, Newark under a Republican Chris Christie, Milwaukee under a Republican Scott Walker, Baltimore under Johns Hopkins----all Republican pols bringing government to public private partnership. Clinton neo-liberals are doing the same as with O'Malley in Maryland, Jerry Brown in California, Quinn and Rahm Emanuel in Illinois----and all of this is the structure for global corporate rule with Trans Pacific Trade Pact installing what they are going to call-----Libertarian Marxism.
When I ran for Governor of Maryland the first debate I was allowed to participate I shouted and exposed as bad---public private partnerships----that was the last major election event I was allowed to participate during the 2014 Democratic primary for governor. O'Malley and Anthony Brown were raging public private partnership neo-liberals. I showed that the one candidate being allowed to pretend she was progressive, Heather Mizeur, made public private partnerships her agenda as well. This is how I knew Mizeur was a Clinton neo-liberal. Republicans take away the power of the people to be citizens and control public policy----NOT DEMOCRATS FOLKS!
SEE HOW WHAT THESE US POLITICIANS ARE EMBRACING LOOKS JUST LIKE WHAT THAT GREEK LEADER, VAROUFAKIS, CALLS LIBERTARIAN MARXISM?\
This is for what the US economy is being brought down with the coming bond market crash---to install global corporate tribunal rule and your pols KNOW AND SUPPORT THIS!
New public-private partnership bill for infrastructure projects signed into law
By Becca Heller
Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, left, with Gov. Martin O’Malley
A House bill refining guidelines for public-private partnerships (P3s) was signed into law by Gov. Martin O’Malley Tuesday after finally passing the House and Senate in the closing days of the session.
The idea is to leverage private financing and construction contracting to build infrastructure projects the state wants more efficiently without adding to bond debt.
The law, HB560, tweaks the current public-private partnership process. It gives the Board of Public Works a more prominent role and seeks to encourage innovation by providing room for businesses to pitch ideas for projects without following the usual procurement procedure.
Bill drew criticism
HB 560 drew criticism from legislators who feared that the new bill stripped protections from the process that would allow more room for favoritism in government procurements.
“In the past we’ve made great strides…to develop fairness and integrity in the procurement process,” said Del. Luiz Simmons, D-Montgomery, during a debate on the House floor. “What’s wrong with the P3 bill is that it eliminates all of these protections.”
Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, who led the O’Malley administration’s effort to pass the bill, dismissed these criticisms. He told reporters Monday that the new process is focused on expanding accountability and improving the relationships between the private sector and the Board of Public Works, the three-member board that includes the governor, the comptroller and the treasurer.
“If you can have a process that is transparent and accountable, then you’re going to reduce litigation,” Brown said. He was referring to a lawsuit that derailed a major project in Baltimore called State Center that had private developers replacing aging state office buildings in exchange for mixed-use buildings on state-owned land.
Brown explained that the new bill will bring the Board of Public Works to the forefront, allowing more communication and a clear delineation of what projects are best for the public.
“We now have the Board of Public Works right there up front taking a part in the decisions as to who will be designated as a P3,” said Brown, who occasionally chairs the board when O’Malley can’t. “We think that that’s going to instill a lot more confidence — both in terms of the legislature and the private sector.”
The Greater Baltimore Committee made the bill a top priority. In its legislative wrap-up, the GBC said “the law is expected to be a key option for the state to leverage private-sector funding for transportation assets and other infrastructure projects.”
“Under P3 agreements,” GBC explained, “a private entity performs functions normally undertaken by the government, but the state agency remains ultimately accountable for the public infrastructure asset and its public function.”
I have said over and over Congress is waiting for Trans Pacific Trade Pact and this coming economic crash to start the national infrastructure project because they award contracts to global corporations that will then bring large numbers of immigrant workers to work just as in the days of the Robber Barons leaving US workers to either work as these immigrants or not work.
I walk to work having to look at fresh water running down the sewers for days with no public sector employees stopping it because we are waiting for the coming bond market crash to send Baltimore into bankruptcy and privatized water with VEOLA ENVIRONMENT so that this global corporation with Johns Hopkins as a major shareholder can get all the infrastructure funding and control the development. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WE HAVE NOT HAD A NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT.
Now, FDR after the economic crash giving us the Great Depression---which is what this bond market crash seeks to create----used the same strategy for job creation BUT HE DID IT AS A NATIONAL GOVERNMENT WORK PROJECT USING TAXPAYER MONEY WITH 90% OF IT COMING FROM THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS TO BUILD AND FUND IT. This time, Clinton neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons are stealing the public assets and wealth and capturing future public taxation to pay for this 'public' project all under the guise of 'public private partnerships. No FDR justice from massive corporate fraud with Clinton neo-liberals in office!
Remember Chris Dodd----of Dodd Frank Bank Reform? Here the neo-liberals are trying to stage this privatization bank just in time for the massive economic bond market crash by the same frauds Dodd, as Congressional banking committee member oversaw during the subprime mortgage fraud.
LIBERTARIAN MARXISM IS NOT SOCIALISM FOLKS----IT IS GLOBAL CORPORATE TOTALITARIANISM.
The Infrastructure Privatization Bank
By Cate Long September 10, 2011
The first time many heard about the United States creating a infrastructure bank was in President Obama’s Thursday speech, but the idea has actually been floating around Congress for a number of years. Former U.S. Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut proposed the idea in 2007 with inauspicious timing. From the American Water Works Association:
In an eerie coincidence, legislation to create a National Infrastructure Bank to address the need for financing of infrastructure projects was introduced with bipartisan support in the US Senate the same day a bridge collapsed in Minneapolis.
The horrific 2007 bridge collapse in Minneapolis is often used as the poster child to promote a national infrastructure bank. In 2007 there were 75,000 other bridges in America that had the same rating of “structurally deficient” as the Minneapolis bridge; the problem continues today. The need for massive spending on our roads and bridges is well understood by everyone.
I think there is some misunderstanding though about the purpose of the proposed infrastructure bank. On the surface it appears to be an alternative source of funding for common transportation, water and energy projects. But its real purpose seems to be a means of spurring a large infrastructure privatization movement in the United States.
Senate Resolution 652, sponsored by Senator Kerry of Massachusetts, would create the American Infrastructure Financing Authority. The AIFA would require that funded projects generate revenues to repay the loan to the infrastructure bank. For the Minneapolis bridge project to be funded it would have needed to be a toll bridge rather than a free bridge (or have a government entity repay the loan). It’s a PayGo Infrastructure Bank.
Currently almost all American infrastructure is funded either through municipal bonds or federal funding. Even as federal funding has been constrained, municipal bond issuance has been very low this year, running at about half of last year’s rate. There is plenty of capacity to fund infrastructure with municipal bonds. From a funding standpoint it’s not clear why we need an infrastructure bank, especially a paygo infrastructure bank.
The AIFA legislation is very specific about the type of projects that can be funded:
- Highway or road
- Mass transit
- Inland waterways
- Commercial ports
- Air traffic control systems
- Passenger rail, including high-speed rail
- Freight rail systems
“the extent to which the provision of assistance by AIFA maximizes the level of private investment in the infrastructure project or supports a public-private partnership, while providing a significant public benefit”
Conceivably Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad could team up with a small municipality and receive below-market loans to fund improvement of their rail systems. There is a lot of gray area defining “public good” in the legislation and this makes way for many projects that might have a larger private component.
The legislation also requires that projects have dedicated repayment sources (page 43):
(3) DEDICATED REVENUE SOURCES.—The Federal credit instrument shall be repayable, in whole or in part, from tolls, user fees, or other dedicated revenue sources that also secure the infrastructure project obligations.
The essence of the American Infrastructure Financing Authority is to use the full faith and credit of the U.S. government to loan funds at below-market rates to public-private partnerships — in other words, to privatize the cash flows from public assets.
When you read the congressional testimony and materials about the proposed bank you always hear about the vast sums of private money waiting in the wings to be invested. When Robert Wolf, Chairman and CEO of UBS Americas and close confidant of President Obama, testified to the Senate Banking Committee last year he said:
Preqin, a private equity industry consultant, estimates that there is over $180 billion dollars of private equity and pension fund capital focused on infrastructure equity investments. This capital can play an important role in bridging state and local budget gaps.
There is no question that private money is interested in being used for loans to infrastructure projects and guaranteed by the federal government and taxpayers. It’s almost identical to senior bondholders who loaned money to too-big-to-fail banks. It’s the best setup for private money because there is no loss.
Although McClatchy is reporting that Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is unenthusiastic about plans for an infrastructure bank, it’s likely that the Senator Kerry’s legislation will be adopted since it has support from the administration, the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
But it’s a pity that a project dressed as job creator will really be a vehicle to create privatized public assets. Our nation was founded and grew strong on the basis of our shared public infrastructure. It’s a shame that the American Infrastructure Financing Authority will be the agency in which ownership of public assets becomes private.
The debate in the US over Evolution vs Creationism is more than a religious debate----it is staging the social debate for the coming SOCIAL DARWINISM THAT IS NEO-LIBERALISM AND NEO-CONSERVATISM. This idea of SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST is playing out in our public school privatization using charter schools that have a philosophy of NO EXCUSES WIN AT ANY COST NEO-LIBERALISM. Only the strongest and most able to adapt will survive.
Baltimore is filled with this philosophy because of the neo-conservative Johns Hopkins and its control over the economy and all of the private non-profits. So, the black and Hispanic underserved communities are being taught that it is OK to push others aside----it is OK that you advance over someone else----that it is OK to undermine other to advance your own interests----THIS IS WHAT THE NEW CIVIL RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUAL WEALTH IS ABOUT.
As you see below, Darwin was against all of what these totalitarian Libertarians are about just as the original Johns Hopkins, a quaker, would have been against the current Bloomberg Wall Street Johns Hopkins. ALL OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROGRESSIVE IDEAS ARE BEING MADE TOTALITARIAN.
Social Darwinism plays harder in communities of color and with women because these groups are always pushed to the bottom of an economic society that is predatory. So, this is where all of the social darwinism is being implanted----and it is why charter schools like KIPP which embrace this neo-liberal education reform are being heavily subsidized with corporate donation and in Maryland's case-----the University of Maryland has allowed for full scholarships for graduates from KIPP K-12 schools---IT IS THE REPUBLICAN POLICY OF INSTILLING SOCIAL DARWINISM IN OUR SCHOOLS MAKING CITIZENS THINK THEY NEED TO WIN AT ALL COST. This is what Asian nations have had these decades and it is what Race to the Top education reform brings to the US.
IF YOU UNDERSTAND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY-----YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE THESE PUBLIC POLICIES AT THE LOCAL LEVEL LEAD.
Conservative Democrats and Republicans were led to support this because they support race and class issues. What they did not understand is white Americans will be found at the bottom of the Darwin ladder just as much as Americans of color. People of color from around the world are far more attuned to social Darwinism than Americans and they are being brought to the US in large numbers.
IT IS NOT THE IMMIGRANTS THAT ARE BAD----IT IS THE POLICY OF NEO-LIBERALISM, NEO-CONSERVATISM AND SOCIAL DARWINISM THAT IS BAD. I AM SURE THE IMMIGRANTS BROUGHT TO THE US WOULD RATHER HAVE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AND US CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!
Misusing Darwin's Theory
Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is entirely focused on an explanation of life's biological diversity. It is a scientific theory meant to explain observations about species. Yet some have used the theory to justify a particular view of human social, political, or economic conditions. All such ideas have one fundamental flaw: They use a purely scientific theory for a completely unscientific purpose. In doing so they misrepresent and misappropriate Darwin's original ideas.
One such distortion and misuse is the loose collection of ideologies grouped under the label of "Social Darwinism." Based largely on notions of competition and natural selection, Social Darwinist theories generally hold that the powerful in society are innately better than the weak and that success is proof of their superiority.
Darwin passionately opposed social injustice and oppression. He would have been dismayed to see the events of generations to come: his name attached to opposing ideologies from Marxism to unbridled capitalism, and to policies from ethnic cleansing to forced sterilization. Whether used to rationalize social inequality, racism, or eugenics, so-called Social Darwinist theories are a gross misreading of the ideas first described in the Origin of Species and applied in modern biology.
As you see---Marxism has always had as a focus moving more power to the people from an exploiting rich-----so teaming Libertarianism----the political policy of extreme wealth and inequity with Marxism is an oxymoron and yet----it is the basis of Baltimore's political structure.
Marxism [mahrk-siz-uh m]
noun 1. the system of economic and political thought developed by Karl Marx, along with Friedrich Engels, especially the doctrine that the state throughout history has been a device for the exploitation of the masses by a dominant class, that class struggle has been the main agency of historical change, and that the capitalist system, containing from the first the seeds of its own decay, will inevitably, after the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, be superseded by a socialist order and a classless society.
If you look at Baltimore's government structure you see just what Libertarian Marxism would look like. From a Board of Estimates that has the Baltimore Mayor controlling three of five appointments to the Board of Estimates to this bill sent to the Maryland Assembly disguised as a step towards giving the citizens of Baltimore the opportunity for an elected school board---
This bill was written so the majority of school board members would remain appointed with a minority elected by citizens making it appear there was citizen involvement. With a corporate controlled government as will be the case with global corporate tribunal rule or Libertarian Marxism -----the voice of the minority is not heard. Everyone knows the Baltimore Mayor controls the Board of Estimates and all city contracting awards because she appoints the majority of Board members and she works for Baltimore Development Corporations and Johns Hopkins. So, the idea of a Libertarian Marxist as Greece's VAROUFAKIS----of giving the government a minority control in a corporate public private partnership DOES NOT GIVE THE PEOPLE ANY CONTROL AS HE KNOWS. The City of Baltimore has operated with this Libertarian Marxism FOR DECADES.
When I testified against this bill knowing it was simply a smoke-screen for citizens demanding a fully elected school board the Baltimore pols pushing these bills probably don't know where all these policies lead----THEY SIMPLY PUSH PUBLIC POLICY WRITTEN BY JOHNS HOPKINS AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM FOR BALTIMORE POLITICS!
This was written in 2004 but mirrors what is happening this year---2015 in Baltimore and Maryland Assembly only this 2015 bill gave the majority to the appointed----making the citizens the minority. Jill Carter wrote a good bill in 2004-----she knows that control of the Baltimore City School Board could be brought back to Baltimore because the excuse by then Schmoke and Grasmick taking state control of protecting special needs children is VOID as Race to the Top and Baltimore School Board installed tiered per pupil funding giving special needs students the least in funding.
An elected city school board might provide accountability
Gregory KaneBaltimore Sun February 2004
ON MONDAY, members of the Parent Community Advisory Board, among others, called for the resignation of the six Baltimore school board members who were around when the system's current money problems began to build.
If school board Chairwoman Patricia L. Welch, Vice Chairman Sam Stringfield and members Kenneth Jones, Dorothy Siegel, Camay Murphy and David Stone had any sense of shame, they'd have resigned, without suggestions or exhortations, weeks ago. But Baltimore is the city where shame comes to die.
During the mayoral primary, Mayor Martin O'Malley, without shame, took credit for a couple of good things that happened in Baltimore schools: rising test scores and new computers. He doesn't take the blame for the $58 million deficit and $58 million cash flow problem - implying the fault lies with the state, Baltimore's co-partner in education. Hey, what good is a partner who can't take the blame for the bad while you take credit for the good?
But neither city nor state officials have seen fit to demand the resignation of the six school board members who apparently watched $58 million grow feet and walk out the door. Thank heavens the PCAB has. Add to their proposal two bills proposed by a Baltimore legislator and we may have a formula for accountability - not quite dead in Baltimore but surely on life support - in the school system.
Del. Jill P. Carter - who was elected in her first run for political office in 2002 - said one bill would require that the current school board membership be increased from nine to 13. If passed, Carter's bill would have the mayor and governor continue to appoint five members of the school board. Seven others would be elected and each would represent two of the 14 councilmanic districts. The position of board chairman would become a citywide elected post.
With an elected school board, we might avoid the early December debacle that saw the appointed board turn hundreds of concerned citizens away from a meeting and then have police officers bar the door. School boards accountable to ordinary folks avoid such scenes. School administrators accountable to taxpayers do their jobs, and Carter's second bill is designed to make sure that happens.
If passed, the delegate's bill would require that no school system employee be paid more than $150,000 a year. Carter wants that salary limit to be lifted only when the average test scores in Baltimore equal or exceed those in state averages.
"It's wrong to pay top management and contractors egregiously high salaries," Carter said, "while teachers and other staff are being laid off, furloughed or subjected to pay cuts. And it's especially wrong when our children are failing. I think it appropriate, in light of the fiscal and educational crises confronting our school system, to require top management to earn high salaries before receiving them."
Carter has only one question about the $150,000 salary mentioned in her second bill: Should it be lower?
Yes, it should. Let's make it lower. No administrator in the Baltimore school system should make more than $99,999.99 until the city's test scores are at or above the state average.
Such a law would eliminate the pathetic revelations Sun reporter Liz Bowie made in an article Feb. 13 last year about the 36 school officials who made $100,000 or more. One of them was now-departed schools Chief Executive Officer Carmen V. Russo, who cleaned up at $192,000. Her driver made $100,000 with overtime. By contrast, 22 made comparable salaries in the Baltimore County school system, which has more students.
And you wonder why there's a budget crisis.
Carter even has an answer for those skeptics who say elected school boards don't work.
"Elected school boards are not new to Maryland," Carter said. "Ten of Maryland's 24 subdivisions have partially elected school boards. And nationally, 96 percent of school board members are elected."
Baltimore's school board has never been elected. According to Sun education columnist Mike Bowler, the city's 20-member school board appointed by the City Council was replaced in 1898 with the nine-member one appointed by the mayor. Then, after the city-state "partnership" was created in 1997, the board became what we currently have: the Beast With 18 Eyes, none of which has 20/20 vision.
Carter mentioned her bills in a letter dated Friday to O'Malley. She took the mayor to task for saying - in a letter to Baltimore's state legislators -that fiscal oversight needed to be returned to city officials.
The city's fiscal oversight won't make a difference without an accountable school board, which she believes her bill would make possible. And the delegate had a few choice words about that $8 million loan the Abell Foundation will give to the city schools.
"Why should a system already in debt, go further into debt?"