Democrats Should Talk About Inequality (Robert Reich)

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2006/10/democrats-should-talk-about-inequality.html

There’s a debate brewing in the Democratic Party about whether to talk about the nation’s widening inequality. Some Democratic strategists say that’s too risky. Most of America’s vast middle class wants and expects to be rich some day themselves. Talk about widening inequality and you risk sounding too negative.

That conventional wisdom is wrong. In September’s Wall Street Journal- NBC News poll, inequality ranked as the second most important economic issue, right after the cost of gas and energy.

A few months ago when Congress was debating whether to raise the minimum wage, polls showed 85 percent of the public in favor. And about 80 percent of Americans polled by the Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg said CEOs are overpaid.

Remember what happened last year when Congress debated the Central American Free Trade Act? Despite a heavy lobbying blitz from the White House and business, it squeaked by with a margin of just two votes in the House. Polls show most Americans no longer favor of free trade because they think it’s hurting the wages of average people.

The fact is, we haven’t experienced inequality on this scale since the 1920s – by some measures since the age of the Robber Barons in the 1890s.

. . .

Forget the book smart word "inequality" use some populist language and hit em with what people already know.

They write laws to favor the super-rich making it impossible for the average joe to get ahead--witness the dropping real income of everyone except the mega-wealthy. And it must be explained to people that unless they make more than $500,000 a year, they are not among the top tenth of one percent (though many people making $100,000 a year think they are.)

How can Americans trust the Democratic Party to stand up to terrorists if our leaders are too frightened to stand up to Bush; too frightened to risk a darn thing to rescue our Constitution?

As long as they fail to challenge rule by signing statement, how do they think they can right the wrongs (including closing the vast chasm between the aristocracy and the rest of the serfs in America) if Bush can just nullify anything they manage to get passed with a signing statement? (Or just put some incompenet in charge to ensure no law that protects our interests is executed or enforced.)

How do they think they can redeem the soul of America in the eyes of the world if they keep declaring "Bush is nuliifying the constitution" with one breath, they "assuring" everyone "But don't worry, we have NO intention of impeaching anyone!

To fail to take extraordinary action in the face of extraordinary violations does nothing but support the fantasy that the violations are just "business as usual."

Just "voting them out" does nothing to say "Your crimes against our constitutional democracy are intolerable -- and we will not tolerate them one more minute."

Impeachment IS Our Positive Agenda!