Capitol Hill was the scene of another pointless hearing and vote yesterday, but the subject matter wasn’t pointless at all. A veterans jobs bill didn’t pass, but politicians used the vote to put themselves on record as either favoring the bill or standing up for fiscal responsibility by opposing it while stating their support for vets.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski has repeatedly shown her will to do right by America’s veterans, and did so again yesterday when she crossed party lines to vote for a $1 billion veteran’s jobs bill that fell two votes short of the 60 it needed to pass.
The largely symbolic vote (nobody gave the bill a chance of passing the House anyway) taken as D.C. lawmakers are ready for an election season adjournment, is sad because it was symbolic. The bill itself speaks to the volumes of work that must be done to ensure that returning vets get the training they need to reenter the job market, as well as the services they need to reintegrate into civilian society.
The bill, which now heads back to committee, has a bit of a pie-in-the-sky feel. It is based on the 1930s-vintage Civilian Conservation Corps, and would put vets to work on federal lands building projects or planting trees. While not everyone needs to become an arborist, the program would have provided jobs and the results would benefit public lands as well as individual hires.
And $1 billion is a lot of cash to start up yet another arm of federal bureaucracy.
But something has to be done. The unemployment numbers cited by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) are stark: She said 720,000 vets are unemployed nationwide, and 220,000 of them have served since Sept. 11.
There is an 11 percent unemployment rate among recent veterans according to the latest monthly jobs report.
Numerous job training programs already exist, and it’s up to those who administer those programs to do as much as they can to assist our veterans. Meanwhile, if any group deserves a government-funded and dignified fallback against poverty, returning veterans who want to learn or hone construction or outdoor skills through a WPA-style public works program should be at the head of the line. Perhaps within an existing federal program a veterans jobs corps could be started without eating up $1billion in seed money.
Comments (31)
Add commentMagic,
How does one spend what one does not possess? There is a road to a warm spot that is paved with “good intentions” At some point we must start to be responsible for our debt. We borrow close to half of the revenue now that we spend, how long can that continue? Certainly not forever!
@alaskabobc
Apparently it can continue for 4 more years. Or can it.....
$1 Billion? This is a drop in the bucket.
We are approaching that in national election campaign contributions.
Creating jobs on the government dime to pull the country away from an abyss is something the government has the most experience with. Think Hoover Dam. Think the Interstate Highway System. President Roosevelt set the precedent via executive orders and he is applauded today.
Congress cannot put $1 Billion dollars on the table in an effort, any effort, to actually put veterans to work?
So Union members of our automotive companies are more deserving?
Let us not forget. I have a great deal of influence in my grandchildren's choices regarding military service (it is still voluntary) for some time to come.
Senator Murkowski: Thank you for crossing party lines. I am only saddened that you may take some hits doing it.
Ken and Jim
What happens after government spends all the revenue that the three of us possess? Along with everyone elses? And no where to borrow more? What then?
vets are pawns
when it comes to election cycles. For the politicians easily offer more veterans programs in an effort to show their concern for vets and then expect to gain votes on election day.
Lisa showed her willingness to play the vet to gain votes when she voted for this bill. It has little to do with anything more than looking for vets votes in the future.
*
*
More information....
This article outlines more precicely what happened with the bill in terms of funding and the votes blocking it. What's mind-boggling is that several of the Republicans voting "no" on this bill actually helped to write it.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/250391-gop-kills-veterans-j...
While I understand the "pay-go" issue, it seems much more logical to me to pass expenditures like this one, as opposed to buying more engines for planes that the Pentagon doesn't want or need, and then paying to store those engines forever. Or building another park to Lincoln in Illinois on the federal dime, or any of a million other christmas tree items that get hung on every "defense" bill.
Guess the GOP will lump those 750,000 veterans in with the 100,000+ who returned home injured (and are not paying taxes) as part of the 47% they don't care about.
alaskabobc: the government has passed that mark long ago.
Remember, the vote was symbolic, and the vets got thrown under the bus in favor of a balanced budget Congress has no intention of passing.
Yes, the administration has a 'plan' to reduce $4 trillion (out of 16) by the time my grandkids are graduating, but then again our President will not be returning for a third term so how much is that promise worth?
islander: you may have a point, but at least she did it, and there will be a political cost.
swimmergirl
thank you for that link - it was very informative!
I guess my tiny post was too
I guess my tiny post was too sardonic for real understanding. I would actually agree to this bill if I actually thought it would do anything. But the bill's own sponsors have no idea if it would help or not. How about just spreading the billion dollars among the vets and be done with it? That's certainly far better than rewarding Dem donors with billions of dollars of green energy loans. The reality is we simply cannot keep spending money that we have to print at the fed or borrow from the Chinese. Let's dump pet projects (green energy) and find some real job programs. I love still being able to see what the CCC did back in the 30's, though I'm not sure those are the best jobs for those returning after risking their lives as combat vets. There's got to be something better than menial labor.
swimmergirl: Good point. I am discouraged with the Republicans'
misguided allocation restriction (particularly on a symbolic vote) and feel it will not resolute well with Americans.
akjim: I am not ready to 'dump' green energy projects. Like Edison said "I did not fail. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
I could say the same for our venture to the moon, or the bottom of the seas.
It is a matter of perspective and national goals.
Trust me, there are many universities and labs across the country addressing our future energy and environmental challenges.
Our politicians do not have all the answers. They are lawyers, not scientists, in control of the purse strings and sound bite credits.
The GOP needs to learn
that if you take this nation to war, you must count the cost. Part of that accounting is taking care of our vets who serve. The conduct of Senate Republicans has been unconscionable. These last four years of absolute obstructionism on votes vital to the interest of the US, coupled with the hijacking of the party by the extreme right, and the increasing loss of voter share by Republicans are signposts on the road to implosion. So, there IS light at the end of the tunnel! Kudos to Senator Murkowski, who has shown she isn't completely braindead, as is the case with so very many of her party.
wolfmagic: they are far from braindead.
I see, and hear, the same drumbeats from both major parties.
Here is the problem: the media, (mainstream or otherwise), are braindead.
The challenge remains in framing the questions.
And the 'media' has presupposed their audience's ability to comprehend the subject matter.
Up or down on vets
"Perhaps within an existing federal program a veterans jobs corps could be started without eating up $1billion in seed money."
Important to note that, according to Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), this bill would be paid for by budgetary set-asides. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) called it a "gimmick." Still, why not just let this one go to a straight up-or-down vote? 58 to 40 looks like a pretty clear majority to me...
Ken has a good point.
It seems that most media outlets now have a lot more "discussion panel" programming, which is basically just a bunch of like-minded people piling on to whatever the issue of the day is. Wouldn't it be nice if we could just erase all of those outlets and put in a chanel that just presented the facts.
- The bill was for xyz
- The vote went this way
- R representative explained the GOP voted the way it did because....
- D representative explained the Dems voted the way they did because.....
- More source documentation can be found here.
Done.
Where the money is!
JE... So typical that you see only one small piece of the big puzzle.
First, sighting Lisa MerCowsky (sp) some Alaska voters can not spell, see her last election for details)) and praising her for crossing the isle condoms spending money we do not have and supports a Party Traitor. She should just change parties and get on the side she truly belongs; with the Dems.
Second, the fiscally responsible in the House and the Senate are doing what they can to keep additional spending down.
If we are to really help our returning vets and our unemployed lets try drilling for oil, fracking for gas and oil, lifting the crushing boots of regulation off the necks of small business and industry to spur economic growth. Doing these alone would equal JOBS, a 4 letter word(See Joe Biden).
And while we are helping the vets and unemployed let's reduce corporate taxes and invite our companies abroad with tax incentives to come back home so they can employ Americans and support our economy.
Am I the only one in the room that feels this way?
I hope not!
Akjustice you need to change
Akjustice you need to change your name, there is no justice in your proposal!
Drilling for oil, fracking for gas? it’s being done right now. Burning fossil fuels is also destroying our planet, fracking is contaminating our water supplies, but you probably don't care about that.
And guess what good planets are hard to come by. So what the hell are our kids going to do?
Crushing boots of regulation? Give me a break! What regs are you speaking of? Name one regulation.
Spur economic growth? We have billionaires controlling our government, elected officials like Lisa Murkowski that are letting industry write our energy policies!
Result, there are NO free markets left in our country, and all the wealth has moved to the top and not across the board! Do you think these billionaires care about clean water, ecosystems, you or our kids? NO THEY DO NOT!
We need to end the practice of making millionaires off of our public resources and spread this wealth around!
And if the Republicans would have stood out of Pres. Obamas way our country would be building high speed rails, improving the grid system all across this country, and creating lots of jobs that would help improve our climate.
Investment built this country
Private investment and hard work built this Country! Private investment and hard work are the only way we will grow out of the economic mess we are in.
With the effective suppression of US oil production and infrastructure development and the US governments (Obama) financial support of South American oil development our current administration has effectively placed us out of work and set the stage for this slow and non-existant recovery.
Jumpstart would have us believe that earning money and accumulating wealth is a bad thing. My questions to those that believe wealth is bad are: Have you ever been hired by a poor person? Who builds the homes, factories, stores and all the wonderful things we have access to in our modern world? Who loaned you the money to finance your house, buy a car and so on.
My advice to you that feel money and wealth are wrong or evil or that we should redistribute to make things equal is to stop drinking the Kool-aid and spend your time making money. You'll develop a real sense of accomplishment and understanding about the real world many of us live in.
And to the point... Returning Vets and the unemployed want to work and earn a living, buy a home, a car and have a life. If we do not build, mine, refine and otherwise produce something, just how do you create wealth and jobs?
People and public money built
People and public money built this country. And it will be education and investing in the middle class that will create the wealth we need to grow us out of the economic mess we are in.
akjustice,
lisa murkowski is a republican traitor? How so?
As far as US oil expansion and its influence on our recovery... there isn't enough oil on US soil, or in international waters surrounding US soil to spur the kind of economic growth you expect. Sorry, it's just not possible.
Even to influence the price of oil would mean the US has the capability to produce enough to flood the market. Not to mention, this could only lower oil prices if foreign producers don't slow production to account for this over-abundance.
The only benefit of expanding domestic oil production is to reduce the fear of foreign dependence. We don't even have the oil reserves to do this effectively. Energy independence must be coupled with renewable energy, as there just isn't enough oil reserve in US territories to feasibly cut foreign dependence and keep oil prices where they are. In order to tap into the majority of our reserves at this point, oil prices need to be higher. It's not economically feasible for private contractors to develop all these reserves at the current price of oil.
As far as redistribution is concerned, I don't think anyone here is suggesting it as a reasonable solution. Wealth redistribution is just a scare tactic, similar to the socialist marketing campaign that has overwhelmed the political discourse the last 7 or 8 years. Democrats are not suggesting the government take the wealth of say Warren Buffett, and dole it out to the poor. The discussion of raising taxes to support our unhealthy spending which, mind you, was initiated long before Obama was elected is met with this redistribution of wealth end of the world gimmick. Enough already!
Taxes haven't even gone up and it's been almost 4 years with a "socialist" (sarcasm) democrat as president and a majority D senate.
Over mining, over drilling, and over using the limited natural resources is not a solution. It's not even a short-term fix. Natural resource development is still expanding under Obama. This isn't our problem and it's not the underlying cause for our current economic situation. It's a hot-button issue because it's an easy way to point a finger at the opponent and say "you support over-regulation. You're destroying this country!" or "you support mining. You're destroying the environment!"
We need environmentalists just like we need developers. The two create a middle zone that fluctuates slightly with regard to various foreign and domestic circumstances. Pushing hard for one or the other is always met with a somewhat equal push back. Then compromise is made.
Have you ever had someone reply to your posts and say honestly "um, excuse me, but yes, I feel money and wealth are wrong and evil and that we should redistribute to make things equal. I love the kool-aid."?
Do you expect someone to fall into the simplistic image you paint of your imagined opponent? It sure is easy to win an arguement when you imagine your opponent is a brain dead vegetable.
How anyone...
...could disagree with what Jumpstart said is beyond me... That must be SOME Kool-Aide you're drinking!
Down with Plutocracy!
As much as the Koch Brothers would have you believe otherwise, this is a nation by and FOR the People. Deal with it!
Ineptocracy
(in-ep-toc-ra-cy)
A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
Idiocracy
(id-i-oc-ra-cy)
noun
A system of government in which the lowest common denominator must be pandered to by promoting conspiracy theories, denying science, and affirming beliefs rather than reality in order for political candidates to be elected.
ex. "The Republican party's primary season was a perfect example of idiocracy in action."
See also: wingnut, denialism, AKjustice
AKjustice...
Right on! Thanks!
While some things change others remain the same...
As before, all the usual nay say-ers show up to tear down, out shout and beat down the ideas they don't like. And again as usual they try, as they may, to make those same ideas and beliefs that they, the authority of what's best for all of us, look small and dumb and not worthy.
Trouble is, facts are stubborn things and they have a way of resurfacing again and again.
Fact is, Returning vets need jobs(4 letter word there Joe) and planting trees is not going to get it. Logging, farming, mining, fishing, manufacturing, constructing and other jobs(4 letter word there Joe) that actually produce a product that has value and that can be exchanged for yet another product is what we need and what most unemployed and returning vets want.
Frankly, I don't care if the factory owner is rich. I want the paying work and so do most people. These same people are, for the most part, not interested in ideology so much as they are interested in a decent income to support their family's
When all you can do is tear down people because of their success it leads me to believe you're a crying loser.
akjustice,
Did you feel outnumbered on this discussion? I tried to hit your main talking points. No reply so I assume you agreed with me.
If you think it's a shouting contest, it's because you started it. You suggested that anyone who disagrees with you is a kool-aid drinking commie who wants wealth redistribution. Forgive me and the rest of us if we returned the favor and you were unprepared to receive it.
And rough cut, you agree with AKjustice? That anyone who supports this bill for vets is a kool-aid drinking commie... oh forget it. Of course you do.
And the usual talking points from MSNBC? If you could argue with even one talking point you wouldn't have posted a one-sentence comment suggesting you can't argue with anyone on this matter. The usual talking points from FOX were nailed by AKjustice and you simply agreed. Sounds like a good fox viewer to me.
Why reply?
The reason I do not reply to many of the comments made against me or my beliefs is because talking to a drunk or a drug addict while they are high is pointless.
The lefties would have us believe that the philosophies of colonialism, communism , socialism are really good for us. That redistributing the wealth is really a good thing. That taking from the one that produces and giving it to the one that does not is a good thing. That restricting our rights in favor of their idea of what we really need is best for us.
Our founders developed the best framework to guide a moral society that has ever been contrived by man. Our country has advanced farther, produced more, improved the quality of life more and set free more peoples than any other country in history. What is so truly sad is the mealy mouthed that use our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, two of our greatest documents, to bend and twist our greatness into a muddy perverseness .
We are an exceptional people made up of peoples from all over the world that, like us, want freedom and liberty. They want to work on that "American Dream", not the Russian dream or the Cuban dream or the Chinese dream, the "American Dream" .
So cheesypoof, I have responded to you with reason and position. I believe in what I do because in applying these beliefs and having an American Dream have made my family a success. And should this country continue to travel down the road of redistribution, so be it. It will not be long before there will not be anything of value to redistribute and tyranny will rule us all.
To further understand responses made please go to:
http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/21PbAr/Hst/US/DmocAthnsUS.htm
and read up on some interesting stubborn facts that will not go away and will most certainly reveal social dependency(entitlements) vs self reliance(working and business).
Hook, line. and sinker.
AKjustice, you really should check your facts before you present them as such. Those chain emails you read and rely on, tend to be full of half truths, and all out lies....or what many consider to be the facts.
Q: What’s the deal with Prof. Joseph Olson’s "unreported stats" from the 2008 election?
A: This chain e-mail is a hoax. The "statistics" are grossly
incorrect, and Prof. Olson says he didn’t write it.
Weird how Democrats Gore and Obama both won 580,000 sq. miles and Republicans Bush and McCain won 2.427.000.
Odd, because Bush won and Obama won, yet the same exact people appear to have voted in both elections??
akjustice, strong argument
now you're saying anyone who disagrees with you is similar to a person high on drugs? It's clear you're far from able to discuss this article or much more than your breakfast condiments. Why did you bother to comment in the first place?
You presented reason and position... where? You suggested the consitution represents people like you and not liberals. You simply presented a general opinion you have of the history both you and I share as Americans.
There is no reasonable argument presented. You made a bunch of silly statements. It's pathetic that you consider it a reasoned and positioned reply. You suggested liberals are commies. That right there is a fool's argument. Just stop reposting propaganda and you won't have to attempt to reply to all the "haters" on here. We're haters because you are a shallow, misinformed, fool with little to no understanding of your perceived opponent: liberals.
And I don't plan to read a religious interpretation of political issues in America. Try a real website for a change. Maybe you won't make such an ass of yourself on Juneau Empire in the future.