Gov. Dean unveils his economic plan

WASHINGTON—Democratic presidential candidate Governor Dean unveiled his economic program today, condemning the "Enron Economics" of the Bush administration, and promising that, as president, he would "reclaim the American dream" for working families.

Speaking to students and faculty at Georgetown University, Governor Dean spoke out against the growing influence of corporate and special interests in the political process.

"When the balance of power in Washington shifts and private interests trump the common good American capitalism has been betrayed. Over the last 30 years, we have allowed multinational corporations and other special interests to use our nation's government to undermine our nation's promise. They have bought access to power with their campaign contributions and their lobbyists. And they’ve used that access to ensure that the laws--and most importantly the tax code--benefit them," Governor Dean said.

"The Bush presidency is the realization of our founding fathers' fear – that one day economic power would seize political power. Enron epitomizes this fear, corporate power run amok. The executives at Enron misled the public and their employees to line their pockets with millions of dollars while employees lost their jobs, lost their health insurance and lost their pensions," Dean said. "President Bush has brought the Enron model from Texas to Washington. He's implemented an economic plan for the country with reckless tax cuts based on false economic assumptions that benefit the wealthiest in our society at the expense of ordinary working Americans. The President's economics are Enron economics."

The Dean economic program consists of:

1. JOB CREATION: A short-term stimulus to create 1 million new jobs through a $100 billion Fund to Restore America that will help states and local governments create jobs in health, education, and homeland security, as well as build or restore schools, roads and other infrastructure.

2. FISCAL DISCIPLINE: Repeal all the president's tax cuts, pay for new programs without increasing the deficit, and a pledge to balance the budget.

3. HELP FOR SMALL BUSINESS: A new Small Business Capital Corporation to expand the secondary market for small business loans and make capital for these job creators available more easily and at a lower cost.

4. TAX FAIRNESS: An aggressive effort to clean up the tax code, end corporate welfare, close tax loopholes, enhance enforcement against tax cheats and to shift the burden of taxation back toward corporations giving fairer treatment to individual taxpayers.

5. TAX SIMPLIFICATION: A commitment to tax simplification so that at least half of American taxpayers will no longer have to fill out forms.

6. A BETTER DEAL FOR WORKING FAMILIES: Addressing working families' anxieties about making ends meet with a higher minimum wage, universal health care, greater assistance with early education and care and college for their kids and a secure retirement.

Governor Dean explained that recovering from the Bush administration's reckless policies—that have cost 3.1 million jobs and turned a $3.1 trillion surplus into a $3.8 trillion deficit—will be difficult.

"The effect of this president's policies is to saddle a family of four with $52,000 in national debt over the next six years alone. And let’s be clear what American middle class families actually received. In 2003, 60 percent of Americans will get an average of $307; the top one percent of all households received an average of over $26,000," Governor Dean said.

"What George Bush is basically doing is borrowing $1000 in your name and handing you $250 of it. That is why I say, unlike some of my rivals, we need to repeal all of the president's tax cuts. These tax cuts weren't written for the majority of America. These tax cuts weren't written to return economic power back to the people. These tax cuts, like Enron's finances, are a scheme to make the rich richer, to starve Social Security and Medicare and to put our nation's financial strength at risk by creating the largest debt in history."

"We'll have to be honest with the American people that it's going to take years and some sacrifice to dig out," Dean said. "I pledge to the American people that a Dean administration in Washington will do what the Dean administration did in Vermont: we will balance the budget."

Rick - Thanks for these frequent, ongoing updates about the activities of Howard Dean - "Dean visits college campus" - "Dean says he doesn't like Bush" - "Dean unveils his hangnail." Thanks to his website, we get up-to-the-minute, day-by-day reports on almost everything he does.

But I feel the picture we're getting is somehow incomplete. Please start letting us know whenever Dean coughs up phlegm or takes a big dump. "Dean unloads his dinner" - "Dean clogs up the toilet" - "Dean wakes up with crust in his eye."

These days, the personal side of a candidate matters, too. Please be a little more thorough in the future if you want people to trust your reports.

Doug, you display such refreshing wit. Don't ever change.

yeah. After all these years, he's still our cuddly FFF

The problem I have with speeches and proclamations like that above is that it is all BULL SHIT!! Yes, it all sounds great! Fantastic! Let's do it!! But I want to hear Dean (and from all the candidates including Clark) on HOW they plan to do all of these things.

I mean give me a fucking break. Who doesn't want (1) Job Creation, (2) Fiscal Discipline, (3) Help for Small Businesses, (4) Tax Fairness, (5) Tax Simplification, and (6) A better deal for working families.

For example, where does this $100 billion for "short term stimulus" for job creation come from?

Repeal ALL of the president's tax cuts? What about the portion that does target and benefit the middle class?

What are these "new programs" and how will they be created without increasing the deficit?

And balance the budget? How? Eliminating the tax cuts will only put a small dent into it. What programs is he going to cut or eliminate to balance this budget? But wait a minute, he just stated he's going to create NEW programs and do it without increasing the deficit. That should be a neat trick.

"Clean up the tax code" how? Flat tax? Create additional tax brackets? National sales tax? Eliminate tax deductions? If so, which ones? What does "clean up the tax code mean"?

End corporate welfare? What exactly is he referring to? What loop holes is he referring to?

I like the idea of not having to fill out tax forms, but how does that work exactly?

And good lord, I love the last one: A better deal for working families? What should the new minimum wage be? $6.00 or $7.00 an hour? And the minimum wage (increased or otherwise) is suppose to support a family of what size?

And UNIVERSAL HEALTH care?!?! I would love to see some sort of it implemented, but how? And what is his definition of "universal healthcare"? How will it be funded? How will it be managed?

And this is really good ... he wants to provide "greater assistance with early education and care and college for their kids and retirement." What exactly is he saying here? What is he actually proposing and how the hell will we pay for it?

Although this seems like a tirade against Dean specifically, but it's not meant to be. ALL candidates (including my man Clark) are guilty of this "I wanna do this, and I will do that" bull shit that just basically becomes a contest for who is best at making promises and telling people what they want to hear.

Any idiot can state goals. But actually outlining how we'll get there is the real challenge.

>The problem I have with speeches and proclamations like that

>above is that it is all BULL SHIT!! Yes, it all sounds great!

> Fantastic! Let's do it!! But I want to hear Dean (and from

>all the candidates including Clark) on HOW they plan to do all

>of these things.

He tells you, you just don't want to hear it!

>I mean give me a fucking break. Who doesn't want (1) Job

>Creation, (2) Fiscal Discipline, (3) Help for Small

>Businesses, (4) Tax Fairness, (5) Tax Simplification, and (6)

>A better deal for working families.

BUSH has proven he's opposed to 2 and 6, and doesn't seem to be a fan of 4 or 5 either. Meanwhile, Dean is one of the only Democratic candidates that's proven he can balance a budget, and he provided healthcare while doing it!

>For example, where does this $100 billion for "short term

>stimulus" for job creation come from?

You answered this directly below:

>Repeal ALL of the president's tax cuts? What about the

>portion that does target and benefit the middle class?

I'll gladly give up my $260 from Bush's BS "tax cuts for the middle class" if it means our healthcare system gets fixed alone!

In addition, ending corporate wellfare and tax breaks, getting tough on American companies "based" in the Carribian, etc. can save far more.

>What are these "new programs" and how will they be created

>without increasing the deficit?

With the money in the increased revenue he *spelled out*. I agree most polititians are full of it, but this one actually has some content for a change. Thats why some of us love him. You just have to read what he writes.

>And balance the budget? How? Eliminating the tax cuts will

>only put a small dent into it. What programs is he going to

>cut or eliminate to balance this budget? But wait a minute,

>he just stated he's going to create NEW programs and do it

>without increasing the deficit. That should be a neat trick.

I think cracking down on all corporate wellfare would do it. All the 'farm aid' that goes to ADM and the like, and for tobacco. Then you stop overextending our military and take spending back to near-Clinton levels, you stop paying companies like Haliburton rediculous amounts to wage the 'Drug War' as mercinaries in central America, in fact you tell the likes of Haliburton that they may well never get another US govt. contract if they don't straighten up and start paying US taxes.

You also get more money as the economy improves, which real prosecution of the likes of Ken Lay and his cronies would help, not to mention replacing a certain idiot warmonger would certianly help the markets to feel more stable.

This isn't like Bush or Arnold's promises, these have depth and are not the kind of step one 'steal underpants', step two '...', step three 'profit!' you hear from ordinary polititians.

Dean is not an ordinary polititian, you just have to look at his financing, his best feature! Then look at Shrub's and get the shivers. http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/

>"Clean up the tax code" how? Flat tax? Create additional tax

>brackets? National sales tax? Eliminate tax deductions? If

>so, which ones? What does "clean up the tax code mean"?

He spells it out! Nothing like flat tax or your other ideas, where are you getting them? Get rid of the idioic BS, (like the loophole for small business to be able to write off a delevery truck that's allowing tens of thousands of private citizens to write off their Hummer... if you can afford gas for a Hummer you don't need a damn tax break, if you're going to give a break to citizens give it to the person buying a Prius!), as well as far worse loopholes, many of which have been around for 50+ years and are not used for anything like their original intent, or were bought and paid for by the industry they affect.

>End corporate welfare? What exactly is he referring to? What

>loop holes is he referring to?

You haven't managed to read this relatively short document with comprehension , 5-50 pages of specific examples would help you how? :7

>I like the idea of not having to fill out tax forms, but how

>does that work exactly?

Probably a lot like the current EZ system only even easier, much like online banking and bill pay I'd guess. Vote for him and find out!

>And good lord, I love the last one: A better deal for working

>families? What should the new minimum wage be? $6.00 or

>$7.00 an hour? And the minimum wage (increased or otherwise)

>is suppose to support a family of what size?

With health care and well funded schools and other kid's programs it'd have a hell of a lot better chance then it does now, wouldn't it?

>And UNIVERSAL HEALTH care?!?! I would love to see some sort

>of it implemented, but how? And what is his definition of

>"universal healthcare"? How will it be funded? How will it

>be managed?

Well, it'll start by not being managed by purely for proffit HMOs, and will not be based on a system that transfers costs for anybody that can't pay to everyone else through $7 Tylenol, etc. He's done it in Vermont, which is far more then anybody else on the stage with him can say.

>And this is really good ... he wants to provide "greater

>assistance with early education and care and college for their

>kids and retirement." What exactly is he saying here? What

>is he actually proposing and how the hell will we pay for it?

He'll balance the budget first, which along with many other things cited will help improve the economy. Then when we're in another Clintonian size (or better) boom the money will go to better use instead of to the special interests.

>Although this seems like a tirade against Dean specifically,

>but it's not meant to be. ALL candidates (including my man

>Clark) are guilty of this "I wanna do this, and I will do

>that" bull shit that just basically becomes a contest for who

>is best at making promises and telling people what they want

>to hear.

>

>Any idiot can state goals. But actually outlining how we'll

>get there is the real challenge.

I agree that all polititians do this, especially having just been through the CA recall where Arnie's stance was he's 'for the children' and he's going to fix everything, repeal taxes-not raise them, and bring back jobs. How? Nobody cared. Good thing too, because he's just now bothering to study the problem in the first place... (or rather, have 'his people' look at it).

Dean, on the other hand, seems to me to be by far the most open and candid, his record in Vermont means a whole lot more to me then the decidedly mixed, special interest laden prospects of Kerry, Gephardt or Looserman.

I do think your transfering your concern about unsubstantiated promisses from your candidate, with no domestic record and who hasn't laid out anything nearly as thorough as this to my knowledge, onto Dean who's got both. But I like Clark too, think he'd be a great VP for Dean!

>Rick - Thanks for these frequent, ongoing updates about the

>activities of Howard Dean - "Dean visits college campus" -

>"Dean says he doesn't like Bush" - "Dean unveils his

>hangnail." Thanks to his website, we get up-to-the-minute,

>day-by-day reports on almost everything he does.

>

>But I feel the picture we're getting is somehow incomplete.

>Please start letting us know whenever Dean coughs up phlegm or

>takes a big dump. "Dean unloads his dinner" - "Dean clogs up

>the toilet" - "Dean wakes up with crust in his eye."

>

>These days, the personal side of a candidate matters, too.

>Please be a little more thorough in the future if you want

>people to trust your reports.

I'd much rather hear Rick's reports on Dean than listen to your incessant drivel, especially since you're the guy who finds the inadequacies of Down's Syndrome children "entertaining to watch".

>The problem I have with speeches and proclamations like that

>above is that it is all BULL SHIT!! Yes, it all sounds great!

> Fantastic! Let's do it!! But I want to hear Dean (and from

>all the candidates including Clark) on HOW they plan to do all

>of these things.

What I posted above is an overview of his economic plan. A more detailed explanation (in PDF format) is posted on his site at this link: http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_economy_reclaimingtheamericandream . As I've said in the past, if you go to Dean's site, http://www.deanforamerica.com , and then click on "On the Issues," you will find very clearly stated and detailed policies & plans. Clark has no such information on his site. Also, we have Dean's record as Governor of Vermont to check against his statements. We know he provided healthcare to everyone under 18, we know he balanced the budget, etc.

What bothers me about Clark (and I have been keeping an open mind about him; actually, more than an open mind, I have really been wanting to like him) is that, unlike Dean, he has not stated any specific plans nor do we know where he stands on many issues. I'm not even going to get into the fact that he seemed to flip-flop on whether or not he supported the war in Iraq or whether or not he was a Republican in the past. To me, all of that is a non-issue. I want to know what he plans to do to get the country on the right track. All I've seen from him and his supporters is talk about who he is. Practically every day, Dean posts a statement about something that's going on in the world, and tells you what he would do if he were President. By contrast: on Oct. 17th, the day after Dean announced his economic strategy, this was (and still is) the big headline on Clark's site: "The General Wesley Clark Campaign Releases documents highlighting Military Career...Highlights encompass earning numerous medals, commendations, and badges, including a Silver Star, Legions of Merit, and a Purple Heart." I searched his site to find something specific re: any issue such as healthcare, taxes, homeland security, etc., but couldn't find anything. There is nothing even approximating Dean's "On the Issues" section. What I did find was Clark's "100 Year Vision for America," which is nice, but as LBB complains about, it is all vague and nothing specific. I've also watched some speeches he's made, and his performance in 2 debates, and have still come away not knowing much more about him than that he is now a Democrat.

What I like about Howard Dean (and I am not a blind follower of Dean by any means; I have been following the candidates for many months and at times have also leaned toward others such as Edwards, who lost me when he focused solely on the "I'm the son of a mill worker" line, which to me is similar to Clark's "I got a Purple Heart") is that he is a straight-talker. And I like the fact that his campaign is about us, not him. It's truly grassroots and the almost 475,000 of us who are involved in his campaign truly feel like we are personally doing something to make a change. And I think the fact that most of the people behind Clark are Washington insiders from the Clinton days is a bit of a turnoff to people who want change.

>ALL candidates (including my man

>Clark) are guilty of this "I wanna do this, and I will do

>that" bull shit

Dean has said that the greatest lie politicians tell is that "I will solve all of your problems." He says that the power to solve our problems lies in all of us, and that is why his campaign is really our campaign. And the Dean staff really do listen to us. I've already had 2 of my suggestions (that I made on his blog) taken seriously. It's very empowering to have a voice in this.

One other thing bothers me about the Clark campaign: they state on his site that he raised "nearly $3.5 Million in just two weeks after declaring his bid for the presidency." but what they neglect to tell us is that a lot of that money was really collected over the past year through the "Draft Clark" campaign. Kinda sneaky wording; something I've yet to see from Dean's people.

I will definitely back Clark if he gets the nomination, but I still think Dean has the strongest chance of beating Bush.

Comparisons to what he did for the tiny state of Vermont and what he'll be able to do for the United States has limited validity when you consider the issues of foreign policy, war on terrorism, military spending, immigration, social security, medicare, etc. And I still don't see all the specifics you say are there. So we're just going to have to agree to disagree. But I don't see it for Clark either.

But I also would like to say that most here should recognize that we ultimately have the same goal: Get Bush out of the white house. I'm going to save most of my energy for the fight next year between who ever the Democratic nominee is and Bush.

Like Rick acknowledged that he'd support Clark if he got the nomination, I have to admit I too would support Dean if he got it. Because in the end, the ultimate goal is the same. It's just that for the time being, you and Rick think Dean has the best chance of meeting our ultimate goal, and I feel Clark has the best chance. And either of our positions could change as time goes.

>Comparisons to what he did for the tiny state of Vermont and

>what he'll be able to do for the United States has limited

>validity

Vermont's population is almost the same as Thomas Jefferson's Virginia and Abraham Lincoln's Illinois. Are you suggesting that they were unfit for the Presidency? :o

>Vermont's population is almost the same as Thomas Jefferson's

>Virginia and Abraham Lincoln's Illinois. Are you suggesting

>that they were unfit for the Presidency? :o

Rick you're more intelligent than this manipulative interpretation of my post. But if you insist ...

The population (why you zeroed in on this is beyond me) is irrelevant. Clinton, who despite his faults, was overall a pretty good president in my view and was governor of a very small state ... Arkansas. Bush was governor of a very large state and sucks as President. What IS the point is the problems faced by a small state such as Vermont is not the same as those faced by our country. And comparing what he did for Vermont, while can be helpful and informative, is limiting since, as the Governor of Vermont, he hasn't faced the problems that he would face as President of the United States.

Does the fact that he was governor of a small state mean he's not qualified to be President? Of course not. No one can claim previous experience as a President.

I suspect a major difference between us on how we view candidates is due to my having a much more conservative view on foreign policy than you do. That might explain your emphasis on his record as Governor of Vermont and why it's not enough for me.

>he hasn't faced the

>problems that he would face as President of the United

>States.

He's encountered them on a smaller scale. What about Clark? Do we have any clue about what he can do for the economy? If all we have to go on is that he got a Purple Heart and other medals of honor, then we don't.

>That might explain your

>emphasis on his record as Governor of Vermont and why it's not

>enough for me.

I actually rarely discuss his record as governor unless it's brought up. I emphasize that he's fiscally conservative, socially progressive, and a straight-talker.

Frankly, I think the small state/large state issue is pretty bogus when it comes to someone's ability to govern.

In Texas (my native home state), the power doesn't lie with the Governor. The Lt. Governor has much more authority and power. In short, just about any jackass can be governor of Texas and many have been.....including the current one and the immediately previous one. The one thing George W. Bush has been truthful about was his promise to "do for the nation what he'd done for Texas". He left Texas in a mess, and now he's done the same for the country.

Dean, Clark, whoever.......anyone but Bush.

i thought it was the inadequacies of taylorky that doug enjoyed watching, and only used trisomy 21 to illustrate the matter. i'd have preferred that doug not insult those with DS by comparing them to taylor, actually. nobody deserves to be likened to him.

rick...

i never thought i'd say this, but... (and yes, i'm totally serious) keep up the dean work. it is hugely refreshing to see you address issues. i'm glad to see you worry about the direction in which the country is headed, as opposed to the length of the tongue in your hole. really. i don't mean this as an insult. i just enjoy this side of you much more than the backside of you.

>rick...

>i'm glad to see you worry about the

>direction in which the country is headed, as opposed to the

>length of the tongue in your hole.

Thanks, but I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. I can still be concerned about the future of our democracy while my ass is being enjoyed. And anyway, I never worry about the length of the tongue. It's the skill that counts. }( But yes, I'll still continue to promote Dean on M4M. And I'll be heading to New Hampshire in January to canvass door-to-door; I know it'll be cold but I'll freeze my hot ass off for that man. ;-)

whether you agree with where dean wants to take the country, i think he's done a really good thing for democracy: he's gotten many people concerned, involved, energized, and PARTICIPATING. (ignore the faulty grammar!) i give kudos to anyone or anything who gets people to actually take part in the process, instead of letting the christian coalition (on the one hand) or corrupt labour union bosses (on the other) dictate.

again, good job, rick. hehe... by the way, i think you should talk to the dean people & get me a reviewers' copy of his book.

>by the way, i think you should

>talk to the dean people & get me a reviewers' copy of his

>book.

I'll see what strings I can pull.

By the way, Dan Rather interviews Howard Dean on CBS' 60 Minutes II at 8 pm ET tonight.