I recently discovered that a childhood friend of mine is involved in a grassroots effort to sponsor a tax credit for volunteering time. Currently the tax code allows you to write off money or material goods donated to charity, but not time, although for most of us time is money. I wanted to know what other people think of this idea.

The web site for the campaign is SAVE USA. The name of the proposed bill (introduced to Congress by Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-NY) is SAVE (Support American Volunteer Efforts.)

On the one hand, the last thing the US needs is fewer taxes. On the other hand they explicitly suggest that this credit be paid for by repealing tax credits for the rich, and it is unfair that people who have time but no money cannot receive credit for their good works. So on balance I think I support this idea. Anyone else?

Based on this thread by Lode Runner about boycotting Republican products:

The fundamental problem with overly expansive boycotts is that they do absolutely nothing except make the participants feel good. The boycott is a tool that only works if wielded in bulk. So a successful boycott must aim itself so as to be as mainstream as possible.

I did this years ago when HACKERS in CYBER-SPACE were the bugaboo of the day and the Clinton Administration was diligently trying to take away our First Amendment rights. Back then, I had the freedom to think of myself as focused mostly on the First Amendment, and I considered feminism a battle that had largely been won. Oh, the follies of youth...

Anyway, it was a good shtick then and it's a good shtick now. Because you know, this is where they want it to end up.

I keep seeing discussions of what the Democratic Party should do phrased in terms of "should we move to the left, or move to the center?" Then someone says "We need Howard Dean and his lefty cred!" and someone else says "But Dean is a centrist!" and meanwhile people accuse John Kerry of being a centrist... and it's all missing the point.

There are four dimensions in politics. Not one. Left, right and center are already pretty lame when talking about a general candidate's opinions. When talking about where the Democratic Party needs to be, it's especially useless because it doesn't actually address the problem.

And screw the elderly!

We, as Democrats, have been fighting so hard and so long to preserve and protect a social program that more or less all by itself vastly extended the American lifespan and brought the elderly out of poverty. And they betrayed us by voting in large percentages for a man who wants to destroy that system.

Okay, fine. Let him.

I have experience with databases. Having just done voter registration in Pennsylvania, and having just gotten a mailing at my mom's house in New York telling me my polling place (I registered to vote in Maryland in 2000; I have not voted in New York since 1996), I've been thinking of what we should be pushing for, at the grassroots level, state by state, to help fix the broken way Americans vote and keep the rolls pumped up and accurate.

We should tie voter registration to driver's licenses. "Motor Voter" doesn't actually mean they register you when you get your driver's license; it means they have the forms at the Department of Motor Vehicles. I know; Maryland has such a law, and that's all they do. I still needed to fill out the form separately and mail it in myself.

I've never done a diary before, but I haven't seen anyone highlighting this point yet.

The meme I keep seeing in right-wing lala land is "John Kerry will lose because he gave Kofi Annan and Jacques Chirac a veto over America's national security" (despite the fact that he specifically said he wouldn't do that, but whatever.)

However, did anyone notice that when they were talking about North Korea, Bush was in favor of relying on allies, and Kerry was in favor of America doing its own job of negotiating? And Bush's allies in this case included China?

Now, realistically, I do think China needs to be included in talks with North Korea, but this should shoot the "Kerry would give foreigners veto over our security" meme in the foot. What's better, turning to our allies in Europe, who are democracies? Turning to France, who has been a friend to the US since they helped us win our freedom? Or turning to China, which was Red Communist just a short while ago and is still jailing religious people?

John Kerry may turn to Western democracies when America is in crisis. But when George Bush has to face a madman with nukes, he gives a veto over America's security to RED CHINA.

Flog this meme wherever you see wingnuts going on about Kerry's internationalism being a weakness. I saw it in Scott Rosenberg's blog comments on Salon and responded there.