As Kos said a while back, this is why it's nice to have a productive think tank on our side.
Center For American Progress: State of the Union 2004
Some personal favorites of mine:
From the SOTU Dictionary
- Bipartisan Support: All Republicans, plus Zell Miller (D-GA)
- Deficit: Something that used to matter but does not matter any more.
- Ally: A nation or leader which helps us but gets nothing in return. (See Tony Blair.)
- Jobs program: Creating the position of Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Manufacturing.
- Top policy priority: A high level Administration position left unfilled.
Also, another SOTU Score Card this one with nice check buttons to click (it's the little things for me). But the real value of the Center's work for me has been the talking points they so thoroughly research and articulate. I don't have time to really think everyone of my arguments through, so having some whip-smart people do it for me is much appreciated. Here are some excerpts from the SOTU talking points (links to a pdf)
At every turn, the President has passed up opportunities to pass high bang-for-the-buck stimulus to jump start job creation, favoring inefficient, ineffective long-term tax cuts for the most well-off. In 2002, with our economy in desperate need of a jumpstart, the administration pushed to retroactively eliminate the corporate alternative minimum tax, a provision which would have provided a $254 million tax break to Enron. The 2003 tax cuts were responsible for only 13 percent of the growth in the third quarter of the year, and this modest contribution was predominantly due to targeted components like the child tax credit that progressives have always championed.
This is the stuff we have to hammer Bush on, especially with numbers like only 13% of 3rd Quarter growth coming from the tax cuts and most of it coming from traditionally progressive approaches.
- There are serious problems facing our retirement savings system today, which we desperately need to address. In any given year, more than half of all private sector workers have no employer-sponsored pension; the same is true for 92% of the working poor and nearly 4 out of 5 small business employees. Only about 5% of people "max out" their current IRA and 401k accounts. And the largest incentives go to well-off people who are already saving and who tend to respond to new incentives by shifting, rather than adding to, their savings. While masked in the short term, the long-term fiscal impact of these accounts would mean a massive loss of revenue equal to half the size of our projected Social Security shortfall.
- The Bush savings proposal does virtually nothing for 95 percent of Americans. The plan offers little for most Americans who do not save enough to max out their individual accounts, while providing a dramatic windfall to the tiny few who are already saving the most. Furthermore, the Bush plan could encourage small businesses to drop coverage, because owners will be able to increase from $6,000 to $45,000 the amount they can save tax-free, without offering a plan to their employees. Proposed changes to 401k non-discrimination rules could lead to less coverage of low-income employees.
The stat that only 5% of workers max out their 401(k) limit is something that I think will resonate with people. Why are we creating these accounts when people can't even take full advantage of what they have now? Also, the rules on the books now for non-discrimation do well to help out poor folks while the new accounts not surprisingly don't have these protections.
However, rather then just bitch about things they offer some real solutions:
A better retirement plan: offer a new Universal 401k plan to all Americans, with generous matching benefits for low-income workers currently having the hardest time saving. American Progress Director of Economic Programs, Gene Sperling, has developed a plan that would give Americans a matching contribution of up to $1,000 a year in savings deducted from their paychecks. For middle-income families, it could be a one-to-one match; for low-income families, it could be a two-to-one match -- or they could even receive seed money to start their savings. A family eligible for a two-to-one match could accumulate a nest egg of $250,000 in today's dollars simply by contributing $700 a year for 40 years, assuming a 5 percent rate of return.
There's so much more of this at their site
NYC Kossack Gathering
