President Obama's speech on economic inequality

Picture courtesy Whitehouse.gov

President Obama gave an important speech on Wednesday regarding economic inequality and mobility; the video of the speech is at the bottom of this post.

Text courtesy WhiteHouse.gov -

Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you, everybody.  Thank you so much.  Please, please have a seat.  Thank you so much.  Well, thank you, Neera, for the wonderful introduction and sharing a story that resonated with me.  There were a lot of parallels in my life and probably resonated with some of you.  

 

Over the past 10 years, the Center for American Progress has done incredible work to shape the debate over expanding opportunity for all Americans.  And I could not be more grateful to CAP not only for giving me a lot of good policy ideas, but also giving me a lot of staff.  (Laughter.)  My friend, John Podesta, ran my transition; my Chief of Staff, Denis McDonough, did a stint at CAP.  So you guys are obviously doing a good job training folks.

 

I also want to thank all the members of Congress and my administration who are here today for the wonderful work that they do.  I want to thank Mayor Gray and everyone here at THEARC for having me.  This center, which I’ve been to quite a bit, have had a chance to see some of the great work that’s done here.  And all the nonprofits that call THEARC home offer access to everything from education, to health care, to a safe shelter from the streets, which means that you’re harnessing the power of community to expand opportunity for folks here in D.C.  And your work reflects a tradition that runs through our history -- a belief that we’re greater together than we are on our own.  And that’s what I’ve come here to talk about today.  

 

Over the last two months, Washington has been dominated by some pretty contentious debates -- I think that’s fair to say.  And between a reckless shutdown by congressional Republicans in an effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and admittedly poor execution on my administration’s part in implementing the latest stage of the new law, nobody has acquitted themselves very well these past few months.  So it’s not surprising that the American people’s frustrations with Washington are at an all-time high.  

 

But we know that people’s frustrations run deeper than these most recent political battles.  Their frustration is rooted in their own daily battles -- to make ends meet, to pay for college, buy a home, save for retirement.  It’s rooted in the nagging sense that no matter how hard they work, the deck is stacked against them.  And it’s rooted in the fear that their kids won’t be better off than they were.  They may not follow the constant back-and-forth in Washington or all the policy details, but they experience in a very personal way the relentless, decades-long trend that I want to spend some time talking about today.  And that is a dangerous and growing inequality and lack of upward mobility that has jeopardized middle-class America’s basic bargain -- that if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead.

 

I believe this is the defining challenge of our time:  Making sure our economy works for every working American.  It’s why I ran for President.  It was at the center of last year’s campaign.  It drives everything I do in this office.  And I know I’ve raised this issue before, and some will ask why I raise the issue again right now.  I do it because the outcomes of the debates we’re having right now -- whether it’s health care, or the budget, or reforming our housing and financial systems -- all these things will have real, practical implications for every American.  And I am convinced that the decisions we make on these issues over the next few years will determine whether or not our children will grow up in an America where opportunity is real.

 

Now, the premise that we’re all created equal is the opening line in the American story.  And while we don’t promise equal outcomes, we have strived to deliver equal opportunity -- the idea that success doesn’t depend on being born into wealth or privilege, it depends on effort and merit.  And with every chapter we’ve added to that story, we’ve worked hard to put those words into practice.   

 

It was Abraham Lincoln, a self-described “poor man’s son,” who started a system of land grant colleges all over this country so that any poor man’s son could go learn something new.  

 

When farms gave way to factories, a rich man’s son named Teddy Roosevelt fought for an eight-hour workday, protections for workers, and busted monopolies that kept prices high and wages low.  

 

When millions lived in poverty, FDR fought for Social Security, and insurance for the unemployed, and a minimum wage.  

 

When millions died without health insurance, LBJ fought for Medicare and Medicaid.  

 

Together, we forged a New Deal, declared a War on Poverty in a great society.  We built a ladder of opportunity to climb, and stretched out a safety net beneath so that if we fell, it wouldn’t be too far, and we could bounce back.  And as a result, America built the largest middle class the world has ever known.  And for the three decades after World War II, it was the engine of our prosperity.  

 

Now, we can’t look at the past through rose-colored glasses.  The economy didn’t always work for everyone.  Racial discrimination locked millions out of poverty -- or out of opportunity.  Women were too often confined to a handful of often poorly paid professions.  And it was only through painstaking struggle that more women, and minorities, and Americans with disabilities began to win the right to more fairly and fully participate in the economy.  

 

Nevertheless, during the post-World War II years, the economic ground felt stable and secure for most Americans, and the future looked brighter than the past.  And for some, that meant following in your old man’s footsteps at the local plant, and you knew that a blue-collar job would let you buy a home, and a car, maybe a vacation once in a while, health care, a reliable pension.  For others, it meant going to college -- in some cases, maybe the first in your family to go to college.  And it meant graduating without taking on loads of debt, and being able to count on advancement through a vibrant job market.  

 

Now, it’s true that those at the top, even in those years, claimed a much larger share of income than the rest:  The top 10 percent consistently took home about one-third of our national income.  But that kind of inequality took place in a dynamic market economy where everyone’s wages and incomes were growing.  And because of upward mobility, the guy on the factory floor could picture his kid running the company some day.

 

But starting in the late ‘70s, this social compact began to unravel.  Technology made it easier for companies to do more with less, eliminating certain job occupations.  A more competitive world lets companies ship jobs anywhere.  And as good manufacturing jobs automated or headed offshore, workers lost their leverage, jobs paid less and offered fewer benefits.  

 

As values of community broke down, and competitive pressure increased, businesses lobbied Washington to weaken unions and the value of the minimum wage.  As a trickle-down ideology became more prominent, taxes were slashed for the wealthiest, while investments in things that make us all richer, like schools and infrastructure, were allowed to wither.  And for a certain period of time, we could ignore this weakening economic foundation, in part because more families were relying on two earners as women entered the workforce.  We took on more debt financed by a juiced-up housing market.  But when the music stopped, and the crisis hit, millions of families were stripped of whatever cushion they had left. 

 

And the result is an economy that’s become profoundly unequal, and families that are more insecure.  I’ll just give you a few statistics.  Since 1979, when I graduated from high school, our productivity is up by more than 90 percent, but the income of the typical family has increased by less than eight percent.  Since 1979, our economy has more than doubled in size, but most of that growth has flowed to a fortunate few.  

 

The top 10 percent no longer takes in one-third of our income -- it now takes half.  Whereas in the past, the average CEO made about 20 to 30 times the income of the average worker, today’s CEO now makes 273 times more.  And meanwhile, a family in the top 1 percent has a net worth 288 times higher than the typical family, which is a record for this country.

 

So the basic bargain at the heart of our economy has frayed.  In fact, this trend towards growing inequality is not unique to America’s market economy.  Across the developed world, inequality has increased.  Some of you may have seen just last week, the Pope himself spoke about this at eloquent length.  “How can it be,” he wrote, “that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?”

 

But this increasing inequality is most pronounced in our country, and it challenges the very essence of who we are as a people.  Understand we’ve never begrudged success in America.  We aspire to it.  We admire folks who start new businesses, create jobs, and invent the products that enrich our lives.  And we expect them to be rewarded handsomely for it.  In fact, we've often accepted more income inequality than many other nations for one big reason -- because we were convinced that America is a place where even if you’re born with nothing, with a little hard work you can improve your own situation over time and build something better to leave your kids.  As Lincoln once said, “While we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.”

 

The problem is that alongside increased inequality, we’ve seen diminished levels of upward mobility in recent years.  A child born in the top 20 percent has about a 2-in-3 chance of staying at or near the top.  A child born into the bottom 20 percent has a less than 1-in-20 shot at making it to the top.  He’s 10 times likelier to stay where he is.  In fact, statistics show not only that our levels of income inequality rank near countries like Jamaica and Argentina, but that it is harder today for a child born here in America to improve her station in life than it is for children in most of our wealthy allies -- countries like Canada or Germany or France.  They have greater mobility than we do, not less.  

 

The idea that so many children are born into poverty in the wealthiest nation on Earth is heartbreaking enough.  But the idea that a child may never be able to escape that poverty because she lacks a decent education or health care, or a community that views her future as their own, that should offend all of us and it should compel us to action.  We are a better country than this.  

 

So let me repeat:  The combined trends of increased inequality and decreasing mobility pose a fundamental threat to the American Dream, our way of life, and what we stand for around the globe.  And it is not simply a moral claim that I’m making here.  There are practical consequences to rising inequality and reduced mobility.  

 

For one thing, these trends are bad for our economy.  One study finds that growth is more fragile and recessions are more frequent in countries with greater inequality.  And that makes sense.  When families have less to spend, that means businesses have fewer customers, and households rack up greater mortgage and credit card debt; meanwhile, concentrated wealth at the top is less likely to result in the kind of broadly based consumer spending that drives our economy, and together with lax regulation, may contribute to risky speculative bubbles.

 

And rising inequality and declining mobility are also bad for our families and social cohesion -- not just because we tend to trust our institutions less, but studies show we actually tend to trust each other less when there’s greater inequality.  And greater inequality is associated with less mobility between generations.  That means it’s not just temporary; the effects last.  It creates a vicious cycle.  For example, by the time she turns three years old, a child born into a low-income home hears 30 million fewer words than a child from a well-off family, which means by the time she starts school she’s already behind, and that deficit can compound itself over time.

 

And finally, rising inequality and declining mobility are bad for our democracy.  Ordinary folks can’t write massive campaign checks or hire high-priced lobbyists and lawyers to secure policies that tilt the playing field in their favor at everyone else’s expense.  And so people get the bad taste that the system is rigged, and that increases cynicism and polarization, and it decreases the political participation that is a requisite part of our system of self-government.

 

So this is an issue that we have to tackle head on.  And if, in fact, the majority of Americans agree that our number-one priority is to restore opportunity and broad-based growth for all Americans, the question is why has Washington consistently failed to act?  And I think a big reason is the myths that have developed around the issue of inequality.

 

First, there is the myth that this is a problem restricted to a small share of predominantly minority poor -- that this isn’t a broad-based problem, this is a black problem or a Hispanic problem or a Native American problem.  Now, it’s true that the painful legacy of discrimination means that African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans are far more likely to suffer from a lack of opportunity -- higher unemployment, higher poverty rates.  It’s also true that women still make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men.  So we’re going to need strong application of antidiscrimination laws.  We’re going to need immigration reform that grows the economy and takes people out of the shadows.  We’re going to need targeted initiatives to close those gaps.  (Applause.)  

 

But here’s an important point.  The decades-long shifts in the economy have hurt all groups:  poor and middle class; inner city and rural folks; men and women; and Americans of all races.  And as a consequence, some of the social patterns that contribute to declining mobility that were once attributed to the urban poor -- that’s a particular problem for the inner city: single-parent households or drug abuse -- it turns out now we’re seeing that pop up everywhere.  

 

A new study shows that disparities in education, mental health, obesity, absent fathers, isolation from church, isolation from community groups -- these gaps are now as much about growing up rich or poor as they are about anything else.  The gap in test scores between poor kids and wealthy kids is now nearly twice what it is between white kids and black kids.  Kids with working-class parents are 10 times likelier than kids with middle- or upper-class parents to go through a time when their parents have no income.  So the fact is this:  The opportunity gap in America is now as much about class as it is about race, and that gap is growing.

 

So if we’re going to take on growing inequality and try to improve upward mobility for all people, we’ve got to move beyond the false notion that this is an issue exclusively of minority concern.  And we have to reject a politics that suggests any effort to address it in a meaningful way somehow pits the interests of a deserving middle class against those of an undeserving poor in search of handouts.  (Applause.)

 

Second, we need to dispel the myth that the goals of growing the economy and reducing inequality are necessarily in conflict, when they should actually work in concert.  We know from our history that our economy grows best from the middle out, when growth is more widely shared.  And we know that beyond a certain level of inequality, growth actually slows altogether.

 

Third, we need to set aside the belief that government cannot do anything about reducing inequality.  It’s true that government cannot prevent all the downsides of the technological change and global competition that are out there right now, and some of those forces are also some of the things that are helping us grow.  And it’s also true that some programs in the past, like welfare before it was reformed, were sometimes poorly designed, created disincentives to work.

 

But we’ve also seen how government action time and again can make an enormous difference in increasing opportunity and bolstering ladders into the middle class.  Investments in education, laws establishing collective bargaining, and a minimum wage -- these all contributed to rising standards of living for massive numbers of Americans.  (Applause.)  Likewise, when previous generations declared that every citizen of this country deserved a basic measure of security -- a floor through which they could not fall -- we helped millions of Americans live in dignity, and gave millions more the confidence to aspire to something better, by taking a risk on a great idea.  

 

Without Social Security, nearly half of seniors would be living in poverty -- half.  Today, fewer than 1 in 10 do.  Before Medicare, only half of all seniors had some form of health insurance.  Today, virtually all do.  And because we’ve strengthened that safety net, and expanded pro-work and pro-family tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit, a recent study found that the poverty rate has fallen by 40 percent since the 1960s.  And these endeavors didn’t just make us a better country; they reaffirmed that we are a great country.  

 

So we can make a difference on this.  In fact, that’s our generation’s task -- to rebuild America’s economic and civic foundation to continue the expansion of opportunity for this generation and the next generation.  (Applause.)  And like Neera, I take this personally.  I’m only here because this country educated my grandfather on the GI Bill.  When my father left and my mom hit hard times trying to raise my sister and me while she was going to school, this country helped make sure we didn’t go hungry.  When Michelle, the daughter of a shift worker at a water plant and a secretary, wanted to go to college, just like me, this country helped us afford it until we could pay it back.

 

So what drives me as a grandson, a son, a father -- as an American -- is to make sure that every striving, hardworking, optimistic kid in America has the same incredible chance that this country gave me.  (Applause.)  It has been the driving force between everything we’ve done these past five years.  And over the course of the next year, and for the rest of my presidency, that’s where you should expect my administration to focus all our efforts.  (Applause.) 

 

Now, you'll be pleased to know this is not a State of the Union Address.  (Laughter.)  And many of the ideas that can make the biggest difference in expanding opportunity I’ve presented before.  But let me offer a few key principles, just a roadmap that I believe should guide us in both our legislative agenda and our administrative efforts.

 

To begin with, we have to continue to relentlessly push a growth agenda.  It may be true that in today’s economy, growth alone does not guarantee higher wages and incomes.  We've seen that.  But what's also true is we can’t tackle inequality if the economic pie is shrinking or stagnant.  The fact is if you’re a progressive and you want to help the middle class and the working poor, you’ve still got to be concerned about competitiveness and productivity and business confidence that spurs private sector investment.  

 

And that’s why from day one we’ve worked to get the economy growing and help our businesses hire.  And thanks to their resilience and innovation, they’ve created nearly 8 million new jobs over the past 44 months.  And now we’ve got to grow the economy even faster.  And we've got to keep working to make America a magnet for good, middle-class jobs to replace the ones that we’ve lost in recent decades -- jobs in manufacturing and energy and infrastructure and technology.

  

And that means simplifying our corporate tax code in a way that closes wasteful loopholes and ends incentives to ship jobs overseas.  (Applause.)  And by broadening the base, we can actually lower rates to encourage more companies to hire here and use some of the money we save to create good jobs rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our airports, and all the infrastructure our businesses need.  

 

It means a trade agenda that grows exports and works for the middle class.  It means streamlining regulations that are outdated or unnecessary or too costly.  And it means coming together around a responsible budget -- one that grows our economy faster right now and shrinks our long-term deficits, one that unwinds the harmful sequester cuts that haven't made a lot of sense -- (applause) -- and then frees up resources to invest in things like the scientific research that's always unleashed new innovation and new industries.  

 

When it comes to our budget, we should not be stuck in a stale debate from two years ago or three years ago.  A relentlessly growing deficit of opportunity is a bigger threat to our future than our rapidly shrinking fiscal deficit.  (Applause.)   

 

So that’s step one towards restoring mobility:  making sure our economy is growing faster.  Step two is making sure we empower more Americans with the skills and education they need to compete in a highly competitive global economy.  

 

We know that education is the most important predictor of income today, so we launched a Race to the Top in our schools.  We’re supporting states that have raised standards for teaching and learning.  We’re pushing for redesigned high schools that graduate more kids with the technical training and apprenticeships, and in-demand, high-tech skills that can lead directly to a good job and a middle-class life.

 

We know it’s harder to find a job today without some higher education, so we’ve helped more students go to college with grants and loans that go farther than before.  We’ve made it more practical to repay those loans.  And today, more students are graduating from college than ever before.  We’re also pursuing an aggressive strategy to promote innovation that reins in tuition costs.  We’ve got lower costs so that young people are not burdened by enormous debt when they make the right decision to get higher education.  And next week, Michelle and I will bring together college presidents and non-profits to lead a campaign to help more low-income students attend and succeed in college.  (Applause.) 

 

But while higher education may be the surest path to the middle class, it’s not the only one.  So we should offer our people the best technical education in the world.  That’s why we’ve worked to connect local businesses with community colleges, so that workers young and old can earn the new skills that earn them more money. 

 

And I’ve also embraced an idea that I know all of you at the Center for American Progress have championed -- and, by the way, Republican governors in a couple of states have championed -- and that’s making high-quality preschool available to every child in America.  (Applause.)  We know that kids in these programs grow up likelier to get more education, earn higher wages, form more stable families of their own.  It starts a virtuous cycle, not a vicious one.  And we should invest in that.  We should give all of our children that chance.

 

And as we empower our young people for future success, the third part of this middle-class economics is empowering our workers.  It’s time to ensure our collective bargaining laws function as they’re supposed to -- (applause) -- so unions have a level playing field to organize for a better deal for workers and better wages for the middle class.  It’s time to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act so that women will have more tools to fight pay discrimination.  (Applause.)  It’s time to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act so workers can’t be fired for who they are or who they love.  (Applause.)  

 

And even though we’re bringing manufacturing jobs back to America, we’re creating more good-paying jobs in education and health care and business services; we know that we’re going to have a greater and greater portion of our people in the service sector.  And we know that there are airport workers, and fast-food workers, and nurse assistants, and retail salespeople who work their tails off and are still living at or barely above poverty.  (Applause.)  And that’s why it’s well past the time to raise a minimum wage that in real terms right now is below where it was when Harry Truman was in office.  (Applause.)

 

This shouldn’t be an ideological question.  It was Adam Smith, the father of free-market economics, who once said, “They who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged.”  And for those of you who don’t speak old-English -- (laughter) -- let me translate.  It means if you work hard, you should make a decent living.  (Applause.)  If you work hard, you should be able to support a family.  

 

Now, we all know the arguments that have been used against a higher minimum wage.  Some say it actually hurts low-wage workers -- businesses will be less likely to hire them.  But there’s no solid evidence that a higher minimum wage costs jobs, and research shows it raises incomes for low-wage workers and boosts short-term economic growth.  (Applause.)  

 

Others argue that if we raise the minimum wage, companies will just pass those costs on to consumers.  But a growing chorus of businesses, small and large, argue differently.  And  already, there are extraordinary companies in America that provide decent wages, salaries, and benefits, and training for their workers, and deliver a great product to consumers.  

 

SAS in North Carolina offers childcare and sick leave.  REI, a company my Secretary of the Interior used to run, offers retirement plans and strives to cultivate a good work balance.  There are companies out there that do right by their workers.  They recognize that paying a decent wage actually helps their bottom line, reduces turnover.  It means workers have more money to spend, to save, maybe eventually start a business of their own.  

 

A broad majority of Americans agree we should raise the minimum wage.  That’s why, last month, voters in New Jersey decided to become the 20th state to raise theirs even higher.  That’s why, yesterday, the D.C. Council voted to do it, too.  I agree with those voters.  (Applause.)  I agree with those voters, and I’m going to keep pushing until we get a higher minimum wage for hard-working Americans across the entire country.  It will be good for our economy.  It will be good for our families.  (Applause.)  

 

Number four, as I alluded to earlier, we still need targeted programs for the communities and workers that have been hit hardest by economic change and the Great Recession.  These communities are no longer limited to the inner city.  They’re found in neighborhoods hammered by the housing crisis, manufacturing towns hit hard by years of plants packing up, landlocked rural areas where young folks oftentimes feel like they've got to leave just to find a job.  There are communities that just aren’t generating enough jobs anymore.  

 

So we’ve put forward new plans to help these communities and their residents, because we’ve watched cities like Pittsburgh or my hometown of Chicago revamp themselves.  And if we give more cities the tools to do it -- not handouts, but a hand up -- cities like Detroit can do it, too.  So in a few weeks, we’ll announce the first of these Promise Zones, urban and rural communities where we’re going to support local efforts focused on a national goal -- and that is a child’s course in life should not be determined by the zip code he’s born in, but by the strength of his work ethic and the scope of his dreams.  (Applause.) 

 

And we're also going to have to do more for the long-term unemployed.  For people who have been out of work for more than six months, often through no fault of their own, life is a catch-22.  Companies won’t give their résumé an honest look because they’ve been laid off so long -- but they’ve been laid off so long because companies won’t give their résumé an honest look.  (Laughter.)  And that’s why earlier this year, I challenged CEOs from some of America’s best companies to give these Americans a fair shot.  And next month, many of them will join us at the White House for an announcement about this.

 

Fifth, we've got to revamp retirement to protect Americans in their golden years, to make sure another housing collapse doesn’t steal the savings in their homes.  We've also got to strengthen our safety net for a new age, so it doesn’t just protect people who hit a run of bad luck from falling into poverty, but also propels them back out of poverty.

 

Today, nearly half of full-time workers and 80 percent of part-time workers don’t have a pension or retirement account at their job.  About half of all households don’t have any retirement savings.  So we’re going to have to do more to encourage private savings and shore up the promise of Social Security for future generations.  And remember, these are promises we make to one another.  We don’t do it to replace the free market, but we do it to reduce risk in our society by giving people the ability to take a chance and catch them if they fall.  One study shows that more than half of Americans will experience poverty at some point during their adult lives.  Think about that.  This is not an isolated situation.  More than half of Americans at some point in their lives will experience poverty.  

 

That’s why we have nutrition assistance or the program known as SNAP, because it makes a difference for a mother who’s working, but is just having a hard time putting food on the table for her kids.  That’s why we have unemployment insurance, because it makes a difference for a father who lost his job and is out there looking for a new one that he can keep a roof over his kids' heads.  By the way, Christmastime is no time for Congress to tell more than 1 million of these Americans that they have lost their unemployment insurance, which is what will happen if Congress does not act before they leave on their holiday vacation.  (Applause.) 

 

The point is these programs are not typically hammocks for people to just lie back and relax.  These programs are almost always temporary means for hardworking people to stay afloat while they try to find a new job or go into school to retrain themselves for the jobs that are out there, or sometimes just to cope with a bout of bad luck.  Progressives should be open to reforms that actually strengthen these programs and make them more responsive to a 21st century economy.  For example, we should be willing to look at fresh ideas to revamp unemployment and disability programs to encourage faster and higher rates of re-employment without cutting benefits.  We shouldn't weaken fundamental protections built over generations, because given the constant churn in today’s economy and the disabilities that many of our friends and neighbors live with, they're needed more than ever.  We should strengthen them and adapt them to new circumstances so they work even better. 

 

But understand that these programs of social insurance benefit all of us, because we don't know when we might have a run of bad luck.  (Applause.)  We don't know when we might lose a job.  Of course, for decades, there was one yawning gap in the safety net that did more than anything else to expose working families to the insecurities of today’s economy -- namely, our broken health care system.

 

That’s why we fought for the Affordable Care Act -- (applause) -- because 14,000 Americans lost their health insurance every single day, and even more died each year because they didn’t have health insurance at all.  We did it because millions of families who thought they had coverage were driven into bankruptcy by out-of-pocket costs that they didn't realize would be there.  Tens of millions of our fellow citizens couldn’t get any coverage at all.  And Dr. King once said, "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane.”  

 

Well, not anymore.  (Applause.)  Because in the three years since we passed this law, the share of Americans with insurance is up, the growth of health care costs are down to their slowest rate in 50 years.  More people have insurance, and more have new benefits and protections -- 100 million Americans who have gained the right for free preventive care like mammograms and contraception; the more than 7 million Americans who have saved an average of $1,200 on their prescription medicine; every American who won’t go broke when they get sick because their insurance can’t limit their care anymore. 

 

More people without insurance have gained insurance -- more than 3 million young Americans who have been able to stay on their parents’ plan, the more than half a million Americans and counting who are poised to get covered starting on January 1st, some for the very first time.

 

And it is these numbers -- not the ones in any poll -- that will ultimately determine the fate of this law.  (Applause.)  It's the measurable outcomes in reduced bankruptcies and reduced hours that have been lost because somebody couldn't make it to work, and healthier kids with better performance in schools, and young entrepreneurs who have the freedom to go out there and try a new idea -- those are the things that will ultimately reduce a major source of inequality and help ensure more Americans get the start that they need to succeed in the future.

 

I have acknowledged more than once that we didn’t roll out parts of this law as well as we should have.  But the law is already working in major ways that benefit millions of Americans right now, even as we’ve begun to slow the rise in health care costs, which is good for family budgets, good for federal and state budgets, and good for the budgets of businesses small and large.  So this law is going to work.  And for the sake of our economic security, it needs to work.  (Applause.)  

 

And as people in states as different as California and Kentucky sign up every single day for health insurance, signing up in droves, they’re proving they want that economic security.  If the Senate Republican leader still thinks he is going to be able to repeal this someday, he might want to check with the more than 60,000 people in his home state who are already set to finally have coverage that frees them from the fear of financial ruin, and lets them afford to take their kids to see a doctor.  (Applause.)  

 

So let me end by addressing the elephant in the room here, which is the seeming inability to get anything done in Washington these days.  I realize we are not going to resolve all of our political debates over the best ways to reduce inequality and increase upward mobility this year, or next year, or in the next five years.  But it is important that we have a serious debate about these issues.  For the longer that current trends are allowed to continue, the more it will feed the cynicism and fear that many Americans are feeling right now -- that they’ll never be able to repay the debt they took on to go to college, they’ll never be able to save enough to retire, they’ll never see their own children land a good job that supports a family.

 

And that’s why, even as I will keep on offering my own ideas for expanding opportunity, I’ll also keep challenging and welcoming those who oppose my ideas to offer their own.  If Republicans have concrete plans that will actually reduce inequality, build the middle class, provide more ladders of opportunity to the poor, let’s hear them.  I want to know what they are.  If you don’t think we should raise the minimum wage, let’s hear your idea to increase people’s earnings.  If you don’t think every child should have access to preschool, tell us what you’d do differently to give them a better shot.  

 

If you still don’t like Obamacare -- and I know you don’t -- (laughter) -- even though it’s built on market-based ideas of choice and competition in the private sector, then you should explain how, exactly, you’d cut costs, and cover more people, and make insurance more secure.  You owe it to the American people to tell us what you are for, not just what you’re against.  (Applause.)  That way we can have a vigorous and meaningful debate.  That’s what the American people deserve.  That’s what the times demand.  It’s not enough anymore to just say we should just get our government out of the way and let the unfettered market take care of it -- for our experience tells us that’s just not true.  (Applause.)

 

Look, I’ve never believed that government can solve every problem or should -- and neither do you.  We know that ultimately our strength is grounded in our people -- individuals out there, striving, working, making things happen.  It depends on community, a rich and generous sense of community -- that’s at the core of what happens at THEARC here every day.  You understand that turning back rising inequality and expanding opportunity requires parents taking responsibility for their kids, kids taking responsibility to work hard.  It requires religious leaders who mobilize their congregations to rebuild neighborhoods block by block, requires civic organizations that can help train the unemployed, link them with businesses for the jobs of the future.  It requires companies and CEOs to set an example by providing decent wages, and salaries, and benefits for their workers, and a shot for somebody who is down on his or her luck.  We know that’s our strength -- our people, our communities, our businesses. 

 

But government can’t stand on the sidelines in our efforts.  Because government is us.  It can and should reflect our deepest values and commitments.  And if we refocus our energies on building an economy that grows for everybody, and gives every child in this country a fair chance at success, then I remain confident that the future still looks brighter than the past, and that the best days for this country we love are still ahead.  (Applause.)

 

Thank you, everybody.  God bless you.  God bless America.


For those readers who aren't fans of reading, the video of the speech -

Jan Brewer: Metaphors are not her friend.

Pretty near everyone in AZ remembers Governor Jan Brewer's major "brain freeze" during the 2010 election where she just totally lost her train of thought during a televised gubernatorial debate.

She became a national punchline, bringing another heaping helping of ridicule down upon the state.

She avoided a repeat of that embarrassment by making that debate the *only* debate of the cycle, following the advice of Abraham Lincoln**.

** - From BrainyQuote.com -

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/abrahamlin109276.html#4cc4ecQjVM4KhIMP.9

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/abrahamlin109276.html#4cc4ecQjVM4KhIMP.99

 

Sounds weird, but it worked - she won that election.

However, she seems to have forgotten that advice.


She held a press conference on Monday regarding the ongoing scandal at Child Protective Services.

From KNAU.org, written by Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services (emphasis added) -

The governor said she does not believe the problem originated with Clarence Carter, director of the state Department of Economic Security, parent agency of CPS. But she clearly wants to know where the policy did begin.

“I think that we need a complete, full investigation,” said Brewer. “We need to know where all the bodies are buried, if you will, no pun intended. But we’re not going to start attacking people until we know that we’ve got a basis to do that.”

Given that the scandal is that more than 6500 reports of child abuse were ignored by the agency, her choice of metaphor is unfortunate, to put it mildly.

I just hope that it doesn't prove prophetic as well.

Andy Biggs' evaluation of the CPS records scandal: Child abuse isn't a problem, opportunities to report it are.

Apparently, when State Sen. Andy Biggs (R-Gilbert), the president of the Arizona State Senate, hears about "uninvestigated reports of child abuse", he thinks that there's a problem.


Not with "child abuse".

Not with "uninvestigated".

Nope, he has a problem with "reports".


From the Arizona Daily Star, written by Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services -

Biggs did not dispute that caseloads have increased in the last four years. But he said that’s the result of a “false positive” due to additional funding.

“Instead of taking the money and using it to solve cases, they went out and advertised for more,” he said. While that may have turned up more legitimate cases of abuse, Biggs said it also resulted in more false reports.

Wow.  What brilliant insight.

If we apply that insight to other areas, think of the quality-of-life improvements that could be made in our society -

- Remove phone lines from police stations; fewer reports of crimes means fewer crimes, right?

- Eliminate anti-corruption "whistleblower" hotlines; fewer reports of corruption means less corruption, right? (Actually, it seems that in AZ, we are already on top of this.  In other words, couldn't find one to link to.  May help explain why there is so much corruption in AZ politics
- Eliminate domestic violence hotlines; fewer reports of domestic abuse means that there's less of it, right?

- Could keep this going all night, but the point is made - not talking about bad behavior doesn't mean that the bad behavior stops.

Not hardly.


I've been told by people who know Biggs and disagree his politics as much as I do that he is, in fact, a very intelligent man.  In this situation however, that works against him.

He's not Sylvia Allen or Jack Harper (lege types from years past who were more known for speaking without thinking than for insightful discourse) or Brenda Barton or Bob Thorpe (current lege types, but otherwise ditto).

He knew exactly what he was saying, and in many ways, he's worse than the people who were directly responsible for burying the CPS cases.

He's protecting and enabling them.

His attitude of contempt toward human life permeates the upper levels of the political class at the Capitol and will continue to do so until we make some changes at the Capitol.  The recall of Russell Pearce wasn't enough of a wake-up call for them - the ones that remain still don't believe that it can happen to them.

And they won't until we start voting them out of office.

CPS records scandal: Is "sacrificial lamb" a commonly-accepted resume entry?

...Because someone should be updating his resume...

By now, most folks in AZ have heard of the confession by the director of the department that oversees Child Protective Services (CPS) that the agency dealt with its heavy workload the simplest way possible -


It ignored more than 6000 reports of possible child abuse.


Additionally, some CPS records related to those reports were found dumped in an alley.

There have been calls (and here) for that director of the Department of Economic Security (DES), Clarence Carter, to resign or be fired by Governor Jan Brewer (mostly by Democratic legislators).

There have been counter-statements "pooh-poohing" the concerns as much ado about very little (mostly by Republican legislators).

Now, Carter says that he isn't going anywhere, but he may not have much say in the matter.

Even before Governor Jan Brewer and the Republicans in the legislature gutted the state personnel system, making all state employees subject to the whims of the political class (aka - Brewer and the Republicans in the lege), agency heads were political appointments hired as much for their willingness to fall on their swords for their benefactors when it becomes necessary as for their competence in the area covered by their agency.

In short, he's going to take the fall for this mess.  He's gone by the end of January; sooner if it turns out that some of the reports that the agency metaphorically buried concern kids who ended up buried, and not-so-metaphorically so.

Part of the reason that he's got to go is that it goes with the job.  As the head of the agency, he is ultimately responsible for its operation.  A failure as big as this one becomes his personal failure, regardless of the level of his personal involvement with it.

However, the bigger part of the reason that he will go is that the Governor and Republicans in the legislature need someone to shield them from their culpability in this.

They've spent years demonizing poor Arizona families and using their own unsupported rhetoric (OK - lies) to justify taking resources from the social safety net and redistributing them upwards to corporations and wealthy persons.

Reports state that currently, CPS faces a backlog of approximately 10,000 cases, and that isn't counting the 6000 that were just made public.

Under the previous conditions (backlog = 10K cases), CPS workers were considered "overworked and underpaid", and considering what Brewer, et. al. think of state employees and the poor Arizonans, that was "good enough" by the lights of Brewer and her compatriots.

However, the current conditions (backlog is 60% higher at 16K cases) indicate that the agency isn't just overworked, it's overwhelmed because it doesn't have the resources to do their job.

Carter, as department director, is responsible for ensuring that the agencies under his direction do their jobs.

He's failed at that mission, and he probably will lose his job over it.  As he should.

Brewer and the lege are responsible for seeing that the agencies have the resources necessary to do those jobs.

They've failed at that mission, and while they should lose their jobs, too, they probably won't.

Hell, they probably won't accept any responsibility for the impact of their policies, they will probably find a way to justify the sacrifice of abused children on the altar of increased corporate profits.

On the other hand, we have some say on the subject, some direct influence to exert.

And we can do so, clearly and unequivocally, by firing them next November.


Disclaimers:

I have seen no evidence that Mr. Carter is professionally incompetent, nor have I seen any indication that he had direct knowledge of the practice of simply ignoring reports of abuse, much less directly participated in it.

I still think that he should still lose his job; he should not be the only person to do so, however.

Affordable Care Act forums and town halls

...of the "real" variety, not the Republicans' "half-truths, misleading statements, and outright lies" variety...

First, the forums -

Other forums, also involving the LD19 legislators above -

Date: Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2013 
Time:  6 to 8 p.m.  
Place: Desert West Community Center, 6501 W. Virginia Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85035
 

Date: Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2013

Time: 6 to 8 p.m.

Place: City of Tolleson Building, Parks and Recreation Center, multi-purpose room, 9555 W. Van Buren St., Tolleson, AZ 85353 

Other events can be found here, at the website of Cover Arizona.

Now, the town halls (actually, tele-town halls).  Info courtesy State Rep. Andrea Dalessandro (D - LD2) -

Call-in information:
Call 559-726-1200 and use the code 322773. 

Please note: this call is not toll free. Long-distance charges may apply.

Tele-Town Hall (English)

Date: Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Times: 11:30 a.m. and 7 p.m.

Herb Schultz, the regional director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, will join Dalessandro for both calls on Dec. 3.


Tele-Town Hall (Spanish)

Date: Thursday, December 5, 2013
Times: 11 a.m. and 7 p.m.

Dr. Betsy Thompson and Roberto Diaz with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services will be available for both calls on Dec. 5.


These events are open to the public and the press. To RSVP, email adalessandro@azleg.gov or call 1-800-352-8404, ext. 65342.

Funeral arrangements for former state representative Ben Miranda

Highly respected attorney, community activist, and former state legislator Ben Miranda passed away suddenly last week.  His funeral services will be held tomorrow, Monday, November 25, 2013.

Picture courtesy Arizona Capitol Times

Details, courtesy his wife, Rep. Catherine Miranda -

Date: Monday, Nov. 25

Services -

Place: Saint Agnes Catholic Church, 1954 N. 24 St, Phoenix, AZ 85008

Time: 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. followed by mass. 

Burial -

Place: National Memorial Cemetery of Arizona, 23029 N. Cave Creek Road, Phoenix, AZ 85024 

Time: 2 p.m. 

Reception/Memorial -

Place: American Legion Post 41, 715 S. Second Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85003 

Time: Following the burial

Miranda was elected to the governing board of the Maricopa County Community College District in 2012.  From his bio page there:

Ben Miranda was born in Texas into a migrant farm worker family. In his younger years, the family traveled across the United States harvesting throughout the year. They finally settled in Gila Bend, Arizona, prior to moving to the inner-city projects of Phoenix. On this journey, he attended one room rural schools and resided in labor camps with up to 5,000 immigrant farm workers. He proudly served 13 months in the Vietnam conflict where he was awarded the country’s Bronze Star. After attending Phoenix College and undergraduate studies at Arizona State University (B.S. Political Science), he graduated with the Deans Award from ASU Law School (Juris Doctorate-Law), where he led a recruitment effort that increased minority law student enrollment by 50 percent.

In 1994, he received the City of Phoenix’s First Annual Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. “Living the Dream” Award. He oversaw over $100,000 in donations from the firm and contributed hundreds of hours in support of Cesar Chavez of the United Farm workers. He served on the Roosevelt School Board where he has been recognized for the hundreds of volunteer hours that he contributes to children. He was elected to the State Legislature in 2002, he served with his brother senator, the first brothers elected to serve together as state level office holders. He has twice been selected by his peers to serve as Chair of the Arizona Latino Caucus of the State Legislature.

He has also served on the boards of the Arizona Trial Lawyers Association, American Red Cross, and Valle del Sol. He has represented the city of Avondale, Pacific Gas and Electric, and Local 383 Union. His passion for helping the underserved has led him to establish Proyecto Manzana which is focused on increasing access to a higher education for all youth in need.

He has acquired a well-deserved reputation for devoting countless hours of free legal advice to people in our community who could not otherwise obtain legal services.

Finally, and most important to him, he is married to Catherine, Arizona House of Representatives District 16 Member, and is a devoted father to his daughters Maritza and Elisa, son-in-law Aaron and grandfather to Mariella, Abraham, Erin Marie and Naomi.

 Deepest condolences go out to his family and many friends.

Short attention span musing

...What do Anthony Weiner, Bob Filner, and even Congressman Trey Radel have in common as we approach Thanksgiving?

They are all glad that Toronto mayor Rob Ford is around to distract everyone from their own "issues".

Ford is the gift that keeps on giving in his apparent quest to explode the stereotype held by Americans that Canadians are "boring, but really nice".


...Speaking of exploding that particular stereotype ("boring, but really nice"), New Mexico, via its state police force, have accomplished the same thing.

In late October, an officer of the New Mexico State Police pulled over a minivan with a mother and her four children for speeding.

The stop didn't go smoothly.




The above video shows that the mother, Oriana Farrell, was completely in the wrong...up until the point where the officers got violent toward her and her children, including an attempt to kill them all (starting at approximately the 12:35 mark).

The prosecutor in NM has filed a number of charges against Farrell, most of which she apparently deserves.

However, she has also been charged with child abuse because the police officers shot at her and her family.

While she was completely wrong for most of the encounter by the side of the road in New Mexico and should be held responsible for her bad acts, she should NOT be held responsible for the bad acts of the officers involved.

Nothing she did during the encounter, including driving away from the police officers, endangered the officers or anyone else.  The use of lethal force was not warranted.

Period.

...For the "responsible gun owners" file:

From the Austin American-Statesman, written by Claudia Grisales -

Texas State Rep. Drew Darby is facing a felony charge after he attempted to take a weapon through a security screening at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport this month, according to court documents.

Darby was shown as booked into Travis County Jail at 7:22 a.m. on Nov. 14 after he was found to be carrying a .38 caliber Ruger and six rounds of ammunition in a magazine during the security screening that morning, the affidavit said.

Don't be surprised if the NRA ponys up funds to cover his "legal fees"...even though he is an attorney (hey, he could bill himself for services rendered, then pay himself, the be reimbursed by the NRA for money that he paid...to himself).

Cynicism is charming, right?  :)

...Lesson learned today:  Arizona's term limits law does not cover all state-level offices equally.

Joe Hart, the current State Mine Inspector, has filed for another run at the office.  Since he was first elected to the office in 2006, and term limits in AZ are eight years, this was a little surprising.

Then I read the section of the Arizona Constitution that covers term limits.

From Article 5, Section 1 (emphasis added) -

Section 1. A. The executive department shall consist of the governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, attorney general, and superintendent of public instruction, each of whom shall hold office for a term of four years beginning on the first Monday of January, 1971 next after the regular general election in 1970. No member of the executive department shall hold that office for more than two consecutive terms.

Not to worry though - we aren't stuck with Hart forever.

From Article 19, Section 0 of the state constitution (emphasis added) -

No mine inspector shall serve more than four consecutive terms in that office.

Whew!!! :)

...OK, so who had "before the end of the year" in the George Zimmerman Arrest Pool?

From CNN, written by Steve Almasy -

George Zimmerman was charged Monday with felony aggravated assault after allegedly pointing a shotgun at his girlfriend, according to Dennis Lemma, chief deputy with the Seminole County, Florida, Sheriff's Office.

Zimmerman, who was acquitted earlier this year of murdering teenager Trayvon Martin, was arrested after the incident at the home of Samantha Scheibe, Lemma said. He also was charged with two misdemeanors -- domestic violence battery and criminal mischief -- in connection with the same incident, Lemma said.

I just hope he ends up in prison before he adds to his body count...

50 years ago this week, part 5...

Instead of capping the week by focusing on the end of the JFK presidency, I would rather focus on the beginning, when he represented the hopes of a generation.

Courtesy UCSB, John F. Kennedy's 1961 inaugural address -

Vice President Johnson, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chief Justice, President Eisenhower, Vice president Nixon, President Truman, Reverend Clergy, fellow citizens:

We observe today not a victory of party but a celebration of freedom--symbolizing an end as well as a beginning--signifying renewal as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed nearly a century and three quarters ago.

The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe-the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans--born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage--and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge--and more.

To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do--for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

To those new states whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom-and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.

To those peoples in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required--not because the communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge--to convert our good words into good deeds--in a new alliance for progress--to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty. But this peaceful revolution of hope cannot become the prey of hostile powers. Let all our neighbors know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know that this Hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house.

To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations, our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support--to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective--to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak--and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run.

Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.

We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.

But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course--both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.

So let us begin anew--remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.

Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.

Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms--and bring the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute control of all nations.

Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths and encourage the arts and commerce.

Let both sides unite to heed in all corners of the earth the command of Isaiah--to "undo the heavy burdens . . . (and) let the oppressed go free."

And if a beach-head of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor, not a new balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved.

All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of this Administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.

In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty. The graves of young Americans who answered the call to service surround the globe.

Now the trumpet summons us again-not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are--but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.

Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility--I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it--and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.

For people who would rather hear speeches than read them....

50 years ago this week, part 4: The others

When JFK was shot while riding in his limousine in Dallas, he was not alone; he wasn't even the only one shot.

The other five people in the car that day - 

...Bill Greer, the Secret Service agent assigned to drive that day, came in for a heavy dose of criticism for slowing down upon hearing the first shot, instead of immediately accelerating away from the scene.  He passed away in 1985 after a fight with cancer.

...Roy Kellerman, the senior Secret Service agent in the limousine, eventually rose in the ranks of the Secret Service before retiring in 1968.  He passed away in 1984.

...Nellie Connally, the wife of then-Texas governor John Connally, survived that day, and for many years more.  She was the last to pass away of the people in the limo that fateful day, living until 2006.  She was the author of a critically-lauded book about that day, "From Love Field: Our Final Hours with President John F. Kennedy".

...John Connally, the governor of Texas, was seriously wounded during the assassination, but later recovered from his wounds, going on to serve as Texas' governor until 1969.  He continued on in business, politics and government for many years, passing away in 1993.

...Jacqueline Kennedy, JFK's wife, survived that day.  She later moved on, marrying Greek shipping tycoon Aristotle Onassis in 1968.  When Onassis died in 1975, she became a widow for the second time.  She had a second career, becoming a publishing executive (actually, an editor) until her death in 1994.

Portrait courtesy C-SPAN

Note: the brevity of the bios is for the purpose of just that, brevity, only.  Their lives were far more interesting than I could truly convey in a few sentences.  However, as with the conspiracy theories surrounding the assassination and its aftermath, writing about them in-depth would keep me writing until the 100th anniversary.

50 years ago this week, part 3: TV news comes into its own

A "where were you when" moment is one that is an almost universal cultural touchstone, one where pretty much everyone who was alive at the moment in question remembers where they were and what they were doing when they first heard about a particular event.

The assassination of President John F. Kennedy was the first "where were you when" moment of the television age, and when most people recall that day, one of the things that they recall is the emergency news bulletin from CBS' soon-to-be legendary newscaster Walter Cronkite.

50 years ago this week, part 2: The picture

It's not often that one can say that the New York Daily News did, or does, journalism proud, but they did with this, a picture of John F. Kennedy Jr. saluting the casket of his slain father.

This picture became one of the most iconic photographs of the 20th Century. 

The Daily News has an article about the photograph here.

Another of the most iconic photographs of the 20th Century won the Pulitzer that year, a picture of Jack Ruby shooting and killing Lee Harvey Oswald.  However, looking back, as significant as that one was, I think that this one has a far greater emotional impact.