|
|
Between the Lines -
Thoughts on Earl Deguise, The Gas Price Fiasco, and
Medical Reform
Earl DeGuise
By Robert E. Martin
On the cover of this edition it says 'Pre-Election Thoughts', which
at this junction less than a month away from the August primaries amounts
to a random assortment of impressions, facts, and ideas that hopefully will
be tied into one prevailing notion that all politics is personal.
From the primitive feudal wars through the rise of Republican oil barons
and the Democratic Labor movement, in America the 'art of compromise' that
defines politics is grounded in the firmament of self-interest that -
provided everything is working properly - flows into a betterment for the
majority.
Nobody knew nor understood this better than Earl DeGuise, and it is with
great sadness that we note his recent passing. As one of the few truly
independent members of the Saginaw City Council, Earl was a true fighter
for fiscal integrity and never lost sight of the paramount role of local
government to provide and protect the essential services that give a city
both its strength & integrity.
Unfortunately, Earl never fulfilled his political dream of becoming Mayor
in Saginaw. An alleged alliance between Gary Loster and Jim Doane prevented
that ascension from ever happening.
Consequently, Loster gained another term in the Big Chair, Doane was given
hundreds of thousands of dollars for the failed Saginaw Business Incubator,
and Earl went on to decry the wasteful spending, quite accurately pointing
out that had this money been properly directed into rehabilitating the
Westside business district, today we would have an area that would probably
rival that of Harbor Springs in terms of attraction. Hmm.
Isn't it ironic that now Loster has appointed Doane yet again to head a
Committee designed to save the Saginaw Civic Center - a situation rather
akin to throwing a drowning passenger a lifevest without a rope attached?
Initially, I had wanted to present a more substantial 'tribute' to Earl in
this edition, however given the 4th of July holiday, few people were
available for quotes & comments, so look for this in a future issue. Earl
did a lot for this city and should be remembered for much more than merely
being the cantankerous old white guy that disparaged Jennine Dankert during
the replacement vote for Del Schrems.
The Seven Sisters & the Gas Price Fiasco
It is with utter amazement that I witness the continual 'political
football' being made of the recent hike in gas prices by both Republicans &
Democrats when both sides are to blame for the lack of proper energy
policy planning over the past 50 years.
Economics dictates that fossil fuels are an unrenewable source of energy.
And as a finite resource, gas prices can only rise over the years. When the
Department of Energy was formed its duty was to become an 'architect' for
future energy policy. Through the use of government subsidy, it could have
bolstered alternative technologies such as solar power, geo-thermal, and
the power of wind & water to make these technologies viable alternatives
over gas & electricity. Instead, largely through the Nixon and Reagan
Administrations, the DOE became a money-mill designed to subsidize the
Nuclear and fossil fuel companies it was designed to foster competition
with. Now we are all paying the bill.
Republicans claim that it is the Clinton Administration's Environmental
Protection Agency that has fueled the increase by requiring stricter codes
for cleaner gas, however these cleaner gas requirements only add an
addition six cents to the price of gas. And politicians that claim
repealing the gas tax is the answer are out of touch with their own design
insofar as many of our infrastructure costs for road repair, education, and
a myriad of other needs are paid for from the gas tax, especially in
Michigan where Republicans have repealed & eliminated the bulk of corporate
taxes.
But the root of the problem lies in the multinational corporations
themselves - the Seven Sisters: Exxon, Gulf, Texaco, Mobil, Socal, British
Petroleum, and Shell, that basically relegated control of production over
to the OPEC nations in order to obtain even greater tax advantages within
this country.
In his excellent book The Seven Sisters, author Anthony Sampson explains
how back in 1950, Saudi Arabia was demanding a bigger share in the profits
of Aramco. Aramco's officials met with the State Department and had a
sympathetic hearing from the Assistant Secretary, George McGhee, also a big
Texas oilman. McGhee was convinced of the need to give the Saudis more
income, and the State Department was worried by the Communist danger in the
Middle East.
The State Department & Aramco then agreed on a scheme of beautiful
simplicity. Additional payments to the King should be regarded as
constituting a foreign income tax, so that under existing rules for double
taxation, they would not be taxed inside the United States. The King's
share would simply be deducted from the company's tax bill.
According to records from the Multinational Hearings back then, there were
misgivings from some State Department officials about what in effect would
amount to a subsidy of Aramco's position in Saudi Arabia by U.S. taxpayers.
This 'Golden Gimmick', as it was later called, deprived the U.S. Treasury
of $50 million in taxes the very next year, enriching the King by the same
amount. As Saudi production increased, the loss of taxes became even more
spectacular. But the tax devise suited the State Department as well as the
King and Aramco, for it was really a means to provide foreign aid to a
kingdom that was important strategically, without having to submit it to
Congress.
Other oil companies and countries soon adopted this same tax dodge to
compete with Aramco, providing a huge inducement to invest abroad rather
than inside America. By 1973 the five American sisters were making
two-thirds of their profits abroad and paying no taxes to the U.S.
government on those earnings.
Obviously, a question to ask of all Congressional & Presidential candidates
this year that is not being asked is: What do you intend to do about this
subsidy to rich oil companies that are creating havoc with the American
economy?
Abraham, Stabenow, & the
Medical Industry
One thing about this year's election cycle is the kick I'm getting
watching Michigan's U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham attempting to pull the
wool over voters eyes about medical reform. Let's only pray he doesn't
succeed!
Last week while Democratic challenger Debbie Stabenow was taking a busload
of senior citizens to Canada to illustrate how they could buy drugs 40%
cheaper in Canada than they could in the U.S., asking why this was the case
when the majority of the manufacturers were American companies, Abraham was
running radio spots about how he wants to repeal the federal gas tax and
drive states into a tailspin by driving up their revenue sharing.
But on the issue of medical reform, the fact is that during his time in the
Senate, Abraham has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign
contributions from the insurance industry. At the same time, he has
repeatedly voted for insurance interests - often at the expense of patients
& doctors.
According to Federal Election Commission records analyzed by the Center for
Responsive Politics, Abraham took $167,000 from insurance industry PAC's
and individuals between 1993 and 1998. Since first seeking public office,
Abraham has received over $205,300 from the insurance industry.
Last year, as part of an effort to stall significant HMO reform, Abraham
voted for a political HMO bill that would have left 113 million Americans
unprotected, and provided only minimal protection to 48 million of the 161
million Americans on health insurance.
In 1998, Abraham voted against even debating a comprehensive Patient's Bill
of Rights. This bill would have ended the 'gag' rule on doctors, protected
the privacy of patients' medical records, given patients the right to
choose their primary caregiver, and held HMOs accountable when they make
potentially fatal mistakes.
During his first year in office, Abraham opposed reforms that would have
stopped doctors from overcharging patients using an HMO option. And despite
the fact that 200,000 Michigan children through age 18 lack health
insurance, Abraham voted against an amendment to offer a basic health
insurance package for pregnant women & children up to the age of 12.
Next Issue - Candidate Forum
Next issue The Review will present an extensive Candidate Forum
between individuals running for the hottest & most contested races in
Saginaw County, including the 95th State Representative seat, Saginaw
County Sheriff, and Saginaw County Clerk.
Stay tuned and remember - politics doesn't affect the other person,
it affects you!
|
|
