Is Arlen Specter concerned about his constituents?

October 16, 2008 // 14 Comments »

Posted in education, money, politics

I’ve been really pissed at Senator Arlen Specter for the last week. Pissed is actually the nice way to describe how I feel. I am outraged by the Senator and his staff.

Why?

I am on a one woman campaign to get Senator Specter and Senator Casey to pay attention to their Gen Y constituents. As of today, I have only had one response from Senator Robert Casey and two responses from Senator Specter.

The mortgage bailout sparked this feeling in me – this feeling that said “wait a minute, no one cares that Gen Y will still be paying for this bailout with their last dying breath”. This feeling is also marked with an urge that says “you have got to be kidding me”.

So I started sending emails to senators. In the last volley of emails, I thanked Senator Specter for his response but pointed out that he did not answer any of the questions I had posed to him. The response I received on Tuesday, October 14th is printed below.

The Response from Senator Specter:

I was outraged by his response. Once again, there was no real answer to the questions I posed. But even more concerning was the lack of an attempt on the part of his staff to provide an answer. An inability to attempt to answer the question “What will you do to help us as we begin our lives in Pennsylvania?” is unacceptable.

So how do we capture the attention of our elected officials?

First things first, we all need to vote. I don’t care if there is rain, snow or a beautiful sun shining down on you. The weather is not an excuse to not vote. I also do not care if the line is long. If an AARP member can stand in line for an hour to vote, so can you. And besides, your knees are younger. Bring an MP3 player and you can entertain yourself during your wait. I bring books to read. I survive the process.

Second, care about local elections. John McCain or Barack Obama will not be accessible to you when either one is elected president. They may be “in touch” now but that will all change soon due to something called “National Security”. And frankly, you shouldn’t be able to call the president and get through to him. I would hope that he would have much bigger fish to fry. It is much more realistic to think you will be able to contact the office of a local/regional elected official. But also know that it takes work and you’ll have to contact a lot of them. Repeatedly.

Third, be an informed voter. Know who the candidates are and what they stand for. This can be a little tough in local governments but the information is out there. And you’re a smart person – with a little effort, you can find that information and cross over into the category of “informed”. Believe it or not, “informed” may get you farther than being only “smart”.

Fourth, don’t just vote down the party line. No one benefits when you vote down the party line. Sure, it’s easy. They even make a handy little switch for you to flick (or button to press) to help you do it. But that doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. Voting needs to be accessible to all but it’s a very serious decision. Take a moment to think before you press that button.

I sent another email to the Senator this afternoon. I know I probably won’t get a very good response but it is so important to show that younger constituents have serious concerns that need to be addressed with the same level of respect given to older Pennsylvanians.

My Response to Senator Specter:

A Response from Senator Specter

October 9, 2008 // 3 Comments »

Posted in education, money, politics

My “Comment” to Senator Arlen Specter:

What is the senator doing to help the overwhelming number of Gen X and Gen Y professionals with an unmanageable burden of student loans?

While this may not be a major concern of older Pennsylvanians, it is a major concern for young professionals (who will eventually be providing key services for older Pennsylvanians) and young families. With sky rocketing tuition, more and more young Pennsylvania voters are graduating with student loan payments that are larger than a monthly mortgage payment.

A mortgage bailout, while appealing to your older constituents, does nothing help the next generations who will be leading this state in the years to come. It does take them any closer to owning a home and it does not free up credit in order for them to take on small business loans.

What will you do to earn the support of Gen Y? What will you do to help us as we begin our lives in Pennsylvania?

The Response from Senator Specter:

Dear Mrs. Morgan:

Thank you for contacting me regarding your views on student loans. I appreciate you taking the time to inform me of your views on this important matter. I would like to take this opportunity to offer a brief report on work being done in Congress to address education issues.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee that oversees Federal discretionary education funding, I continue to review and advance methods to improve our nation’s education system. When I became Chairman of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHHS) Appropriations Subcommittee in Fiscal Year (FY) 1996, the level of discretionary funding for the U.S. Department of Education was $23 billion. Throughout my tenure as Chairman or Ranking Member of LHHS, I have strongly advocated for increasing discretionary education funding to today’s level of $59.2 billion in FY08. This is an increase of $36.2 billion or 157% since FY96.

It is important that every child have access to the quality of education necessary for success in the 21st Century. I have worked from my Appropriations Subcommittee position to highlight the critical need for early childhood development programs. In FY08, I worked to secure nearly $6.9 billion for Head Start, which is a community-based program providing educational, nutritional and medical services to low-income preschoolers. Since FY96, Federal funding for Head Start has increased from $3.6 billion to nearly $6.9 billion, or 92%.

In 2001 I supported enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act, which was approved with bipartisan support and ensures that students will no longer be allowed to advance from grade to grade regardless of whether they are learning at grade level. However, I strongly believe there needs to be state flexibility in the implementation of the Act. Each state has the knowledge of the particular challenges facing its education system, including accounting for students with learning, emotional and English language difficulties.

The No Child Left Behind Act is expected to be considered for reauthorization in 2008. In the past, I invited superintendents from Pennsylvania to Washington, D.C. to testify before the U.S. Secretary of Education at a hearing on education funding, including funding for the No Child Left Behind Act. The testimony of the superintendents was critical to providing insight on state flexibility and implementation of the Act. I will continue to work with Pennsylvania educators to ensure that they have a voice throughout the reauthorization process.

I also worked to provide $14 billion in FY08 for Title I grants to school districts, which comprises the largest part of the No Child Left Behind Act. Title I grant funds have increased 49.6% since the Act was passed in 2001.

I am also committed to ensuring that the Federal government meets its goal to provide 40% of the excess costs associated with providing special education to students with disabilities. To this end, I supported an allocation of $11 billion for Special Education Grants to states in FY08 to help states meet the goals of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. At this level of funding, I have worked to increase the Federal contribution to educate children with disabilities to 19% of the national average spending per student, up from 7.3% in FY96. Additionally, I demonstrated my commitment to reaching the goal of 40% as one of only ten members to cross the aisle to support an amendment offered by Senator Tom Harkin during the most recent reauthorization of this Act, which would have increased funding to meet this target by 2011. Unfortunately, the amendment failed.

Additionally, I have taken the lead on the LHHS Appropriations Subcommittee to increase funding for the Higher Education Act, which authorizes the Federal government’s student financial aid programs. Specifically, I have battled to increase the maximum award for Pell grants. This important financial aid program makes post-secondary education more affordable for our nation’s neediest students. Today, the maximum Pell grant award is $4,310. Since FY96, the maximum award has risen $1,771, or 72%, from $2,470 to $4,241.

The Higher Education Act also authorizes programs that provide services and incentives to disadvantaged students to help increase their access to postsecondary education. I have worked to secure funding for GEAR UP, which provides tutoring, financial aid counseling and college scholarships to low-income students from the seventh grade through high school graduation. Since the program began in FY99, I have consistently supported increasing funding from the initial $120 million to $303 million in FY08, an increase of $183 million or 153%. In addition, I have advocated for support of the TRIO program, which provides student support services to participants who are from low-income families and are first-generation college students. Federal funding for the TRIO program has increased from $463 million in FY96 to $828 million in FY08, an increase of $365 million or 79%.

I have been a strong advocate for our nation’s education systems and the students and families that are served by them, and I will continue to be in the future.

Thank you again for contacting me. The concerns of my constituents are of great importance to me, and I rely on you and other Pennsylvanians to inform me of your views. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office or visit my website at http://specter.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

My Reply to the Senator:

Dear Senator Specter:

Thank you for making the effort to tailor your response to my question. However, the most important question you made no attempt to answer.

What will you do to earn the support of Gen Y? What will you do to help us as we begin our lives in Pennsylvania?

Telling me about your support of “No Child Left Behind” does not tell me how you will help me or my family. I don’t have kids. And my husband and I cannot afford to have children due to rising costs.

We may have had access to education in order to succeed in the 21st century but we are unable to pay for it. Monies were made available for low income or disadvantaged students but the middle class of suburbia is struggling to educate their young adults in a competitive and cost effective manner.

We are graduating with more and more debt every year. Does this concern you? It concerns me. It concerns my family. It concerns my neighbors and it concerns my peers.

What are you going to do to help your constituents? What are you going to do to support the “twenty-somethings” in Pennsylvania?

I look forward to your response.

Kind Regards,

Mrs. Dorie A. Morgan

A response from Senator Casey

October 3, 2008 // 7 Comments »

Posted in money, politics

Last week, I submitted my concerns about the bailout and my questions on student loans to Senator Robert Casey’s website.  I submitted my comments under the “Education” option from the drop down menu (because it was more about college than mortgage) and asked about what the Senator was doing to help his Gen Y constituents.  I even sent him links to various Gen Y bloggers who had similar concerns.

Today, I received his response. In which he makes no comment about student loans, Gen Y or the links that were sent. I know some intern on his staff probably skimmed the letter and picked a form response but I am still fairly annoyed.

For your reading pleasure, I’ve posted the form letter I have received and my response to his letter below. If you haven’t already contacted your Senator and Representatives, it is so easy to do and I highly recommend you get involved and say something.  Now is the time to show Washington that Millennials are a force to be acknowledged.

Response from Senator Robert Casey:

Dear Mrs. Morgan:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding the proposal to stabilize the economy and our financial infrastructure. I appreciate hearing from all Pennsylvanians about the issues that matter most to them.

On Wednesday, October 1, the Senate passed H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, a bill that will stabilize our credit markets, protect retirement and pension savings, modify troubled loans and protect taxpayers from paying for Wall Street’s mistakes. After careful consideration, I decided to vote for this legislation.

This is a time of great economic uncertainty in our Nation’s history. For many families in Pennsylvania and throughout the country, the recession has been part of their lives for many months now. Just this week we learned that the unemployment rate in Pennsylvania went from 5.4% to 5.8% in the month of August and for some parts of the state it went up far more than half a percentage point. We also learned that in the month of August the foreclosure rate in Pennsylvania went up by more than 60% from the previous year. The job loss and foreclosure rates are indicators of the economic trauma that many families have felt in Pennsylvania and across America.

Like you, I am not happy with the current crisis, and I’m angry about the climate of deregulation and deference to Wall Street over the last eight years that got us into this mess. However, failing to act will not simply punish those who brought us to this situation; it will punish everyone.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) provides up to $700 billion to the Secretary of the Treasury to buy mortgages and other assets that are clogging the balance sheets of financial institutions and making it difficult for working families, small businesses and other companies to access credit. After purchasing these assets, the Department of Treasury will hold them until markets for them recover. Treasury would then plan to sell these assets for a profit, recouping most or all of the $700 billion for the benefit of taxpayers.

You should know that Congress has significantly improved the original proposal presented by the Bush administration. In the version passed by the Senate, executives will be held accountable for their past decisions through limitations on compensation, prohibitions against golden parachutes or excessive retirement packages, and requirements that unearned bonuses be returned. As improved by the Senate, the legislation also requires participating companies to provide warrants and other forms of equity so that taxpayers will share in the profits if the stock of these companies goes up as a result of Treasury Department intervention.

The EESA also contains several provisions directed at stemming the tide of mortgage foreclosures thereby keeping families in their homes and addressing the root cause which has led to a loss of investor confidence and the freezing of credit markets. It would require the Treasury Department, where possible, to modify troubled loans to help American families keep their homes. It would also expand the HOPE for Homeowners program and require other federal agencies to modify loans that they own or control.

To ensure that Treasury isn’t just getting a blank check, the legislation makes $250 billion available immediately, then requires the President to certify that additional funds are needed. The Treasury must report on the use of the funds and on progress in addressing the crisis. The bill establishes an Oversight Board so that the Treasury cannot act in an arbitrary manner and establishes a special inspector general to protect against waste, fraud and abuse.

The United States is in a financial crisis that could become worse than anything in a generation. In addition, our Nation’s problems are already spreading into the global economy. If the federal government fails to take action right now, there is a real threat to small businesses and jobs, as well as mortgages, pensions and savings.

For all these reasons, I concluded that Congress must act now, and I decided to vote in favor of H.R. 1424. In the last two weeks, I have worked hard to be sure that this bill includes provisions to help families who are struggling. I’ve closely questioned and sent two detailed letters to Treasury Secretary Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke and also spoke to leading economists about this legislation.

Enactment of this legislation is only the first in a series of steps we must take to bring about economic recovery. We need to institute rigorous and aggressive regulation of players in the market place in order to prevent the abuses which caused our economic problems.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my web site, http://casey.senate.gov. I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator

My Response to the Senator:

Dear Senator Casey,
 
Thank you for taking the time to send me a form letter.
 
Sadly, your form letter did not address the questions I posed to you and your staff.  It makes me wonder if you truly heard the issues that matter most to your constituents.
 
Before I go any further, let me tell you how disappointed I am to know that you did in fact vote for H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.  It does not protect taxpayers from paying for Wall Street’s mistakes and I am very concerned that you seem to think it does.  Keeping a family in a home who cannot afford said home does not make any sense. My husband and I did not even consider making the major purchase of home ownership until we were convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that we could do so responsibly and without jeopardizing our financial future.
 
Continuing on my initial attempt to communicate with you and your staff: What are you doing to help those of us with student loans? While this may not be a major concern of older Pennsylvanians, it is a major concern for young professionals (who will eventually be providing key services for older Pennsylvanians) and young families.  With sky rocketing tuition, more and more young Pennsylvania voters are graduating with student loan payments that are larger than a monthly mortgage payment. 
 
What are you going to do to help younger Pennsylvanians?
 
Quite frankly, the idea of any sort of bailout disgusts me. But if relief is being offered to homeowners, it should be offered to young professionals as well.
 
I look forward to seeing your response.
 
Kind Regards,
 
Mrs. Dorie A. Morgan
 
PS – The act of email and an online submission form for initial contact implies access to internet. Perhaps you should rephrase that portion of your letter and provide other, non-electronic means of contact.

Safe and Comfortable is not enough

October 1, 2008 // 6 Comments »

Posted in choices, politics, reflecting on self

While I was making dinner last night, a young woman came to the door to talk about our voting choices. My father in law may have gotten to the woman first because I may have a habit of hassling the kids that go door to door on a campaign and it may make my family uncomfortable. No one else seems to be as entertained by it as I am. (My favorite question involves Gen-Y, student loans and what will whatever politician do to earn my vote.)

My f-i-l has a brief conversation with the girl. She had to have been 19 or 20. She had that “I’m a college kid and I can change the world” level of excitement, which I love. I wish we all had that level of excitement in our daily lives. But is excitement enough?

She was campaigning for Barack Obama in a predominantly white, suburban neighborhood (there are only two African American families on our street which is kind of impressive because most houses on the street are owned by the original owners). Her accent and use of language implied that she probably did not grow up in the best Philadelphia neighborhood. She was an African American. She had a look on her face that said “I work hard for everything I’ve got and I’m proud of where I am going”.

She was also dressed as if the moment she got done walking through the neighborhood, she was going to the clubs, not the burbs.

This was not the face I expected in the neighborhood. Usually our door to door campaign kids are dressed like they are headed to the office. And they usually come in pairs and are smiley – not passionate.

This girl had all of this enthusiasm which was inspiring and amazing to see. I might not be a huge fan of Obama but his ability to excite people is something I really respect. She conveyed his message with passion and commitment.

But I couldn’t help but wonder about the package that message came in.

Could the message be hidden by the form that it was delivered in? Would my 90 year old neighbor across the street want to open the door? Then again, my 90 year old neighbor doesn’t even open her front door for girl scouts selling cookies.

This isn’t just politics. This is everyday life.

I once heard a sermon that Jesus has become a safe package for us to accept salvation (I cannot remember for the life of me who I heard it from so if you recall, let me know). But Jesus wasn’t a safe package to accept two thousand years ago. Two thousand years ago, salvation in the form of Jesus was pretty radical concept. It wasn’t safe and it wasn’t comfortable but it did change the world. Regardless of your religious beliefs, Jesus changed the world you live in.

Things or people that change the world are rarely safe and comfortable. But people who get hired usually are comfortable. They make the interviewer feel comfortable with the decision to hire. If you aren’t safe and comfortable, you have to be so brilliant it hurts to be hired but even then, you’ll probably be an entrepreneur and make your own terms.

Safe and comfortable also helps when you want to get married or when you want to be part of a long term relationship. Part of why I married Brian was that he made me feel safe. And having that safety in my marriage makes it easier to not be safe in my other life decisions. It is easier to be bodacious by day when there is a comfortable harbor to return to at night.

From where I am sitting today, it seems as if our next president needs to be safe enough to make us feel comfortable with our decision but still have the courage to make changes. It isn’t enough to change the world and it isn’t enough to just give warm, fuzzy feelings to the voters.

I didn’t get to talk to the dressed up campaign worker. I could only overhear what was said. But when she left our house, she left me thinking.

What’s wrong with politics? Bumper stickers.

September 16, 2008 // 14 Comments »

Posted in politics

I am sick of Barack Obama.

The only time in the last week when I wasn’t sick of Obama was when I heard a breast augmentation commercial on the radio followed by “I am Barack Obama and I approve this message” before the launch of his own commercial.  That was funny.

I’m not just sick of Obama though, I am sick of all of it.  Obama just has the misfortune of being the face I see the most. And if it was another candidate, I’d still be sick of it.

I am sick of bumper stickers with political declarations.  I just don’t get the point.  Am I going to pull up at a red light, see your political sticker and think to myself “wow, I didn’t know who to vote for but thanks to the Prius in front of me, I now know who to vote for”?  Nope.  It’s not going to happen.  Your bumper sticker will not influence my voting decisions.

I am sick of the political t-shirts. I was at Phillies game last week and it seemed like I couldn’t turn around without seeing some shirt declaring some desire to vote for a candidate, usually with some quirky play on words.  Do t-shirts influence how you choose to vote?  I hope not at all.  And if they do, isn’t that the bigger problem?

I am sick of the signs on suburban front lawns, declaring allegiance to a national candidate. For some reason, I can tolerate the signs for local candidates but around the time the democrat down the street built a shrine to Hilary on his front lawn was around the time I couldn’t tolerate it any more.  How often do people really drive around the Philadelphia suburbs looking for inspiration for their voting decisions?

My distaste for political merchandise is as high as my distaste for “awareness” ribbons – a magnetic ribbon on the back of your car will not inspire me to go out and donate to your cause.  And when I do donate to a cause, I do not want to be given a reward. My reward is giving of myself to help someone else.

But before I go too far down this path, I need to say that I love all of the conversations that I see on the blogs. I don’t agree with all of it – in fact, I don’t agree with most of it. Reading someone’s well articulate thoughts on the events at hand is exciting and seeing the conversation that follows in the comments section is even better. 

Buying merchandise or taking a free bumper sticker just doesn’t do it for me.  Having a real conversation? That’s what matters.

Politics at Home: Just don’t say a word

July 10, 2008 // 1 Comment »

Posted in compromise, family life, politics

About a week before the Pennsylvania Primaries, there was a message on the answering machine from my husband’s grandmother.  I was excited to know she called – most of Brian’s family lives in Florida and as a result, we don’t get to hear from them very often. 

But when we listened to the message, we deleted it.  She called to tell us how important it is for us to vote for Barack Obama.

It isn’t that we weren’t interested in hearing from his family.  It’s just that Brian and I don’t talk about politics at home. 

Why?  Three reasons:

1. By and large, Brian’s family is made up of very liberal, Democrat types.  None of them are quite so bad as my neighbor down the street who built a shrine to Hilary Clinton on his front yard (and still has part of it up, apparently he never got the phone call about Barack Obama) but at the end of the day, they are Democrats.
2. My husband is not a registered voter.  He never has been.  He never will be.  I told him I found men that were not registered to vote sexually unattractive but he didn’t care.  He refuses to take part in what he identifies as a corrupt system.  He also tells me that it is because he does not like the idea of being controlled and therefore does not like the idea of selecting who is going to control him.
3. I am a registered Republican.  I registered as soon as the paperwork arrived in the mail and I have stayed true to my beliefs despite living in a township that is 98% Democrat. 

Clearly, we don’t agree on politics in my household.  And for a while, this was a source of stress and arguments.  So we decided no more politics.  It was better for us that way.  We were tired of arguing, I was tired of being ganged up on by Brian’s friends and family and everyone was tired of me threatening to stop feeding them for attacking my belief system.  At one point, it felt like a verbal political gang bang and I did not like being on the receiving end of that train.

Eventually we realized it wasn’t politics that we had a problem with discussing.  We talked about abortion, gay marriage, separation of church and state, tax policy, polygamy, etc. on a regular basis.  The problem came when we put the names on those things.  When we left the “Democrat” or “Republican” words away from the conversation, we were able to really discuss what was at the heart of the issue and leave our charged emotions at the door.  We were able to have a rational discussion and truly learn about where the other person was coming from.

I’ve had my opinion changed on a few things as a result.  Brian still has not registered to vote but I’m becoming increasingly okay with that.  And I did tell him that if felt so inclined to register, I would not say a word if he registered as a Democrat.