Guest Blogger: Part VII: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148


The Marshall Plan:
(Disclaimer: This plan is constructed under the premise that I had full authority. I understand that it would be politically unfeasible to pass in our current legislature)

Total:

• Reduction through cuts and new programs: $3.28 Trillion Dollars by 2020 
• Reduction through revenue increases: $2.9829 Trillion Dollars by 2020 
• Additional Spending: $953 Billion Dollars by 2020

Following the Discretionary Spending Growth Rates in the President’s budget (projected at an additional $680 Billion), the final score for my 9 year deficit reduction plan is a net deficit reduction of $4.6299 Trillion dollars. And a near 50-50 ratio of cuts to revenue increases.

I understand that this is not politically feasible; this proposal doesn’t have a snowballs chance of passing.

It clearly violates the Republican’s no new tax pledge.

By creating the Carbon Tax/Cap and Trade, Millionaire Tax, and Financial Speculation Tax, I can’t even claim I’m closing tax loopholes or that allowing tax cuts to expire is not a tax hike. There would also be issue with the increased federal spending for education which many Republicans believe is a state/local issue.

Another issue would come from a new batch of stimulus spending. Even if it is half the size of the original stimulus spending.

Democrats would not like the Medicare premium increase, nor the Social Security benefits increase.

One change I think could catch on with both parties in Social Security reform is the idea of tying it to life expectancy. It would create a system where age increases occur automatically and don’t require votes.

Guest Blogger: Part VI: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148


The Marshall Plan:
(Disclaimer: This plan is constructed under the premise that I had full authority. I understand that it would be politically unfeasible to pass in our current legislature)

 New Spending:

-          Increase Social Security Benefits for Low Earners
This option would increase the standard benefit for workers who had more than 20 years of work to their credit but whose average indexed monthly earnings were below those of workers who earned twice the minimum wage for 35 years of full-time work.

The effect would be greater for beneficiaries who had more years of work and for those who had lower average indexed monthly earnings. For example, the benefit would be increased by 40 percent for workers who worked full time for 30 years but never earned more than the minimum wage.

Cost by 2020: $221 Billion

-          Enact New Jobs Bill
In an effort to reduce the 10% unemployment rate, this option will provide another stimulus package next year to aid in employment and building infrastructure. 

 Cost by 2020: $330 Billion

-          Increase funding for Adoption and Foster Care by 25%
The federal government currently funds states to help them place children with families, with additional money going to states placing special needs children. The funds are split evenly between the foster and adoption programs.

 Cost by 2020: $34 Billion

-          Increase Federal Funding of K-12 Education by 25%
Federal spending on K-12 education will be about $38 billion in 2010 (mainly thanks to Race to the Top). This option would expand Race to the Top and increase the federal share by 25% by 2015. 

 Cost by 2020: $78 Billion

-         Increase funding for the Education of Disadvantage and Disabled Children
In 2009 the federal government provided about $1,370 per child to educate students with disabilities. I would increase that average to $4,200. Included in this proposal would be increasing grants to help disadvantaged children who are underachieving academically (from $14.3 billion to $25 billion).

 Cost by 2020: $290 Billion

 Stay Tuned for Part VII

Guest Blogger: Part V: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148


The Marshall Plan:
(Disclaimer: This plan is constructed under the premise that I had full authority. I understand that it would be politically unfeasible to pass in our current legislature)

New Programs:

-          Health-Care Public Option
This proposal will involve passing the public option that was originally part of the House’s America’s Affordable Health Choices Act. The Public option was taken out of the final version of the bill but it creates a Medicare-type public insurance plan that individuals would have the option of buying into as part of the health care exchanges that will begin to operate in 2014.

Savings by 2020: $400 Billion

Additional Revenue:
-          Tax the Worldwide income of US Corporations as it is earned
Income earned abroad also may be taxed by the country in which it is earned. To prevent such double taxation, U.S. companies are allowed to claim the foreign tax credit, which reduces their U.S. taxes by the amount of any income and withholding taxes they have paid to foreign governments.

The foreign tax credit is subject to limits that are designed to ensure that the amount of credits taken does not exceed the amount of U.S. tax that would otherwise have been due. Those limits also are intended to prevent corporations from using foreign tax credits as a way to reduce taxes on income earned in the United States.

Most income earned by the foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations is not subject to U.S. taxation until it is repatriated in the form of dividends paid to the parent corporation.

Under this option, all income earned by the foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies would be subject to U.S. taxes as it was earned, regardless of when it was repatriated. To prevent double taxation, foreign tax credits would still be allowed. For determining the limit on those credits, however, the U.S. parent corporation’s overhead expenses would no longer be allocated between domestic and foreign activities.

Revenue by 2020: $65.2 Billion

-          Financial Speculation Tax

Tax that is based off of a tax the United Kingdom has had for decades. A modest tax on financial transactions like trading stocks, options, futures and credit default swaps (0.25% on the sale or purchase of a share of stock).

Revenue by 2020: $2.1 Trillion 

Guest Blogger: Part IV: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148


The Marshall Plan:
(Disclaimer: This plan is constructed under the premise that I had full authority. I understand that it would be politically unfeasible to pass in our current legislature)

Cuts:         
-            Order the Federal Reserve to buy and hold $750 billion - $1 trillion in debt
The Federal Reserve Board routinely buys and sells U.S. debt as part of its monetary policy operations. In the current downturn it has made the unusual decision to buy up hundreds of billions of dollars of long-term government bonds and more than $1 trillion of mortgage backed securities in order to help keep long-term interest rates low and thereby provide support to the economy.

This option would have the Fed sell back at most $250 billion to the public (it intends to sell it all back), keeping the flow of interest on this debt going back into the Treasury. This way the debt issued to support the economy in the downturn does not become a burden on the government in the future.

In ordinary times, the decision by the Fed to buy large amounts of government debt could lead to inflation. This is unlikely to be a serious problem in the current context of near double-digit unemployment. When the unemployment rate begins to return to more normal levels, the Fed could use other tools, such as raising reserve requirements or raising the federal funds rate, to ensure that inflation does not get out of control.

Savings by 2020: $1.125-$1.5 Trillion

-          Tie Retirement Age of Social Security and Medicare eligibility into Life Expectancy rates.
One of the drawbacks to most retirement programs are that we are living longer than when the Government first passed social security and Medicare programs. Current Social Security law states that the normal retirement age is 62, and that age will begin rising two months a year in 2016.

Under this proposal we make the retirement age 14% of the life expectancy rate. The average life expectancy in the US is currently 77 years, so we raise the normal retirement rate to 66.

Savings by 2020: $78 Billion

-          Reduce Troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to 60,000 by 2015.
This proposal is to slowly decrease the troop levels over in Afghanistan and Iraq. Troop levels in both countries added up to be about 235,000 in 2010. This proposal calls for decreasing troop levels slowly to 195,000 in 2012, 80,000 in 2014 and 60,000 in 2015.

Savings by 2020: $690 Billion

Guest Blogger: Part III: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148

Current Plans:

There have been many speculated and failed plans.

• At the beginning of the process, a bipartisan Vice-President Biden lead group came up with a plan that included $1.7 trillion dollars in spending cuts and a $2.4 trillion dollar raising of the debt limit, that was shunned by the House because it didn’t meet their dollar for dollar requirement.
  
  
• A Grand Deal proposed by Obama in his bipartisan budget talks cut spending by $3 trillion and raises an additional $1 trillion in revenue for a reduction of $4 trillion. But this compromise too was shot down because it required raising taxes.
  
  
• Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell proposed a plan to fundamentally change the process of raising the debt ceiling, giving the President the power to raise the debt ceiling, issuing the proposal that the legislature could then vote down.
  
  The President would be able to veto their objection and raise the debt ceiling anyways. Most Republicans don’t like this idea because #1 it’s strictly a political move and #2 it gives more power to the President.
  
  
• The House Republicans passed the Cut, Cap and Balance Act which makes substantial cuts to social security, Medicare, creates a constitutional amendment that requires that the Federal Government pass a balanced budget, and a requirement that any increase in taxes must contain a 2/3rds majority in both houses (essentially no new taxes).
  
  Senate Democrats (and any sane rational person with an understanding of governance) voted against this bill.
  

Guest Blogger: Part II: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148

What’s the hold up in raising the debt Ceiling?

With the Republicans in control of the House of Representatives any debt ceiling vote is going to have to come with House Republican’s approval. Backed by a core of first term Tea Party candidates Republicans have trumpeted the cause of reducing federal spending.

In all fairness to their cause, economist caution that when a country’s debt reaches 100% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) they struggle to generate jobs and support a healthy economy (Greece before their economic meltdown had a 133.3% GDP to debt ratio, Italy which is juggling its economic meltdown has a debt to GDP ratio of 116%), and at a GDP at $15 trillion, there is major concern that our debt is going to lead us to a major economic depression.

Obama is calling for a $2.4 trillion dollar increase in the debt limits, because projections show that that is what’s needed to get us through the 2012 elections.

The President has stated outright that he will veto any short term deal, under the belief that with all the trouble we’re going through now to pass a deal it’s going to be impossible to do so during an election cycle. He also states that by passing a 3, 6 or 9 month plan will increase market uncertainty which will continue to slow the economic recovery.

Republicans have called Obama’s request for a long term deal a political ploy, that his request isn’t because he doesn’t think a deal can get done during an election season, but because he’s trying to avoid the issue come election time because it hurts his re-election.

They in turn have tied the debt ceiling to the debt and demand that any increase in the debt ceiling has to have a dollar for dollar reduction of the debt in the federal budget over the next 10 years. Included within that demand is a zero tolerance policy for any new taxes.

Essentially they are calling for $2.4 trillion dollars in cuts in federal spending, which can only be obtained through cuts to Democratic Darlings like Medicare and Social Security.

A deal that appeases Obama’s demand for a long term deal and a Republican demand for dollar for dollar cuts with no new taxes is virtually impossible and thus the impasse.

Stay Tuned for Part III

Guest Blogger: Part I: The Debt Ceiling: The Antoine Marshall Proposal

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall breaks down the Debt Ceiling and puts forward his original proposal (in a 7 part blog series)-- let's hope Congress takes notice.  Antoine Marshall is a rising 3rd year law student at Wake Forest University. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148


Fixing the Debt Ceiling.

Much has been made over our impending debtpocolypse that will occur if the Congress doesn’t raise the Congressional debt limit by August 2nd, the date given by Treasury Secretary Geithner, that the country will run out of money to obligate our payments. Although some question the date given by Geithner, and the effect of us defaulting, Congress and the White House have been working towards a deal to raise the debt limit.

What is the debt limit?

The debt limit is basically how much Congress allows us to borrow. A statutory limit has been placed on our debt as part of the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 which allowed us to finance World War I. Right now it’s at about $14.6 trillion dollars. Meaning the federal government has borrowed $14.6 trillion dollars that we haven’t paid back yet.

Total debt of the federal government can be increased in two ways.

1. Either selling debt to the public, normally secured through US savings bonds (Those birthday gifts you probably received and were upset by as a kid. “Happy Birthday Little Johnny, here’s $100 in a US Savings Bond. You can’t spend it for another 20 years but it draws interest and will be very valuable by the time you forget you have it.”),
   
   or
    
2. When the federal government issues debt to certain government accounts such as social security, Medicare, and transportation trust funds.

So who holds our debt?

As of right now

• commercial banks and credit unions hold about $269.8 billion, 
• insurance companies hold about $260.8 billion, 
• the UK and state and local governments have about $511 billion each, 
• mutual funds hold about $637.7 billion, 
• Pension funds worth $706.4 billion, 
• Japan has traditionally been one of the largest US debt holders with $877.2 billion, 
• China is the largest debt holder at $895.6 billion, 
• $1.5 trillion is held by individuals, businesses, estates, corporations, and non-corporate business, 
• and $5.351 trillion is actually held by the US Government (yeah the biggest holder of government debt is the federal government… go figure).

The debt ceiling was raised 8 times during the Bush administration, 5 times when the Republicans have had control of the house, with each of those 5 votes earning at least 193 Republican voting yes.

Even when Democrats took back the House during the final 2 years of the Bush Presidency, the debt limit was raised three times with a combined 136 Republican yes votes.

Between 2000 and 2008 the debt ceiling went from $5.9 trillion to $11.3 trillion. Since Obama has been in office the debt ceiling has been raised 3 times, with not a single Republican yes vote.

Stay Tuned for Part II

Guest Blogger: Part III- When a Black Leader Needs To Retire

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall was inspired from a conversation he had on the posting of a friend (shoutout to Bradley), regarding the BET employee's comments about BET which can be found here. Antoine Marshall is currently a first year law student at Wake Forest. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148
The three examples above are merely an example of the timeline of what seems to be every black leader.

1. Accomplish great things
2. Get older
3. Believe in the hype that has been placed upon you
4. Get addicted to the power and influence
5. Declare yourself the self-appointed leader of all things within the black community
6. Abandoning ideas from young leaders, insult young leaders.

Maybe this is the criteria for black leaders, or maybe the leaders viewed as the greatest are so because they are assassinated before they reach phase II or III of black leaders (King, X, Newton). While interesting to ponder upon that's not quite the purpose of this note.
I was asked a question in a conference once that I now pose to you. Name a black leader under the age of 40 who is not a musician or athlete... Don't worry I'll wait. It's not an easy question, and I have trouble doing it without doing an online search. Which brings me to the purpose of this note what we are going to do about it?

Everyone I have tagged in this note I believe is an intelligent, young African-American with the capability of becoming a leader on a local, regional, or national stage (not to say anything about the people I didn't tag, and of course I underline "capability" because it's on you to realize that potential).

Problem is, like Hales (Our BET employee), we are also the type normally shot down by the relics of movements past, who have the belief that because we haven't achieved the level of success they have in our many less years, our ideas are somehow less valuable or effective.

Despite the oncoming post-racial America (that we exceedingly are proven we don't live in) that Barack Obama is supposed to usher in. There will always be a black community, just like there will always be a Jewish, Hispanic, Muslim, Asian, etc. community. And the black leaders of today need to be just as inspired and talented as leaders past.

I had a friend who had a lunch with John Lewis (One of the big 6 from the Civil Rights Movement, and current US Representative from Georgia) and asked him what can we do as young African-Americans today to continue the fight for civil rights, and his answer mirrored many of the strategies used in the 40s-60s: march, rally, boycott, etc.

As we saw with the Jena 6 and SC Confederate Flag those methods don't work anymore and now it's on our generation to update our strategies to be more relevant and effective in today's faster society (not to say anything disparaging about John Lewis, one of our better US Congressmen).

It is my sincere hopes that this note brings about serious discussion about the state of black leadership, the transition of power over to the younger generation, and how we can cement ourselves and ideas within our communities on a local, regional, and national level, among all who are tagged or happen to stumble upon this note.

If not immediately I hope to at least grease the wheels for discussions in the near future. I understand this note is long, but how can we hope to achieve the status of leaders if we shy away from long/difficult endeavors.

With the high rates of incarceration, drug use, drop outs, births out of wedlock, single parent homes and other socio-economical attacks on our community if only one person is able to stomach and decipher my philosophical babblings on what I believe is a void in leadership among African-Americans, or recalls this note after they have reached the pinnacle of success to avoid the pitfalls that have plagued our other black leaders, then I feel the time and effort put into this note is more than worth it.

Guest Blogger: Part II- When a Black Leader Needs To Retire

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall was inspired from a conversation he had on the posting of a friend (shoutout to Bradley), regarding the BET employee's comments about BET which can be found here. Antoine Marshall is currently a first year law student at Wake Forest. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148

1. W.E.B. DuBois
   
   The first black to receive a PhD from Harvard, architect of the NAACP and the principal known as the talented tenth, was very much a leader through the early 20th century. He fought for the education, civil reform, and economic reform of blacks making significant advancement throughout those areas.
   
   His later life he was marred by his praise of Stalin, fights with the NAACP, controversies that resulted in losing his US citizenship, criticism of younger black writers/musicians and developing a nasty habit of changing his mind on major issues; sometimes fighting just as passionately for the issues he fought against a few months prior.
2. Thurgood Marshall
   The man voted by Time Magazine as Mr. Civil Rights in the 50s and 60s (beating King, X, and many others more associated with the civil rights movement now) arguably singlehandedly did more for abolishing Jim Crow laws and discrimination than any other leader.
   
   His ability to follow Charles Hamilton Houston's plan of legally breaking down separate but equal doctrines earned him the privileged of being our first black Supreme Court Justice. But as the young hotshot lawyer grew older he took steps to get in front of the movement ensuring that he received the glory from major case wins.
   
   This included separating the Legal Defense Fund from the NAACP in a battle of egos to ensure that he had the power to remain in front of the movement and didn't have to divulge power and glory to the NAACP. As a Supreme Court Justice he was called on to step down during the late stages of the Carter administration to ensure that the people would be granted a successor with the same ideological leanings as him (with the even more gracious offer to have him in on the meetings to choose his successor, with several well qualified black nominees being considered).
   
   Despite his failing health and questions about his mental capacity diminishing, Marshall's ego had him stubbornly refuse, blasting the well-qualified potential black nominees who viewed him as a hero, saying he'd stay in office until death. Remarkably he lasted another 8 years on the bench (which given his health conditions and demand of the job a testament to his willpower) but retiring in '91 and I personally hold him responsible for being stuck with Clarence Thomas the man then President H.W. Bush nominated to replace him.
3. Jesse Jackson nuff said...
   
   Ok so that was wrong, but the man who worked closely with Dr. King, ran for President in 1984 and 1988 (if you didn't know he was 2nd in the Democratic Primaries voting in 1988. He was the 1988 Hillary Clinton) and helped electrify the Democratic base in 1992. Has become for the lack of a better annoying. His Rainbow/PUSH Coalition routinely fleeces worthy causes, for the purpose of filling his pocket, and who can forget this.
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aLGkFpsdHo
   
   By now even his most adamant supporters know he's being a media whore.

Stay Tuned for Part III of When a Black Leader Needs To Retire

Guest Blogger: Part I- When a Black Leader Needs to Retire

Guest Blogger Antoine Marshall was inspired from a conversation he had on the posting of a friend (shoutout to Bradley), regarding the BET employee's comments about BET which can be found here.  Antoine Marshall is currently a first year law student at Wake Forest. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/antoine-marshall/1a/267/148
There is one section in particular that brought out the larger conversation that follows.

I came in with a plan to provide balance and to deliver good music to the masses and help make BET relevant again -- at least in the dot-com world. Those attempts were shut down by out-of-touch executives who run a dot-com but could barely turn on a computer.

The short explanation of this is that a bright young intelligent employee of BET proposed quality ideas to BET, but BET with an absolute deterrence to anything remotely successful shot down these quality ideas.
We could leave off there and chalk it up to BET executives living up to the failure that is BET, but I think it brings up a more pressing issue of significant importance within the black community and that is the idea of black leaders stepping down.

One thing is inevitable, we all lose it at some point. Either through physical or mental deterioration, or the result of a changing of times, there is a point in our life when we are on the decline, unable to do the thing that we're best at, or at least unable to do so on the same level. Jordan's high flying dunks were replaced by the fadeaway jumpshot, Ali's foot speed and piston like jabs were replaced by the rope-a-dope, Ray Charles' fast paced fusion of gospel and Rock & Roll was replaced by slower ballads. But what about our black community leaders?
Unlike Jordan, Charles, and Ali community leaders can't just choose to retire. In the black community they remain public images throughout their lives, many of them living relics of a past fight or struggle. The problem is, is that they don't wish to relinquish that image, wanting to be forever viewed as the champion of abolition, civil rights, or whatever worthy cause they had so much success with, often times to the detriment of their causes.

Don't believe me? I bring up three examples

Stay Tuned for Part II of When a Black Leader Needs To Retire