As Douglas County Democrats, we are thrilled to have two highly qualified candidates vying for the right to take back the 2nd Congressional District from Lee Terry. On January 20th, at the 32nd Annual Harry S. Truman Dinner, State Senator Gwen Howard and Douglas County Treasurer John Ewing will participate in their first debate; and they want to answer questions from Democratic primary voters like you.

WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK THE CANDIDATES?

This is your chance to ask Ewing and Howard about the issues that matter to you—so submit your questions now. Questions will be chosen from five categories: Job Creation; Deficit Reduction/Spending; Medicare/Social Security/Medicaid; Foreign Policy; and Social Issues.

There are four ways to ask your question:

1. Submit it as a comment on our Facebook page: www.facebook.com/DouglasCountyDemocrats

2. Send a tweet using the hashtag #CD2Debate

3. Fill out the following form

[contact-form-7]

4. Send an email with your question to info@douglascountydemocrats.com

—

To buy tickets for the Truman Dinner, click here.

Click here to purchase tickets.

Please join your fellow Douglas County Democrats for our 32nd Annual Truman Dinner.

This year we are proud to host to first debate of the 2012 Second District Congressional race between State Senator Gwen Howard and Douglas County Treasurer John Ewing.

—

January 20, 2012

Ramada Plaza Hotel & Convention Center

(3321 S. 72nd St., Omaha)

—

Gathering/Cocktail Hour: 6:30 PM

Dinner: 7:30 PM

Debate: 8:30 PM

Omaha, NE – Douglas County Democratic party announces a primary election debate between Douglas County Treasurer John Ewing and State Senator Gwen Howard, the two Democratic candidates for Nebraska’s Second Congressional District.

The debate will occur on Friday, January 20, at the Douglas County Democrats annual Truman Dinner.  The event will be at the Ramada Plaza Hotel and Convention Center at 3321 S 72^nd St in Omaha.  The debate is scheduled to begin at approximately 7:00pm.

“We are excited to have two such highly qualified individuals for Nebraska’s Second Congressional District seat this year,” stated Douglas County Democrats Chairman, Mike Leahy. “We want to give both candidates a chance to make their case to the voters.”

The candidates will be asked questions on the subjects in five categories – job creation, government spending, foreign policy, social issues and Medicare/Social Security programs.  These questions will be submitted by voters of the district using various social media outlets such as the DCDP website and Facebook during the weeks prior to the debate event.

“It is important that the candidates representing our party are presented with the questions that our members may have for the upcoming election,” commented Leahy. “We are pleased that both Gwen Howard and John Ewing are ready and willing to listen to the voters and answer their questions.”

The Douglas County Democratic Party will provide details regarding the Moderator Panel members as well as debate format as those details become available.

###

The proposed contract;

• Ends pension “spiking” by retirees
• Raises the department’s retirement age
• Increases contributions made by firefighters into the pension plan and cuts their pension benefits
• Restricts wages
• Reduces overall benefits
• Increases health care premiums
• Prevents a $300 million lawsuit against the city to cover an unfunded pension liability

This agreement represents four years of negotiations with firefighters who looked beyond their own interests to do what was best for the City of Omaha.

Omaha firefighters addressed concerns raised by city officials and agreed to; accept cuts in pay, significant benefit reductions, increases in health care premiums, and end spiking.

Their cooperation and commitment to work out differences at the bargaining table is making it possible for the City of Omaha to bring actuarial balance to the Omaha fire and police pension system.

The city will save 16 million dollars this year alone from the combined savings made as a result of the concessions made by firefighters through this contract agreement.

Since 2000 our pension shortfall grew from 30 million to nearly a billion dollars and it will continue to grow if we don’t take action.

According to Milliman Actuarial Services our city spends more than 150,000 dollars a month to do nothing and wait for the courts (CIR) to make decisions. Since we announce our tentative agreement with the City we have expended 475,000 dollars in accrued pension costs. In October, that cost will double.

This contract is a real solution to pension shortfalls that will continue to grow out of control unless we put an end to it. It enables us to stop ballooning pension costs and saves millions of dollars every year.

This effort at shared responsibility demonstrates that the City and the Firefighters are capable of bringing meaningful and long term solutions to bear on these serious issues. Any desire to drag this dispute through more protracted litigation is an evasion of responsibility. The CIR, even as amended, cannot fix the City’s pension problems.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 8, 2011

DOUGLAS COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY URGES ADOPTION OF CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OMAHA AND FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL NO. 385

Omaha, Nebraska.

The Douglas County Democratic Party today urged the Omaha City Council to approve the proposed contract between the City of Omaha and the Firefighters Union.

“The time has come to adopt the contract,” stated Mike Leahy, Chair of the Douglas County Democratic Party. “Last year, the Council approved the new Police contract that already has yielded millions of dollars in savings to the citizens of Omaha,” Leahy continued, “the proposed Firefighters contract will provide savings of $16 million dollars this year alone from the combined savings made as a result of the concessions made by firefighters through this agreement.”

The proposed contract:

• Ends pension “spiking” by retirees
• Raises the department’s retirement age
• Increases contributions made by firefighters into the pension plan and cuts their pension benefits
• Restricts wages
• Reduces overall benefits
• Increases health care premiums

This agreement represents four years of negotiations with firefighters who looked beyond their own interests to do what was best for the City of Omaha.

With recent reports that the City of Omaha’s AAA Bond Rating could be in jeopardy due to political stagnation in Washington, the City Council must immediately take steps to shore up the liabilities in the pension fund.

Leahy continued, “The price of doing nothing is too high. According to Milliman Actuarial Services, Omaha currently spends more than $150,000 dollars per month to do nothing but wait for the courts (CIR) to make decisions that our elected officials should be making. Omaha is not Washington. We don’t gamble our long-term financial security in political games.”

It seems that there are members of the Council who are not interested in any compromise. “The most vocal opponents of the proposed contract seem more interested in ending collective bargaining entirely than in reaching an agreement that is best for the city,” stated Leahy. “Compromise doesn’t mean getting everything you want.”

“This effort at shared responsibility demonstrates that the City and the Firefighters are capable of bringing meaningful and long term solutions to bear on these serious challenges. Any effort to drag this dispute through more expensive litigation is an evasion of responsibility.” Leahy concluded, “The time to act is now.”

Monday, September 12th

Field Club of Omaha (Map)

Registration and Lunch at 10:30am

Shotgun start at 12:00pm

Over $1,000,000 in prizes!

]]> http://www.douglascountydemocrats.com/golf/feed/ 0 http://www.douglascountydemocrats.com/2011/08/2012-caucus-planning-meeting-this-thursday/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=2012-caucus-planning-meeting-this-thursday http://www.douglascountydemocrats.com/2011/08/2012-caucus-planning-meeting-this-thursday/#comments Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:09:34 +0000 dcdp http://www.douglascountydemocrats.com/?p=2299

WE NEED YOU
TO KEEP IT BLUE!

It is because of the work we accomplished in the 2008 Caucus that convinced then-candidate Obama to believe that the Democrats of Douglas County could deliver an Electoral College Vote.

If we want to prove to President Obama that Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District still matters, we once again must prove to him that we can do what it takes to win our district again.

The theme of the 2008 Caucus was “CAUCUS COUNTS” because the Democrats of Nebraska wanted to count and be able to make a difference in who would be our candidate for President.  We did just that.

Nebraska did COUNT and was pivotal in the decision on who would be the Democratic candidate for President.

Now is the time to prepare for the upcoming 2012 Nebraska Presidential Caucus and we need you to be part of our team.  We invite you be part of the 2012 DCDP Caucus Committee.  We welcome you to our first meeting to begin the planning process.  Our initial meeting will be:

Thursday, August 4th @ 7:00pm
7602 Pacific Street – Lower Conference Room

To help prepare us for all those that will be attending, we ask that you

RSVP HERE

Remember:  If we want to elect a Democratic Congressperson and deliver for President Obama…IT STARTS WITH CAUCUS!

Midlands Voices: Terry’s debt analysis off base

The writer is chairman of the Douglas County Democratic Party.

I think most Nebraskans can agree with U.S. Rep. Lee Terry’s recent essay that the Founding Fathers were right in creating a republic where the will of the majority could be expressed while protecting the rights of the states.

I admire the attempt by Rep. Terry to take a long view of history. However, in this case, I believe his July 19 Midlands Voices commentary missed the trees for the forest. A more accurate assessment would be an analysis of the past 15 years.

It is disingenuous for Rep. Terry to claim a dedication to fiscal responsibility given the progression of his career in Washington. When he was first elected in 1998, our government announced its first budget surplus since 1969. At $70 billion, this represented six years of concerted effort to get our fiscal house in order.

By the time Rep. Terry was running for re-election in 2000, the surplus had reached a rec- ord $230 billion. According to a joint report from the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Office of Management and Budget, our total national debt had reached $5.7 trillion.

One would hope that this surplus would be used to pay down this debt, but, alas, this was not to be.

After the 2000 elections, “fiscal conservatives” like Rep. Terry controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. Instead of “getting our fiscal house in order” by paying down the national debt, we inexplicably saw our nation become the first in history to cut taxes while at war.

In 2011, we have reached a point that our national debt has exceeded our national GDP. I agree wholeheartedly with the motives of Rep. Terry but disagree most strenuously with his methods.

One needs look no further than Rep. Terry’s support of Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. This policy would end Medicare as we know it, slashing benefits for future generations while further cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans.

Moreover, the Terry/Ryan plan would hit seniors immediately by reopening the Medicare prescription “donut hole.” That alone would cost Nebraska seniors $16 million more in drug costs in 2012.

Rep. Terry claims allegiance to a balanced-budget amendment, but take note that he didn’t introduce one until the 111th Congress, the first Congress convened during the Obama administration and with a Democratic Senate.

The balanced-budget amendment includes much more than just balancing the budget. It would require a two-thirds super-majority to close any tax loopholes, including those for Big Oil companies and corporate jet owners.

Moreover, the Ryan/Terry plan would fall short of balancing the budget by nearly $4 trillion over the next decade. This means that without additional revenue, we would need $400 billion in additional cuts beyond the already draconian measures proposed in this bill. Furthermore, even if it were to pass, it would not be ratified by the necessary 38 states until at least 2013.

When dealing with a problem of this magnitude, we cannot simultaneously tie our hands with an amendment. Tying this type of amendment to the debate over the debt ceiling is also disingenuous. The debt ceiling does not cover future spending but, instead, funding already allocated by the Congress. It absolutely must be increased.

Rep. Terry has put the economic recovery at tremendous risk by refusing to pay bills that he has racked up as a member.

Now is a time for tough decisions and true leadership in Washington. Rep. Terry has proven through his 13-year career that if we want someone capable of tackling our toughest fiscal issues, we need someone else.

Nebraskans can no longer afford his go-along, get-along attitude; he’s just too late to the party.

• One of the most important and urgent things we can do for the economy is get our fiscal house in order and reduce our nation’s deficit.

• The President knows that we have a unique opportunity now to do something big to solve our problem of underlying debt and deficits. He is ready to make tough decisions in order to stabilize America’s finances, but we need to act now.

• Yesterday, you heard the President make the point that the Gang of Six’s proposal, and the support surrounding it, shows that there is significant momentum behind a big, balanced approach to deficit reduction.

• While we may not agree with every aspect of their approach, the Gang of Six plan shows there is still an appetite to make the hard choices to solve our nation’s deficit problems.

• We need a balanced approach that asks the very wealthiest and special interests to pay their fair share as well, and we believe the American people agree.  We’re talking about getting rid of tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires; tax breaks for oil companies who are making some of their largest profits ever, hedge fund managers who pay lower tax rates than teachers and fire fighters, and corporate jet owners who get special tax breaks commercial airlines don’t get. These tax breaks don’t contribute to our economic growth, and it’s time to end them if we are serious about our deficits.

• Congressional Republicans, conservatives and business leaders agree that we need take a balanced approach and increase revenues in order to reduce our nation’s deficit.
  • Last week, Senator Graham said he supports generating revenue by closing tax loopholes.
  • Recently, Bill O’Reilly said, “Republicans need to accept the need to raise more revenue.”
  • Warren Buffett said, “there is plenty of room on the revenue side with wealthy people like me. We’ve never had it so good. I mean our tax rates have never been lower than this and we’ve had it for 10 years and it’s shown in the great disparity of wealth that’s occurred in the last decade or so.”

• The President is willing to make tough choices to solve the nation’s deficit problem — it’s time for members of both parties to do the same.  He’s willing to make tough choices when it comes to entitlement reform.  He put forth a framework to make Medicare and Medicaid stronger and more efficient without shifting the cost of care to our seniors or people with disabilities.

• He also supports working in a bipartisan way to strengthen Social Security for future generations.

• The President has made it clear that now is the time to lead, to reject the usual Washington positioning and political posturing, and find compromise in order to solve this problem for the American people.

• He believes that now is the moment to rise above that cynicism and show the American people that we can still do big things.

• We can’t simply kick the can down the road – that’s how we built up this debt over the last decade in the first place.

• We must take a balanced approach that includes shared sacrifice to force our government to live within its means and put our economy on a stronger footing for the future.

• We must get this done before August 2nd to ensure that America does not default on its obligations.  If America, for the first time in its history, defaults on its obligations, it would have a catastrophic impact on our economy and the financial system.

• If Congress fails to act and forces the first default in the nation’s history, it will:
  • Require the government to stop, limit, or delay payments on a broad range of legal obligations – which means the government could not guarantee it could make payments for military salaries, Social Security and Medicare benefits, interest on the national debt, and tax refunds.
  • Cause a spike in interest rates for mortgages, car loans and credit cards.
  • Hurt folks who have been putting money away in their 401(k)s to save for retirement or into accounts for their kids’ education.

7/20/2011, via The White House

Rather than taking responsibility for the tough decisions needed to reduce our deficits, Republicans including Nebraska’s own Lee Terry, have made it clear they would prefer to”Duck, Dodge, and Cover.” Their reckless, irresponsible plan would threaten both short-term economic recovery and long-term competitiveness. It would likely lead to spending cuts that look like the Medicare-killing Ryan plan on steroids. Here are just a few examples, per Jason Furman of the National Economic Council:

• The bill would abruptly cut more than $100 billion in spending in the first year alone, cuts at a level that Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf stated would “affect our projections for GDP growth over the next two years.”
• The House Budget Resolution plan would cut clean energy investments by 70 percent, infrastructure investments by a third, and education and training by 25 percent—cutting 320,000 children from Head Start and reducing aid for families trying to put their kids through college by hundreds, or even thousands of dollars.
• It would cut Medicaid by one-third over the decade, and by nearly 50% by 2030. This could, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, result in 36 million people losing Medicaid coverage, including people with disabilities and seniors in nursing homes.  And that comes on top of the 17 million who would lose coverage due to repealing subsidies in the Affordable Care Act.
• And it would cut programs for the most vulnerable – for example, by food stamp benefits for a family of four by $1,760 per year or cut 8 million households from the program.
• Finally, the House Budget Resolution proposed to convert Medicare to a voucher program, increasing costs for Medicare beneficiaries by $6,400 a year beginning in 2021 – with those higher costs increasing over time.

The GOP plan also requires adoption of a so-called “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the Constitution, in addition to the cuts described above. This draconian measure would require a two-thirds supermajority to cut tax loopholes or take other steps on revenue. Furthermore, at the end of the next decade, the House plan would still be $400 billion a year short of achieving the balanced budget the amendment would require. Unless Republicans are willing to entertain $3 to $4 trillion in additional revenues over the next decade, that means $400 billion a year would need to be cut beyond the Ryan plan.

Sixty-six percent of Americans—including a majority of Republicans—favor a balanced approach to deficit reduction. The President agreed to a proposal which would have reduced the deficit by $4 trillion, with 83% of the savings coming from spending cuts and 17% from revenue increases such as closing tax loopholes for billionaires and private jet owners. However, Republicans rejected this compromise—even though they proposed virtually the same plan back in March! Now, Republicans are playing political games at the expense of the faith and credit of the United States, putting all their weight behind a plan that is out of touch with American values with no backup plan.

Democrats and the President, on the other hand, have proposed a comprehensive approach that ensures we live within our means, reducing the deficit while supporting economic growth and long-term job creation, protecting critical investments, and meeting the commitments made to provide economic security to Americans no matter their circumstances. As of today, a bipartisan group of senators known as the “Gang of Six” have come out with another proposal—one which the President has endorsed. We have reached the eleventh hour, but the President is right: “now is the moment to rise above that cynicism and show the American people that we can still do big things.”