Portland (Dbseru er
Page 8
A p ril 24,2013
New Prices
Effective
May 1,2010
Martin
Cleaning
Service
Carpet & Upholstery
Cleaning
Residential &
Commercial Services
Minimum Service CHG
$45.00
A sm all distance/travel charge
m ay be applied
CARPET CLEANING
2 Cleaning Areas or
more $30.00 Each Area
Pre-Spray Traffic Areas
(Includes: I sm all H allw ay)
1 Cleaning Area (only)
$40.00
Includes Pre-Spray Traffic Area
(Hallway Extra)
Stairs (12-16 stairs - With
Other Services)-. $25.00
Area/Oriental Rugs:
$25.00 Minimum
Area/Oriental Rugs (Wooly.
$40.00 Minimum
Heavily Soiled Area:
Additional $10.00 each area
(Requiring Extensive Pie-Spraying)
UPHOLSTERY
CLEANING
Sofa: $69.00
Loveseat: $49.00
Sectional: $109 - $139
Chair or Recliner
$25 - $49
Throw Pillows (With
th * P
Other Services): $5.00
%
ADDITIONAL
SERVICES
• Area & Oriental Rug
Cleaning
• Auto/Boat/RV Cleaning
• Deodorizing & Pet
--x
Odor Treatment
• Spot & Stain
Removal Service
• Scotchguard Protection
• M inor Water Damage
Services
SEE CURRENT FLYER
FOR ADDITIONAL
PRICES & SERVICES
Call for Appointment
(503) 281-3949
Cutting Your Benefits Not the ‘Middle’ Way
Does anyone
actually like
this idea?
by
P eter H art
T h e fe d e ra l
budget is, accord
ing to many ex
perts, a "political
docu m en t." It's
how our political
leaders convey their priorities to
the people they serve.
So what's the political lesson
of Barack Obama's recent bud
get plan? He apparently thinks
older people could get by with
less.
The Obama budget has at
tracted a lot of attention — and
controversy — because he's
making a rather shocking open
ing offer to the Republican op
position: Let's cut Social Secu
rity b en e fits and M ed icare
spending in the name of shrink
ing the federal deficit.
The W hite House supports
something called the "chained
CPI." That doesn't just sound
painful — it could very well hurt
a lot of people. The idea is to cut
benefits by a small amount ev to the deficit, the focus of deficit
ery year — about a quarter of 1 reduction.
percent — by using a different
So how can reporters talk
method for calculating inflation. about this as if it's the "middle" of
As the Center for Economic & anything? B ecause they see
Policy Research shows, the cuts these fights as squabbles be
add up overtime. Twenty years tween politicians — the Demo
on, that's almost a 6 percent crats on one side, the Republi
cut in benefits for retirees in cans on the other. In this view,
their late 80s.
Obama is trying to bridge the
Does anyone actually like gap between the two sides.
this idea? Not really. Polls have
W ho's left out o f that story?
long shown that it gamers mea The rest of us. And when poll
ger support, and probably for sters ask the public what they'd
good reason. Most people know like to see happen in order to
(or are) people who rely on So reduce the deficit, the public
cial Security benefits, and they speaks up loud and clear: The
know that most retirees aren't public prefers cutting the bloated
living high on the hog.
military budget and raising taxes
But many journalists and pun on the wealthy. There are any
dits are cheering Obama's gam num ber o f w ays to get the
bit as a move to the "center" or co untry's finances in order.
the "middle." That's what NPR's Clearly, we don't have to take
Cokie Roberts called it. Others anything away from the elderly.
portray the move as "good poli But how often do you hear re
tics" : Obama is making his more porters talk about those sensible,
liberal supporters angry, which widely supported policies as "the
helps portray him as squarely in middle"?
the middle, willing to make the
The media didn't create this
tough choices.
political problem, but they have
But cutting benefits for eld played along. Corporate media
erly retirees is hardly brave. And constantly chum out lots of fear-
it wrongly makes Social S ecu -' mongering reports about Social
rity, which doesn't add a penny Security's supposed "crisis." That
propaganda lays the groundwork
for politicians to claim they must
"reform" it. And reform always
stands as code for cuts, which are
supposedly necessary and bold.
There's more to the language
games than that. As The New
Yorker recently reported, the
press has been complicit in re
branding Social Security and
Medicare not as earned benefits
but as "entitlements." Ronald
Reagan started using that term,
and the press went along with it.
What we call things matters.
When politicians speak of the
need to "cut entitlements," they
know that sounds better than
"the retirement benefits you paid
for are going to keep getting
smaller every year. We're going
to send you a smaller check than
you were expecting, and it will
keep getting smaller every year."
It's bad enough that politicians
w on't level with the people
they're supposed to represent.
But when the media do the same
thing, and cheer these political
leaders for their bravery, they
show us whose side they're on.
Peter Hart is the activism
director o f Fairness & Accu
racy in Reporting.