As part of their latest effort to rebrand the GOP as a more caring party, House Republicans are scheduled this week to put forward a student lending bill called the “Smarter Solutions for Students Act.” But the label is misleading. A more appropriate name would be the “Making College More Expensive Act.” (Indeed, that’s what House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer calls it.)

The bill changes the way interest rates are set, making the rate on every loan vary each year—similar to credit card rates and the flawed variable-rate mortgages that played a role in the 2008 Wall Street crash that sparked the recession. Although touted as a lifeline that would keep student interest rates from doubling from 3.4 percent come July 1, the bill would still leave students paying a much higher rate of interest than they are paying now.

Interest rates for Stafford Loans would be set by adding 2.5 percentage points to the rate of high-yield 10-year Treasury notes, with a cap of 8.5 percent. At 1 p.m. Tuesday, that rate was 1.94 percent. The annual interest rate on Direct PLUS loans would be 4.5 percentage points above the rate on high-yield 10-year Treasury notes, with a cap of 10.5 percent.

“In seven out of the next 10 years, interest rates under the House Republican proposal would be higher than the status quo, meaning it would simply trade lower interest rates today for higher rates and more debt down the road,” said Rory O’Sullivan, policy director for Young Invincibles, a youth advocacy organization. “Moreover, interest rates on some loans could still reach double digits, and the proposal sets rates in a way that makes more money off students and puts it toward deficit reduction.”

Already debt-ridden families and jobless graduates would be forced to pay down our government’s debt while fat cats get away scot-free. The CBO predicts the bill will save the government an estimated $3.7 billion over 10 years, but at a staggering cost to the struggling middle class. “In the first 10 years alone, students would be expected to pay $3.7 billion more to borrow for college than under current law,” said The Institute for College Access and Success.

Putting the fate of our students into the hands of market rate forces is the wrong policy prescription to heal our economy and accelerate our recovery.

We need common sense legislation that supports students and families over businesses and banks like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s alternative. Under the “Bank On Students Loan Fairness Act,” students would be able to pay back their loans at the same rock-bottom interest rates banks receive, currently 0.75 percent.

The “Smarter Solutions for Students Act” is neither smart nor a solution for 99 percent of this country. It’s time to stand up for our students and put America back to work.

In the latest round of atrocities committed by conservatives, Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee sent to the House floor a farm bill on Wednesday that offers little food for families while dishing out corporate subsides. In protest, organizational leaders and activist met with elected officials on Capitol Hill to demonstrate opposition to cutting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as food stamps).

The proposed $21 billion in cuts to SNAP would cause nearly 2 million low-income Americans—among them people with disabilities, children, seniors and struggling parents— to lose an average of $90 per month. The bill also axes funding for nutrition education and eliminates program performance bonuses.

A new report, set to be released in the “Social Service Review” next month, reveals that in 2011 an estimated 1.65 million families lived on less than $2 a day per person; this figure includes 3.55 million children. How do these individuals survive in America on a Third-World income? The report finds they rely on the social safety nets that caught millions as they were falling because of the recession. This is also the same net that deficit hawks seek to whittle away at. As the wealthiest and most powerful nation, it is downright dirty that we let anyone go hungry and fail to provide for those in need.

Benefits already average less than $1.50 a day for each meal. You try living on that (I have, it’s called the Food Stamp Challenge). Although meager, SNAP is still our nation’s first line of defense against hunger. Rep. Barbara Lee, (D-Calif.) professed that when she was a single mother, food stamps “were a bridge over troubled water while I was struggling.”

Who will feel this funding void? “If divided evenly across Feeding America’s national network of food banks, every food bank would have to provide an additional 4 million meals each year for the next ten years, and that is just not possible,” said Bob Aiken, president and CEO of Feeding America. “There is no way that charity would be able to make up the difference. We are already stretched thin meeting sustained high need, and we simply do not have the resources to prevent hunger in all of the families who would be impacted by these cuts.”

At a time when 50 million individuals are hungry, 17 million being children, “we should be talking about how we improve and expand SNAP,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. His view is not only supported by research, such as that of a recent Institute of Medicine report that finds the program needs to be strengthened, but also by the majority of Americans. Seven in 10 voters say that cutting food stamp funding is the wrong way to approach deficit reduction. The Alan Simpson-Erskine Bowles deficit commission didn’t even recommend cutting SNAP to reduce the deficit. It is also important to note that just this week the CBO said the “deficit disaster” is now solved for the next 10 years.

Yet, Republicans continually ask our most vulnerable to pay while safeguarding corporations and bankers. “The pattern that is happening here is really diabolical.” said the passionate Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. Although she is a representative of the nation’s wealthiest state, one in seven children go to bed hungry in her district.

“If you think this is the right path, you don’t live in the same America I do!” said Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio.

Aside from the moral imperative, the SNAP program helps our economy and is fiscally responsible. In 2011, SNAP lifted nearly 4 million Americans out of poverty, including 1.7 million children and 280,000 seniors. Economist at Moody’s Analytics and the Department of Agriculture estimate that for every $1 spent on SNAP benefits, there is an economic return of $1.73 to $1.79. Inflicting more hunger on our nation worsens health, causing higher health cost that the taxpayer will have to pick up, and reduces our educational outcomes.

Feeding our nation while spurring our economy is a vision we all should be able to agree on. No one wants to live on welfare; people want jobs. Until our government can actually put in place policies that will produce jobs, the least we can do is make the wise investments in programs like SNAP, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to support the economic recovery and future success of financially struggling Americans.

In the wake of the Great Recession, the majority of Americans continue to suffer and struggle to remain afloat, and the very definition of what it means to be middle-class is being redefined downward. Yesterday, The Atlantic held its first annual Summit on the State of the Middle Class to help define the attitudes, beliefs and desires of today’s middle-class Americans.

The summit, in conjunction with the latest Allstate–National Journal Heartland Monitor Poll, found that only 46 percent of Americans consider themselves to be in the middle-class.

America’s promise of economic security to those who play by the rules and work hard is now an equivocal reality. “Just 43% think that middle class means having the opportunity for financial and professional growth, buying a home, and saving and investing for the future.” Additionally, the poll found that a “solid majority (54%) of Americans believes that being middle class today means keeping up with expenses and holding a steady job while not falling behind or taking on too much debt.”

Similarly, things once considered essential to the American dream are now reserved for the privileged. “One-quarter to one-third of middle class Americans believe that yearly vacations, regular income increases, affording quality healthcare, and having job security are only manageable for the upper class.” The poll also found that paying for children’s education, retiring comfortably, and having enough money to weather health or income emergencies are seen as out of reach for the majority of Americans.

Although the economic crisis is the clear culprit, Americans understand that politicians are truly to blame for the middle-classes demise. “64% believe Congress is making things worse, and 8% think it’s making things better.”

The “Game of Life” now resembles “Chutes and Ladders,” with the odds stacked against Americans striving for that once sought after middle-class economic security.  Policy makers have solutions on hand to fix our economy, yet continually refuse to do so. As more and more Americans sink, with middle-class economic security even further out of reach, it’s time to finally toss them the economic lifelines they need and deserve.

Have we failed our children, and subsequently the future of our country? UNICEF says yes.

According to a report released earlier this month — “Child Well-Being in Rich Countries”— the U.S. came in 26th place out of 29 wealthy countries in its care for children. Though it is the wealthiest country in the world, the U.S. barely managed to beat out the poorest ones on the list: Lithuania, Latvia and Romania.

The report shows we have the second highest share of children living in poverty, and the second largest child poverty gap. That’s a byproduct of our stark income inequality continues to widen, as the top 1 percent capture 112 percent of all income growth. Shame on us.

In the academic race to the top, we have a long way to go. The U.S. was ranked 25th in the percent of people from 15 to 19 years old who are enrolled in schools and colleges and 23rd for those not participating in either an education, workforce or training program.

Our children may be some of the most likely to exercise, but they are still the most overweight. Also, we continue to have one of the highest infant mortality rates. To put this in perspective, an infant born in Botswana would have a better chance of surviving than an African-American infant born in some communities here. And American children are also among the most likely to fall victim to homicide: close to three times more likely than Canadian children, almost four times more likely than children in Greece or Poland, about five times more likely than children in the Czech Republic.

Additionally, the report found that the emotional well-being of American children is on par with their physical health. For their own level of “life satisfaction,” American children ranked in the bottom third and were ranked 28th for the quality of their relationships.

There were some positive rankings in the report: U.S. children are exposed to some of the lowest levels of air pollution, rank in the middle in terms of overall educational achievement, and have some of the lowest rates of tobacco and alcohol usage. All of these rankings have one thing in common: they are related to somewhat effective government regulations.

Despite conservative myths, that fact is that government can play an important role in improving the health and wealth of our country. Lifting our children out of poverty is not only a moral imperative but also an economical one. Policies that would improve the environment our children grow up in are supported by the majority of Americans: raising the minimum wage, protecting financial support programs, investing in education and infrastructure, protecting the environment and supporting job creation. Still, deficit hawks continue to use our children as their reason for slashing spending on education and entitlements.

Both political parties are to blame for our shame. Just last week, a Democratic-controlled Senate failed to protect innocent lives by deciding not to extend background checks on guns, and the president’s recent budget proposal would cut Social Security benefits. His proposal would also be the smallest U.S. investment budget in our recorded history.

For too long our national dialogue been focused on what we’re leaving behind for future generations while disregarding how we are failing them today. If our current political climate doesn’t change, our children will continue to suffer, and so will our stature in the eyes of the world.

The Pew Charitable Trust’s fourth annual report on “Who’s Winning the Clean Energy Race?” doesn’t give the United States much to celebrate on this Earth Day. The report, released last week, finds that the United States is no longer the global leader in renewable energy investment. China is.

From 2011 to 2012, China attracted $65.1 billion of the $269 billion globally invested in renewable energy investment. That compares to $35.6 billion by the United States, which is a 37 percent decline from 2011.

Pew found that globally investments in the renewable energy sector were down 11 percent from their 2011 figures, and that more than 50 percent of all investments were in countries not in the G-20, the set of leading industrial countries. China was the only G-20 country to have a net increase in attracting investors to its renewable energy sector in 2012. Luckily, the renewable energy sector still managed to grow by 88 gigawatts, or 11 percent, globally.

Pew said investments in wind energy were down 14 percent but solar still remained strong. “For the second year in a row, solar technologies attracted more financing than any other technology by a wide margin: $126 billion was invested in the sub-sector in 2012, or 58 percent of the G-20 total,” it said. “China, Europe, and the United States were top markets for solar investment.”

The U.S. loss is no surprise, as policy makers have begun to curtail incentive programs and pursue discredited austerity tactics. Meanwhile, China’s size, commitment and aggressive policies enable it to become the clear leader in clean energy. “In countries with strong policy, they’re successful in attracting investment,” Phyllis Cuttino, director of Pew’s clean energy work, said. In the U.S., “we need more than a patchwork of state policies.”

The on-again-off-again nature of federal clean energy programs such as the wind production tax credit, which was barely kept on the books for one more year during the fiscal cliff negotiations at the beginning of the year, contributed to the U.S. losing its clean energy lead. “This is largely due to policy uncertainty,” said Cuttino. “We have no clean energy standard and while there are tax incentives on the books for oil and gas, there are none for clean energy. That makes investors a little nervous.”

The report comes at a particularly hard time for the U.S., as the economy fails to grow and millions still suffer from unemployment. According to Cuttino, the decline in investments is a double whammy because it threatens our advantage as innovators. “This is a sector of the global economy that we’ve traditionally led,” Cuttino said. “We have invented many of the clean energy technologies, so to see China come along and the United States fall back is very troubling.”

On the bright side, the U.S. led the G-20 in energy efficiency, investing $2.5 billion in 2012. President Obama’s latest budget proposal intends to hold this advantage by allocating $200 million for efficiency programs. We are not out of the clean energy race yet.

We need to Increase our public and private investments in green technologies, fix our crumbling infrastructure and create other types of green jobs to return to global green leadership. Enacting policies that would simultaneously heal our broken economy and our climate would give the U.S. a real reason to celebrate the next Earth Day.

“Tell me I’m your national anthem.” That was the theme of the hundreds of environmentalists and labor union members gathered today at the BlueGreen Alliance’s annual conference in Washington. They wanted to remind President Obama and Congress that the middle class is still the national anthem of this country.

In response,  Obama administration officials and congressional Democrats touted the president’s successes and current efforts to a skeptical audience.

They gathered at the conference with a shared vision for our country—combating climate change while creating well-paying jobs, rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, advancing the rights and safety of workers, and securing our race to the top—that is shared by the majority of Americans.

At an opening panel focused on the rise and fall of climate change on the national agenda, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., acknowledged that the “propaganda campaign by the polluting industries” has been effective in derailing both the labor and environmental movements.

Although President Obama has placed climate change back on the national agenda, more needs to done. Executive action is crucial in our current political environment, but victories on the local and state level are just as important, if not more. Whitehouse told audience members “the only way to fight is to put light on it,” to advance the national dialogue. “Climate change needs to line up with issues such as gay rights and immigration,” he said.

Corporations and naysayers often claim we must choose between the environment and safety standards, between collective bargaining and job creation, while ignoring the facts. Currently, there are more than 3 million “green jobs.” Employment in this sector grew four times faster than other job categories. Since 2004, investment in clean energy is up 500 percent, and companies are bringing jobs back home from overseas.

This could not be possible without effective policies that promote green technologies and provide incentives for companies to relocate here, such as grants and tax credits. Research has shown that low-cost labor is not a major reason for companies taking jobs overseas. BMW manufactures its sports utility vehicles on our soil, not in Germany. We can compete.

“We have an opportunity before us,” declared David Danielson, Assistant Secretary at the Department of Energy, on the topic of American-made clean energy and manufacturing. He discussed the administration’s current green energy efforts, such as the Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative. In one recent success, in 2012 General Electric moved some operations from China and started manufacturing energy efficient water heaters that use 60 percent less water and save families on average $300 per year.

On the same topic, Leo Gerard, president of SWU, pointed out that “if we don’t have the manufacturing here, we won’t do the R&D here, and if we don’t do that here, we won’t be able to compete in a global economy.”

Our trade deficit is already costing us almost $1 billion a day and our current deficit with China is the largest in history.

This is not only an economic and environmental issue, but also a moral one. “I don’t want this generation, my generation, to be the one who destroys the planet” said Gerard. He envisions a future where his “grandkids and grandkids’ kids” are able to “grow up in an environment where they don’t worry about rising waters or finding good jobs.” This is an idea that we can all get behind.

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood proudly stated that “America was built on big ideas and bold action. We have a duty to be good stewards of the environment.”

We have a clear path forward: Green jobs are good jobs that can end the pain and suffering caused by the recession, while setting America on a sustainable track.

Can something be equally beneficial for both the environment and the economy? Leaders of the nation’s largest environmental organizations and labor unions say yes. This week in Washington, the BlueGreen Alliance will be holding its annual conference, appropriately themed “Good Jobs, Green Jobs.”

Often considered each other’s adversary, both the labor and environmental movements share the same goal of putting America on a sustainable path. David Foster, President of the BlueGreen Alliance Foundation, opened yesterday’s kickoff event by saying that both groups agree “90 percent of the time,” and that they share the same “desire for change.”

Combating climate change while simultaneously creating good-paying jobs is a reality that our country has not taken seriously enough. More than 50 percent of our schools are more than 50 years old, as well as our more than 2.5 million miles of existing pipelines. Retrofitting our schools and repairing our existing infrastructure not only leads to a more energy-efficient country, but also a more prosperous one.

Modernizing and fixing our current infrastructure should be one of America’s top priorities, especially while interest rates remain low and unemployment high. Moving toward a greener economy can rebuild our middle class by providing jobs, better working conditions and a higher standard of living. Showing how the interests of workers and environmentalists intersect, Leo Gerard, president of United Steelworkers, noted, “There is more steel used in one wind turbine than in 100 cars.”

Climate change also burdens taxpayers and is a direct threat to our national security. For example, if the U.S. continues to burn fossil fuels at its current rate, ocean temperatures will increase one degree every 10 years. While this may not seem like a lot, scientist have shown that warmer waters lead to more powerful natural disasters, such as superstorm Sandy. Already, from 2004-2011, more than $80 billion was allocated for disaster relief.

Green jobs are not only more advantageous to our overall economy and future, but also to human needs. Michael Brune, Executive Director of the Sierra Club, said, “environmental rights and worker rights are one in the same.” Members of labor unions are disproportionately put at risk for being exposed to pollutants while working and therefore overwhelmingly support environmental protections. Green jobs allow workers to have clean and safe working conditions. In the U.S., environmental pollutants have already led to higher rates of mortality, and just recently, China acknowledged the existence of cancer villages due to its pollution.

Several panelists discussed the election of 2008 and President Obama’s broken promises of change. While issues surrounding social equality have triumphed over the past five years, economic justice has not. Both climate change legislation and labor laws have failed to see progress as CEO pay soars and banks, once again, get bigger. This is the first time since 1935 that the U.S. has not had a fully functioning National Labor Relations Board, and due to this, the rights of workers are continually threatened.

As the nation struggles to combat climate change and rebuild the middle class, organizations and leaders must not fall for the allure of self-reliance. “They will either knock us off one at a time or all together unless we fight back,” said Gerard at the end of the panel discussion.

Neither the labor nor environmental movements can achieve success without one another. And, the U.S. economy and middle class cannot achieve success without both of them. As progressives, we are all in the struggle for a sustainable and equitable future together.

Millennials – the largest, best educated, and most diverse generation in our nation’s history – have one question for Democrats seeking election in 2014: Do your values really reflect ours?

Democrats have reason to worry about what the answer would be from the 80 million people between the ages of 18 and 29 who make up the largest segment the “rising American electorate.” Economically, the only thing rising for America’s youth are unemployment rates, debt, and inequality.  Their judgment about not only who is responsible, but also who is fighting for their economic future, will be key to determining the outcome of the 2014 midterm elections.

Millennials constituted 18 percent of the vote in 2008, and backed Obama by more than a two-to-one ratio (66 percent to 32 percent). Four years later, comprising 19 percent of the vote, they helped Democrats grow their numbers in Congress and were the group giving Obama their largest margin support in four key swing states: Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. This group is adding about four million eligible voters a year.

But the fragile economy has not been able to support their needs. On Thursday, Demos released a bleak report on the employment prospects of 18-to-34-year-olds, whose labor force participation is now at record lows. “For many young people the promises of finding a good job, starting a family, or making a better life for themselves are all on hold” as they struggle in an economy that has “pushed them toward the sidelines, ” the report said.

The report concludes, “This generation of young adults will bear the scar of the Great Recession well into their working lives. … They will start their careers later, earn less, and put off the kinds of investments that establish security for the future.”

This was also clear in interviews Democracy Corps did for its most recent report on the RAE and unmarried women. Many have witnessed friends and family lose their jobs, homes, health care insurance, and face other forms of economic hardship. Millions have been forced to accumulate student loan debt now exceeding $1 trillion, with the average graduate now burdened with more than $27,000 in loans.

Upon graduation, debt-ridden young adults enter the workforce during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and slowest recovery on record. Although millennials are confident, self-expressive, optimistic and liberal, they are also the most scarred by the economic collapse. Currently, 284,000 college graduates are barely making minimum wage and thousands more are unemployed. For millennials, the American promise that a quality education guarantees gainful employment with living wages is now being broken.

As income inequality has continued to grow, and wages remain stagnant from the lost Bush years, the wealth gap between young and older Americans stands at the widest ever. In 2012, the median net worth of households headed by millennials was a mere $3,662, while households headed by someone 65 or older was $170,494. According to the U.S. Census, between 2005 and 2010 the median net worth for people under 35 fell by 37 percent.

Inevitability, the economy’s stunted growth has also diminished the ability for young people to leap into adulthood. The recession has forced a quarter of all millennials, often called the Boomerang or Peter Pan generation, to move back in with their parents, and nearly a third have put off marriage or having a child.

It isn’t that these hundreds of thousands of young adults don’t want to grow up; they simply can’t afford to.

The future may seem bleak for young adults, but it would be delusional to believe that they don’t desire or deserve the wants of previous generations. Eighty-four percent of 18-34-year-olds who are currently renting aspire to own a home; 64 percent rank the opportunity to own their own home as “very important”.

Conservative media outlets have dubbed millennials the give-me generation, saying many are moochers, feel entitled, and expect “handouts” from the government. This is simply fiction. Conservative policies robbed the middle class of its financial security when the economy collapsed, increasing the need for government support. This reality affects their political perspectives.

The real priorities of millennials and the RAE are clear: protect and strengthen social insurance benefits, invest in education and job creation, repeal the sequester, and raise the minimum wage. According to a study done by the Center for American Progress, 80 percent of young adults agree that a strategy for long-term economic growth must include government investments in science, education, and infrastructure. Furthermore, 72 percent favor tax hikes on the wealthy and believe that “the government should do more to reduce the gap between rich and poor.”

Here are some other key facts from Pew, Democracy Corps, and Gallup polls:

• By a 48 to 41 percent margin, young adults say programs for older adults are a higher priority than deficit reduction.
• People of all ages said they would rather increase taxes to the rich to pay for Social Security and Medicare than raise the eligibility age.
• More than three-quarters (71 percent) of the RAE believe the sequester is harmful to our country.
• To strengthen the Social Security system, 64 percent of millennials favor raising taxes on high-income earners.
• By a 59 to 37 percent margin, young adults say government should do more to solve problems.
• 78 percent of millennials believe that the minimum wage should be raised.

Our future is being shortchanged by reckless policies that neglect public investment and fail to provide jobs. Our nation is literally crumbling, hundreds of thousands of schoolteachers have been laid off, and vital aid used to make college affordable is being slashed. Recently, economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said, “Fiscal policy is, indeed, a moral issue, and we should be ashamed of what we’re doing to the next generation’s economic prospects.”

Yet, in the current political arena, priorities of the young and old alike are being ignored and placed on the bargaining altar as a sacrificial offering.

Although the GOP’s fiscal and social policies are antithetical to the values of most millennials, their political enthusiasm for Democrats has also cooled. Since December, Obama’s job approval rating among young adults has already dropped by 9 percentage points. Many have begun to believe Obama’s messaging around change, for the Democratic Party, and politics itself, as nothing more than a farce. “About half of Millennials say the president has failed to change the way Washington works, which had been the central promise of his candidacy,” according to a recent Pew report. Words are nice, but something more tangible that can be felt, instead of only heard, would be better.

Just recently, the Republican National Committee released a scathing “autopsy” report acknowledging that it must try harder to appeal to young voters, minorities, and women. But even if Republicans fail to rid their cave of every Neanderthal and appeal to the RAE, Democrats could still suffer if millennial disenchantment deepens and participation levels among young voters declines.

Remember the catastrophe of 2010, when millennials stayed home in large numbers. Polling data shows that a solid majority of young adults (53 percent) wanted a Democrat-controlled Congress. However, only 20.9 percent of all eligible young people voted in the 2010 midterms. More than half of the people who voted in 2008 (51 percent) shied away from the polls. In the months leading up to November 2014, Democrats will have to try even harder to win the millennial vote. Republicans are already poised to make some headway: note the thousands of young people at the Conservative Political Action Conference a few weeks ago.

As the most diverse generation (39 percent are people of color), millennials are more civically engaged, progressive, open to change and tolerant non-meddlers on social issues. Overwhelming they support same-sex marriage (78 percent), abortion rights (68 percent), and immigration reform (78 percent). Democrats’ stance on social issues are the main draw for young voters.

But demography isn’t destiny. It would be suicidal for Democrats to take for granted a group that will comprise almost a quarter of the electorate in 2014. Progressive views on social issues are appreciated, but are not sufficient. The number one priority of millennials and the rising American electorate is still economic recovery—and millennials need to see Democrats being the champions of a recovery that will allow them to rise.

Isaiah J. Poole and Ben Johnson contributed to this post.

Campaign for America’s Future, the AFL-CIO, and more than 60 national organizations today had one simple message for Congress: Repeal the sequester.

Over 300,000 activists joined forces for a national day of action in Washington and in their local communities. Protests were held across the country, with thousands of concerned citizens speaking up against the devastating impact that the sequester will have on millions of hardworking Americans. All in all, 9 percent of domestic spending and 13 percent of defense spending will be cut in a seven-month time span. Aside from the million jobs expected to be lost, the threat of a double-dip recession, and risk to our national security, the automatic cuts would have a simply egregious impact on .

Raleigh Green, a Department of Veterans Affairs worker, said that “the answer to the budget problem is not on the federal workers’ backs,” and that the middle class “didn’t create this problem.”

Green, a U.S. Army Veteran, said that although he has not been furloughed yet, “if it [the sequester] affects one of us, it affects us all,” and that Congress should “get rid of it, period,” because “the decisions they make today are going to affect me for years.”

CAF shares the sentiment of Green and the majority of Americans: “What Congress created, Congress can end,” argues Roger Hickey, co-director of CAF.

Click here to view the video on YouTube.

On this day of action, former congressman Barney Frank, a longtime advocate for a sensible federal budget, pointed out in an interview with OurFuture.org’s Isaiah J. Poole that he “voted against the sequester” and “what we should be doing is repealing the sequester.”

Frank urged members of Congress to “cut the military, cut it sensibly, don’t lay off workers,” and raise revenue through “increased taxes on the wealthy.”

The House also voted today on the Congressional Progressive Caucus’s Back to Work Budget, which Frank believes “a lot of Democratic members really believe in that budget, but are worried about it politically.” (The Back to Work Budget was defeated, 327-84, with 102 Democrats voting against the budget and 84 voting in favor.)

He concluded that Americans must keep voicing their opinion that jobs and rebuilding the working-class economy should be the priority, and members of Congress “ought to hear about it.”

Conservatives are using the sequester as leverage in their latest attempt to hold our economy and government hostage. All in all, nine percent of non-defense programs and 13 percent of defense programs will be cut in a seven-month time span. Aside from the million jobs lost, threat of a double-dip recession, and risk to our national security, the automatic cuts are simply egregious to human needs.

But what Congress created, it can end. On March 20, join CAF, more than 60 national organizations, and the AFL-CIO for a national day of actions at congressional offices and communities to ask Congress to cancel the sequester.  Here at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF), we have one simple message for Congress: “Cancel the Sequester!”

There are negotiations underway to replace the sequester, for everyone knows it only benefits a select few, but the solution is far more simple: repeal the sequester. It is time to put this manufactured crises behind us and start focusing on the urgent problems facing our country: putting America back to work, raising wages, and reducing economic inequality.

“We are proud to join with 60 national groups and 300,000 individuals to send a clear message to Congress:  End the Sequester,” said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America’s Future. “The Members of Congress at the event today understand the sequester was created by legislative action when conservatives threatened to destroy our economy by failing to raise the debt ceiling.  What Congress created, Congress can end.  And Rep. John Conyers’ proposed law does it in one sentence.  The American people do not want to paralyze important public services or choke of a very weak economy, and that’s why the movement is growing to repeal the sequester,” said Hickey.

Make sure that your voice, along with the majority of Americans, is heard by attending the national day of action and signing our petition.