By Les Leopold, AlterNet
Posted on March 23, 2011, Printed on March 29, 2011
Do public sector workers earn more than private sector workers? Who cares? This boneheaded question has us fighting over the crumbs. (And the answer is no -- all credible studies show that when you account for educational levels, the total compensation packages are about the same.)
The real question is: Why have most workers seen their standard of living stall over the last generation?
The answer is both obvious and appalling. More and more of our nation’s wealth is going to the few, while the many have seen their real wages actually decline. It’s a disgrace.
It wasn’t always so. For more than a quarter century after WWII the fruits of America's productivity were shared with average working people, year in and year out. But what exactly was being shared?
What’s productivity and who gets its benefits?
Productivity is a crucial economic measure of the total output of goods and services in our economy per hours worked. It’s not based on pay levels, only on hours worked in the economy as a whole. In effect, it measures how much human labor power it takes to produce everything we have. It makes a real difference to our standard of living if it takes 10,000 hours rather than 1,000 to build a house.
Output per working hour, although imprecise, is the best way we have to measure our level of technique, organization, skill, effort and intellectual firepower. Sure, this measure has significant flaws because it doesn’t really measure our health or environmental quality. But it does indeed measure the material side of our standard of living. When productivity grows, a society has the means to solve many problems and the means to enhance working and living conditions…but only if the fruits of productivity are shared somewhat fairly.
Productivity and who gets it is the story of the last two generations of the American middle class – one that saw a tremendous rise in its standard of living, and one that saw its way of life stall and even crumble.
From 1947 to 1975, our output per worker hour grew by more than 75 percent. At the very same time, the real wages of the average worker rose by nearly the same amount. The rise of productivity and the rise in real wages turned our working people into the largest, most vibrant middle class in the history of the world. This dramatic upward movement in material conditions gave America its supreme bragging rights in the Cold War. No one could deny that democratic capitalism delivered the goods to working people, not just to elites.
Until it didn’t.
Neo-liberalism and the stalling of middle-class income
This upwardly mobile economy changed during the 1970s, and it wasn’t an accident. That’s when our nation’s leaders embarked on a series of policies that were supposed to break down stagflation and rebuild our economic miracle. We now call it neo-liberalism. That’s when we decided to unleash innovation through deregulation, especially financial deregulation. That’s when we lowered taxes on the wealthy. That’s when we pushed forward globalization. That’s when we stopped raising the minimum wage. That’s when we undercut the labor movement. All this was supposed to make the economy boom and reignite the post-WWII economic miracle.
These policies, not the blind actions of markets, broke open the cookie jar of productivity. And there was plenty in there to take: Since 1975, productivity increased by nearly 180 percent – meaning that we almost tripled what we could produce per hour of labor. But unlike the post-WWII period, it wasn’t shared. Here are the brutal facts:
* The average real wage of the non-supervisory production workers (which comprise 82.4 percent of total private non-farm employees) actually declined by 9 percent between 1975 and 2010.
* Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw their share of national income rise from 8 percent in 1975 to 23.5 percent in 2005
* More amazing still, the wage gap between the top 100 CEOs and the average worker jumped from $45 to $1 in 1970 to an unbelievable $1,723 to $1 in 2006
* Today after the crash, financial incomes are so enormous that in 2010, John Paulson, the top hedge fund manager, earned $2.4 million an HOUR (not a misprint), and his tax rate is less than yours
I like Ike
These statistics turned me into an Eisenhower communist. I realized that our great, conservative general and president stood for policies that would never have let our nation’s productivity cookie jar get robbed. Under Ike, those earning $3 million or more (in today’s dollars) faced marginal tax rates of over 90 percent. (Yes, there were loopholes that bought the effective rates down to 70 percent. But, what’s the effective rate on the rich today? About 16 percent.) And Ike ended the Korean War. And he named and took on the military-industrial complex, which today would probably get you impeached.
Of course, the '50s weren’t nirvana. Segregation and sexism haunted all areas of society. (And besides, we only had three TV channels and no Facebook.) But our standard of living was rising as were our expectations. We expected society to improve and this formed the basis of the explosion in social equality that swept the country, starting with the Civil Rights movement in the South under Ike’s rule.
But after Vietnam damaged our economy and social cohesion, Democrats and Republicans alike drank the Kool Aid of neo-liberalism. A few sips and you could believe that markets would solve everything. Sip some more and you realized that you didn’t need to govern at all. You only needed to get government out of the way (while also undercutting labor laws, removing trade barriers, permitting mega-mergers, destroying Glass-Steagall, passing tighter rules on debtors, etc.). Then out you go to make some real money. It the '50s, it was fabulous to become a millionaire. By the 1980s that was chump change. Unless you’re Bernie Sanders, becoming a politician put you on the fast track to Wall Street.
It’s not just that theft of society’s productivity is unfair. It’s also incredibly dangerous. We learned both in 1929 and in 2008 that when you combine financial deregulation with too much money in the hands of the few you get a casino, a bubble, and then a crash. In the most recent crash, the super-rich had so much capital they ran out of real investments in goods and services. So Wall Street came up with new exotic bets on subprime loans to soak up the excess capital. But the fundamental cause was that the super-rich walked off with years and years of productivity gains that should have gone to working people in the form of higher wages and benefits. Show me a worker who invests in synthetic CDOs.
Watching politicians pit public and private employees against each other is the cruelest joke of this entire crash.
First of all, there would be no state and local budget gaps were it not for the fact that the Wall Street crash destroyed more than 8 million jobs in a matter of months. In any rational world, the Wall Street gamblers would be paying reparations for the damage they’ve caused, rather setting record profits based on our bailouts.
Second, the richest hedge fund honchos are the glorious beneficiaries of a tax loophole that allows them to pay a maximum federal rate of 15 percent instead of 35 percent. Closing that loophole on just the 25 richest hedge fund managers produces twice the revenue as does Obama’s wage freeze on two million federal employees.
So join me in waving Chairman Ike’s little red book. Close the hedge fund loophole and jack up the top income tax rates – way up to where they belong. Raise the minimum wage and index it permanently to inflation. Invest in infrastructure and education to put our people back to work. And stop wasting our resources on war and weapons that no one needs, or on wasteful arguments about how many teachers and cops to fire.
Ike was a staunch capitalist and usually believed in the invisible hand of the market. But he wouldn’t be letting it give us the finger.
http://www.alternet.org/story/150343/the_real_story_of_our_economy:_why_our_standard_of_living_has_stalled_out?page=entire
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Despite $3.2 Billion Tax Credit, GE To Demand Deep Cuts From Union. Shock Doctrine, Anyone?
March 29, 2011 06:00 PM
By Susie Madrak
By Susie Madrak
My, they do take the Big Brass Ones award! They still don't get it. This country is so close to the edge, and they've decided to take it all the way over. (Maybe they figure workers should cover potential liability from their crappy nuclear power plants?) Mike Elk at Think Progress:
Last week, the New York Times reported that, despite making $14.2 billion in profits, General Electric, the largest corporation in the United States, paid zero U.S. taxes in 2010 and actually received tax credits of $3.2 billion dollars. The article noted that GE’s tax avoidance team is comprised of “former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.”
After not paying any taxes and making huge profits, ThinkProgress has learned that General Electric is expected to ask its nearly 15,000 unionized employees in the United States to make major concessions.
This year, 14 unions representing more than 15,000 workers will negotiate a new master contract with General Electric. Among the major concessions GE has signaled that it will ask of union workers is the elimination of a defined contribution benefit pension for new employees, a move the company has already implemented for its non-union salaried employees. Likewise, GE is signaling to the union that it will ask for the elimination of current health insurance plans in favor of lower quality health saving accounts, a move the company has already implemented for non-union salaried employees as well.
In addition, General Electric may ask some workers for a wage freeze. Since the recession began in 2007, GE threatened to close plants in Schenectady, NY and Louisville, KY unless workers took wage concessions and adopted two-tier wage structure. In an interview with ThinkProgress, Mark Haller, a machinist at General Electric locomotive factory in Erie, PA, said:
The company I work for paid no federal taxes last year, but we all get these mass emails from GE asking us to call our Congressman to fund the useless, alternative GE engine for the F-35. As taxpayers, we are subsidizing the profits of this company to a huge extent and now after making the company even more profitable, they are asking us to make concessions on pensions, benefits, and perhaps even wages. You wonder why there is a jobs crisis in this country with a guy like G.E. CEO Jeff Immelt heading the President’s Jobs Commission.
In 2003, union workers at 16 different General Electric factories engaged in a strike when G.E. proposed to cut their health care. Workers are mobilizing again this year. They have planned a rally that is expected to attract 10,000 workers from all over the country at the General Electric Locomotive Factory in Erie, PA on June 4th.
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/despite-32-billion-tax-credit-ge-dema
Florida Legislature proves once and for all that it is for sale
By Howard Troxler, Times Columnist
In Print: Sunday, March 27, 2011
These are harsh words for a Sunday morning, but the occasion screams out for them. I take them from the Bible; please forgive me.
The Florida Legislature proved this past week, once and for all, that it is the utter Whore of Babylon.
It is now legal in our state to pay off the Legislature directly. Who says so? The Legislature.
This is not a joke.
This is not satire.
This is Florida — where the laws of our democracy are now openly, officially For Sale.
On Thursday afternoon, with greedy lip-smacking speed, the Legislature voted to relegalize a bygone and corrupt institution, outlawed in this state for more than two decades, known as "leadership funds."
These "leadership funds" are campaign slush funds operated legally and officially by the leaders of the Legislature themselves:
The speaker of the Florida House and his chosen successor, the "speaker designate."
The president of the Florida Senate and his successor.
The leaders of the minority party in the House and Senate.
So now, just as it was in Florida's corrupt past, if you are an interest group that wants a law passed, you simply go to the leaders of the House and Senate …
And you pay them off directly.
I feel the need to repeat: This is not a joke.
This is now the law of Florida, as of Thursday — for they tripped over themselves to make it effective immediately.
And so this is our stewardship of the great nation birthed by Washington and Jefferson and preserved by Lincoln.
This is the American legislative process once practiced by Clay and Webster.
This is what we have come to.
"Lawmakers" walking around with open gunny sacks, selling the democracy, frankly, proudly, wickedly, shamelessly, amorally.
Good God.
• • •
If you tell yourself a lie, and if everybody around you tells the exact same lie, and it is vitally important that all of you believe it — then all of you will believe it.
Especially if you all profit from it.
And so every single person in Tallahassee who voted for this outrageously wicked law on Thursday will tell you exactly the same lie:
It's an improvement.
It's a reform.
Here is Tallahassee thinking. Here is how they rationalize it:
See, it will be better if interest groups can just pay off the Legislature directly. We will list the contributions in a separate report and everybody can see it. This will be more "transparent."
Yes, a nice, separate report! Makes me feel better!
Except for two tiny, teeny things:
1. The money is laundered anyway.
They turn right around and pour their ill-gotten money into local elections around the state to perpetuate their power. Local candidates Smith and Jones are still being bankrolled by corporations, or unions as the case may be, hidden through the leadership funds.
2. The second teeny, tiny problem is, in case I have not adequately mentioned it …
THE LEGISLATURE IS BEING PAID OFF
Good grief! Jehoshaphat! Are you kidding me? Are you kidding?
In what universe should the very writers of law in a democracy operate their own slush funds, into which those seeking favorable treatment can pour money?
Listen:
If you are personal friends with, or a fellow Rotary member of, a Florida legislator who voted for this — heck, if you are married to someone who voted for this — you will want to believe him or her. This is human nature. It is loyalty. It is understandable.
Ed Hooper of Clearwater. Peter Nehr of Tarpon Springs.
Jeff Brandes of St. Petersburg, who promised to take people to the "woodshed." (Did he mean, so they could give money there?)
Jim Frishe of St. Petersburg. Dana Young of Tampa. Will Weatherford of Wesley Chapel, the next speaker, whom I like tremendously.
I am sure that if you are among their friends or family, you will want to believe them. They will speak very smoothly about it.
But here is the reality. Here is the truth.
Legislators. Sworn to the sacred duty of writing the laws of a free people. Taking legal, direct payoffs from those seeking favorable laws.
If you can swallow that, then your moral relativism knows no bounds.
• • •
Here is who voted for this from our part of the state, and who voted against it.
Senators voting yes:
Dennis Jones, R-Treasure Island; Jack Latvala, R-St. Petersburg; Jim Norman, R-Tampa; Ronda Storms, R-Brandon.
Senators voting no:
Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey; Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland; Arthenia Joyner, D-Tampa.
House members voting yes:
Larry Ahern, R-Seminole; Jim Boyd, R-Bradenton; Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg; Rachel Burgin, R-Riverview; Richard Corcoran, R-New Port Richey; Jim Frishe, R-St. Petersburg; Rich Glorioso, R-Plant City; James Grant, R-Tampa; Shawn Harrison, R-Tampa; Ed Hooper, R-Clearwater; John Legg, R-New Port Richey; Seth McKeel, R-Lakeland; Peter Nehr, R-Tarpon Springs; Rob Schenck, R-Spring Hill; Jimmie Smith, R-Inverness; Greg Steube, R-Bradenton; Will Weatherford, R-Wesley Chapel; Dana Young, R-Tampa.
House members voting no:
Janet Cruz, D-Tampa; Richard Kriseman, D-St. Petersburg; Betty Reed, D-Tampa; Darryl Rouson, D-St. Petersburg.
Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city!
[Last modified: Mar 26, 2011 10:54 PM]
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/florida-legislature-proves-once-and-for-all-that-it-is-for-sale/1159953?r44b=no
In Print: Sunday, March 27, 2011
These are harsh words for a Sunday morning, but the occasion screams out for them. I take them from the Bible; please forgive me.
The Florida Legislature proved this past week, once and for all, that it is the utter Whore of Babylon.
It is now legal in our state to pay off the Legislature directly. Who says so? The Legislature.
This is not a joke.
This is not satire.
This is Florida — where the laws of our democracy are now openly, officially For Sale.
On Thursday afternoon, with greedy lip-smacking speed, the Legislature voted to relegalize a bygone and corrupt institution, outlawed in this state for more than two decades, known as "leadership funds."
These "leadership funds" are campaign slush funds operated legally and officially by the leaders of the Legislature themselves:
The speaker of the Florida House and his chosen successor, the "speaker designate."
The president of the Florida Senate and his successor.
The leaders of the minority party in the House and Senate.
So now, just as it was in Florida's corrupt past, if you are an interest group that wants a law passed, you simply go to the leaders of the House and Senate …
And you pay them off directly.
I feel the need to repeat: This is not a joke.
This is now the law of Florida, as of Thursday — for they tripped over themselves to make it effective immediately.
And so this is our stewardship of the great nation birthed by Washington and Jefferson and preserved by Lincoln.
This is the American legislative process once practiced by Clay and Webster.
This is what we have come to.
"Lawmakers" walking around with open gunny sacks, selling the democracy, frankly, proudly, wickedly, shamelessly, amorally.
Good God.
• • •
If you tell yourself a lie, and if everybody around you tells the exact same lie, and it is vitally important that all of you believe it — then all of you will believe it.
Especially if you all profit from it.
And so every single person in Tallahassee who voted for this outrageously wicked law on Thursday will tell you exactly the same lie:
It's an improvement.
It's a reform.
Here is Tallahassee thinking. Here is how they rationalize it:
See, it will be better if interest groups can just pay off the Legislature directly. We will list the contributions in a separate report and everybody can see it. This will be more "transparent."
Yes, a nice, separate report! Makes me feel better!
Except for two tiny, teeny things:
1. The money is laundered anyway.
They turn right around and pour their ill-gotten money into local elections around the state to perpetuate their power. Local candidates Smith and Jones are still being bankrolled by corporations, or unions as the case may be, hidden through the leadership funds.
2. The second teeny, tiny problem is, in case I have not adequately mentioned it …
THE LEGISLATURE IS BEING PAID OFF
Good grief! Jehoshaphat! Are you kidding me? Are you kidding?
In what universe should the very writers of law in a democracy operate their own slush funds, into which those seeking favorable treatment can pour money?
Listen:
If you are personal friends with, or a fellow Rotary member of, a Florida legislator who voted for this — heck, if you are married to someone who voted for this — you will want to believe him or her. This is human nature. It is loyalty. It is understandable.
Ed Hooper of Clearwater. Peter Nehr of Tarpon Springs.
Jeff Brandes of St. Petersburg, who promised to take people to the "woodshed." (Did he mean, so they could give money there?)
Jim Frishe of St. Petersburg. Dana Young of Tampa. Will Weatherford of Wesley Chapel, the next speaker, whom I like tremendously.
I am sure that if you are among their friends or family, you will want to believe them. They will speak very smoothly about it.
But here is the reality. Here is the truth.
Legislators. Sworn to the sacred duty of writing the laws of a free people. Taking legal, direct payoffs from those seeking favorable laws.
If you can swallow that, then your moral relativism knows no bounds.
• • •
Here is who voted for this from our part of the state, and who voted against it.
Senators voting yes:
Dennis Jones, R-Treasure Island; Jack Latvala, R-St. Petersburg; Jim Norman, R-Tampa; Ronda Storms, R-Brandon.
Senators voting no:
Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey; Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland; Arthenia Joyner, D-Tampa.
House members voting yes:
Larry Ahern, R-Seminole; Jim Boyd, R-Bradenton; Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg; Rachel Burgin, R-Riverview; Richard Corcoran, R-New Port Richey; Jim Frishe, R-St. Petersburg; Rich Glorioso, R-Plant City; James Grant, R-Tampa; Shawn Harrison, R-Tampa; Ed Hooper, R-Clearwater; John Legg, R-New Port Richey; Seth McKeel, R-Lakeland; Peter Nehr, R-Tarpon Springs; Rob Schenck, R-Spring Hill; Jimmie Smith, R-Inverness; Greg Steube, R-Bradenton; Will Weatherford, R-Wesley Chapel; Dana Young, R-Tampa.
House members voting no:
Janet Cruz, D-Tampa; Richard Kriseman, D-St. Petersburg; Betty Reed, D-Tampa; Darryl Rouson, D-St. Petersburg.
Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city!
[Last modified: Mar 26, 2011 10:54 PM]
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/florida-legislature-proves-once-and-for-all-that-it-is-for-sale/1159953?r44b=no
Depleted uranium: a strange way to protect Libyan civilians
by David Wilson
Global Research, March 27, 2011
Stop the War Coalition - 2011-03-26
In the first 24 hours of the Libyan attack, US B-2s dropped forty-five 2,000-pound bombs. These massive bombs, along with the Cruise missiles launched from British and French planes and ships, all contained depleted uranium (DU) warheads.
DU is the waste product from the process of enriching uranium ore. It is used in nuclear weapons and reactors. Because it is a very heavy substance, 1.7 times denser than lead, it is highly valued by the military for its ability to punch through armored vehicles and buildings. When a weapon made with a DU tip strikes a solid object like the side of a tank, it goes straight through it, then erupts in a burning cloud of vapor. The vapor settles as dust, which is not only poisonous, but also radioactive.
An impacting DU missile burns at 10,000 degrees C. When it strikes a target, 30% fragments into shrapnel. The remaining 70% vaporises into three highly-toxic oxides, including uranium oxide. This black dust remains suspended in the air and, according to wind and weather, can travel over great distances. If you think Iraq and Libya are far away, remember that radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales.
Particles less than 5 microns in diameter are easily inhaled and may remain in the lungs or other organs for years. Internalized DU can cause kidney damage, cancers of the lung and bone, skin disorders, neurocognitive disorders, chromosome damage, immune deficiency syndromes and rare kidney and bowel diseases. Pregnant women exposed to DU may give birth to infants with genetic defects. Once the dust has vaporised, don't expect the problem to go away soon. As an alpha particle emitter, DU has a half life of 4.5 billion years.
In the 'shock and awe' attack on Iraq, more than 1,500 bombs and missiles were dropped on Baghdad alone. Seymour Hersh has claimed that the US Third Marine Aircraft Wing alone dropped more than "five hundred thousand tons of ordnance". All of it DU-tipped.
Al Jazeera reported that invading US forces fired two hundred tons of radioactive material into buildings, homes, streets and gardens of Baghdad. A reporter from the Christian Science Monitor took a Geiger counter to parts of the city that had been subjected to heavy shelling by US troops. He found radiation levels 1,000 to 1,900 times higher than normal in residential areas. With its population of 26 million, the US dropped a one-ton bomb for every 52 Iraqi citizens or 40 pounds of explosives per person.
William Hague has said that we are in Libya " to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas".You don't have to look far for who and what are being 'protected'.
In that first 24 hours the 'Allies' 'expended' £100 million on DU-tipped ordnance. The European Union's arms control report said member states issued licences in 2009 for the sale of £293.2 million worth of weapons and weapons systems to Libya. Britain issued arms firms licences for the sale of £21.7 million worth of weaponry to Libya and were also paid by Colonel Gadaffi to send the SAS to train his 32nd Brigade.
For the next 4.5 billion years, I'll bet that William Hague will not be holidaying in North Africa.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23985
Global Research, March 27, 2011
Stop the War Coalition - 2011-03-26
In the first 24 hours of the Libyan attack, US B-2s dropped forty-five 2,000-pound bombs. These massive bombs, along with the Cruise missiles launched from British and French planes and ships, all contained depleted uranium (DU) warheads.
DU is the waste product from the process of enriching uranium ore. It is used in nuclear weapons and reactors. Because it is a very heavy substance, 1.7 times denser than lead, it is highly valued by the military for its ability to punch through armored vehicles and buildings. When a weapon made with a DU tip strikes a solid object like the side of a tank, it goes straight through it, then erupts in a burning cloud of vapor. The vapor settles as dust, which is not only poisonous, but also radioactive.
An impacting DU missile burns at 10,000 degrees C. When it strikes a target, 30% fragments into shrapnel. The remaining 70% vaporises into three highly-toxic oxides, including uranium oxide. This black dust remains suspended in the air and, according to wind and weather, can travel over great distances. If you think Iraq and Libya are far away, remember that radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales.
Particles less than 5 microns in diameter are easily inhaled and may remain in the lungs or other organs for years. Internalized DU can cause kidney damage, cancers of the lung and bone, skin disorders, neurocognitive disorders, chromosome damage, immune deficiency syndromes and rare kidney and bowel diseases. Pregnant women exposed to DU may give birth to infants with genetic defects. Once the dust has vaporised, don't expect the problem to go away soon. As an alpha particle emitter, DU has a half life of 4.5 billion years.
In the 'shock and awe' attack on Iraq, more than 1,500 bombs and missiles were dropped on Baghdad alone. Seymour Hersh has claimed that the US Third Marine Aircraft Wing alone dropped more than "five hundred thousand tons of ordnance". All of it DU-tipped.
Al Jazeera reported that invading US forces fired two hundred tons of radioactive material into buildings, homes, streets and gardens of Baghdad. A reporter from the Christian Science Monitor took a Geiger counter to parts of the city that had been subjected to heavy shelling by US troops. He found radiation levels 1,000 to 1,900 times higher than normal in residential areas. With its population of 26 million, the US dropped a one-ton bomb for every 52 Iraqi citizens or 40 pounds of explosives per person.
William Hague has said that we are in Libya " to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas".You don't have to look far for who and what are being 'protected'.
In that first 24 hours the 'Allies' 'expended' £100 million on DU-tipped ordnance. The European Union's arms control report said member states issued licences in 2009 for the sale of £293.2 million worth of weapons and weapons systems to Libya. Britain issued arms firms licences for the sale of £21.7 million worth of weaponry to Libya and were also paid by Colonel Gadaffi to send the SAS to train his 32nd Brigade.
For the next 4.5 billion years, I'll bet that William Hague will not be holidaying in North Africa.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23985
Sen. Fitzgerald leaned on bureau staffers to publish law, testimony suggests
JESSICA VANEGEREN | The Capital Times | jvanegeren@madison.com
Posted: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 2:40 pm
Three visibly uncomfortable staffers of the Legislative Reference Bureau, including the bureau director, testified Tuesday about what appears to be a pivotal, early morning meeting with Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald that led to the bureau publishing the controversial collective bargaining bill.
Stephen Miller, the bureau's director, said that he arrived to work around 9:15 a.m. on Friday, March 25, and was soon made aware of a 9:30 a.m. meeting with Fitzgerald, R-Juneau.
Miller said he did not know what the meeting was about until after it began.
Miller said Fitzgerald then expressed to those in attendance that "we should publish it."
According to testimony, Senate Chief Clerk Rob Marchant, Cathlene Hanaman, the deputy chief of the bureau, and Jeff Kuesel, an attorney with the reference bureau, were also present at the meeting.
The hearing Tuesday before Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi had been scheduled to review the judge's March 18 temporary restraining order barring Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing Gov. Scott Walker's controversial budget repair bill. But it also included testimony concerning the bill's publication Friday by the reference bureau.
Signed by Walker on March 11, the bill eliminates nearly all collective bargaining rights for most public employees. By law, the secretary of state has 10 days to publish a bill after it is signed by the governor. It then takes effect the next day.
This process was interrupted, however, when Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne filed suit charging a hastily called meeting of lawmakers March 9 violated the state's open meetings law. The meeting was a first step toward the Senate approving the bill later that evening, with the Assembly voting on it the following day.
Hanaman said Fitzgerald was told at Friday's meeting that a bill does not become law until after it is published by the secretary of state. When pressed by Attorney Robert Jambrois, who is representing Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, over whether Fitzgerald "insisted" the bill be published by the reference bureau on March 25, Hanaman hesitated several times before answering.
"He is our boss," she finally said. "His asking could be seen as insisting."
Miller then testified that Fitzgerald told him to call Kevin St. John at the Attorney General's Office if he had any questions. Miller said he had only called the Attorney General's Office a few other times since he began working at the bureau in 1998. Miller said he was not aware St. John was the deputy attorney general, or No. 2 in command.
"I was already committed to doing it (publishing the bill), but I wanted to clarify my thinking on it," Miller said. "I though it might make me feel better."
Miller said his conversation with St. John was brief. He said St. John told him the reference bureau would be acting in accordance with state statute and could be subject to civil action if it decided not to publish it.
Sumi said the hearing would continue through Tuesday afternoon and resume Friday before a ruling was made by the court.
Miller has repeatedly stated that he did not believe the actions of the non-partisan reference bureau would make the bill law.
The state, however, has stopped collecting union dues from state employee paychecks and the state Department of Administration has indicated state employee paychecks, as of April 21, will reflect the 12.6 percent health-care contribution and 5.8 percent contribution toward pensions contained in the budget repair bill.
http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_89f28044-5a3c-11e0-a5ad-001cc4c03286.html
Posted: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 2:40 pm
Three visibly uncomfortable staffers of the Legislative Reference Bureau, including the bureau director, testified Tuesday about what appears to be a pivotal, early morning meeting with Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald that led to the bureau publishing the controversial collective bargaining bill.
Stephen Miller, the bureau's director, said that he arrived to work around 9:15 a.m. on Friday, March 25, and was soon made aware of a 9:30 a.m. meeting with Fitzgerald, R-Juneau.
Miller said he did not know what the meeting was about until after it began.
Miller said Fitzgerald then expressed to those in attendance that "we should publish it."
According to testimony, Senate Chief Clerk Rob Marchant, Cathlene Hanaman, the deputy chief of the bureau, and Jeff Kuesel, an attorney with the reference bureau, were also present at the meeting.
The hearing Tuesday before Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi had been scheduled to review the judge's March 18 temporary restraining order barring Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing Gov. Scott Walker's controversial budget repair bill. But it also included testimony concerning the bill's publication Friday by the reference bureau.
Signed by Walker on March 11, the bill eliminates nearly all collective bargaining rights for most public employees. By law, the secretary of state has 10 days to publish a bill after it is signed by the governor. It then takes effect the next day.
This process was interrupted, however, when Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne filed suit charging a hastily called meeting of lawmakers March 9 violated the state's open meetings law. The meeting was a first step toward the Senate approving the bill later that evening, with the Assembly voting on it the following day.
Hanaman said Fitzgerald was told at Friday's meeting that a bill does not become law until after it is published by the secretary of state. When pressed by Attorney Robert Jambrois, who is representing Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, over whether Fitzgerald "insisted" the bill be published by the reference bureau on March 25, Hanaman hesitated several times before answering.
"He is our boss," she finally said. "His asking could be seen as insisting."
Miller then testified that Fitzgerald told him to call Kevin St. John at the Attorney General's Office if he had any questions. Miller said he had only called the Attorney General's Office a few other times since he began working at the bureau in 1998. Miller said he was not aware St. John was the deputy attorney general, or No. 2 in command.
"I was already committed to doing it (publishing the bill), but I wanted to clarify my thinking on it," Miller said. "I though it might make me feel better."
Miller said his conversation with St. John was brief. He said St. John told him the reference bureau would be acting in accordance with state statute and could be subject to civil action if it decided not to publish it.
Sumi said the hearing would continue through Tuesday afternoon and resume Friday before a ruling was made by the court.
Miller has repeatedly stated that he did not believe the actions of the non-partisan reference bureau would make the bill law.
The state, however, has stopped collecting union dues from state employee paychecks and the state Department of Administration has indicated state employee paychecks, as of April 21, will reflect the 12.6 percent health-care contribution and 5.8 percent contribution toward pensions contained in the budget repair bill.
http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_89f28044-5a3c-11e0-a5ad-001cc4c03286.html
Billionaire self-pity and the Koch brothers
By Glenn Greenwald
Sunday, Mar 27, 2011 10:28 ET
Since the financial crisis of 2008, one of the most revealing spectacles has been the parade of financial elites who petulantly insist that they are the victims of societal hostility: political officials heap too much blame on them, public policy burdens them so unfairly, the public resents them, and -- most amazingly of all -- President Obama is a radical egalitarian who is unprecedentedly hostile to business interests. One particularly illustrative example was the whiny little multi-millionaire hedge fund manager (and CNBC contributor), Anthony Scaramucci, who stood up at an October, 201o, town hall meeting and demanded to know: "when are we going to stop whacking at the Wall Street pinata?"
Sunday, Mar 27, 2011 10:28 ET
Since the financial crisis of 2008, one of the most revealing spectacles has been the parade of financial elites who petulantly insist that they are the victims of societal hostility: political officials heap too much blame on them, public policy burdens them so unfairly, the public resents them, and -- most amazingly of all -- President Obama is a radical egalitarian who is unprecedentedly hostile to business interests. One particularly illustrative example was the whiny little multi-millionaire hedge fund manager (and CNBC contributor), Anthony Scaramucci, who stood up at an October, 201o, town hall meeting and demanded to know: "when are we going to stop whacking at the Wall Street pinata?"
The Weekly Standard now has a very lengthy defense of -- including rare interviews with -- Charles and David Koch, the libertarian billionaires who fund everything from right-wing economic policy, union-busting, and anti-climate-change advocacy to civil liberties and liberalized social policies -- though far more the former goals than the latter. In this article one finds the purest and most instructive expression of billionaire self-pity that I think I've ever seen -- one that is as self-absorbed and detached from reality as it destructive. It's really worth examining their revealed mindset to see how those who wield the greatest financial power (and thus the greatest political power) think of themselves and those who are outside of their class.
I'm not someone who sees the Koch Brothers as some sort of unique threat. I mostly regard them as little more than a symbol of the death of democratic values in the U.S. -- the way in which the possession of vast financial resources is an absolute prerequisite to making any impact on the national political process, and conversely, how those without such resources are politically inconsequential and impotent (short of their fomenting serious social unrest). Every political movement needs demons lurking behind every problem -- the more hidden and omnipotent the better -- and the Koch Brothers now serve the same function for the Left as George Soros long served for the Right: the bogeymen who motivate the loyalists and on whom everything bad, including political losses, can be blamed.
There's no question in my mind that the unrestrained power over the political process and both political parties enjoyed by oligarchs is the single greatest political problem the country faces -- the overarching problem -- but in the scheme of corporate and oligarchical dominance, the Koch Brothers are a small part of that dynamic. Nor do I believe that they're motivated in their political activism by personal profit: for people with a net worth of $20 billion, there are vastly more efficient ways to convert one's wealth into greater wealth than spending money to influence public policy; I think they're True Believers.
That said, this Weekly Standard interview shows how delusional and extreme the Koch Brothers are -- though in ways quite representative of other resentful elites. Let's begin with this:
Ask Charles Koch what he thinks about Obama and he looks like he’s just bit into a lemon. "He's a dedicated egalitarian," Charles said. "I'm not saying he's a Marxist, but he's internalized some Marxist models -- that is, that business tends to be successful by exploiting its customers and workers."
David agreed. "He's the most radical president we’ve ever had as a nation," he said, "and has done more damage to the free enterprise system and long-term prosperity than any president we’ve ever had." David suggested the president’s radicalism was tied to his upbringing. "His father was a hard core economic socialist in Kenya," he said. "Obama didn’t really interact with his father face-to-face very much, but was apparently from what I read a great admirer of his father’s points of view. So he had sort of antibusiness, anti-free enterprise influences affecting him almost all his life. It just shows you what a person with a silver tongue can achieve."
So Barack Obama is a "dedicated egalitarian" who has "internalized Marxist" ideas in the Kenyan socialist tradition. Just compare that to actual facts. From The Huffington Post today:
Despite high unemployment and a largely languishing real estate market, U.S. businesses are more profitable than ever, according to federal figures released on Friday.
U.S. corporate profits hit an all-time high at the end of 2010, with financial firms showing some of the biggest gains, data from the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis show. Corporations reported an annualized $1.68 trillion in profit in the fourth quarter. The previous record, without being adjusted for inflation, was $1.65 trillion in the third quarter of 2006.
Many of the nation's preeminent companies have posted massive increases in profits this year. General Electric posted worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, while profits at JPMorgan Chase were up 47 percent to $4.8 billion.
Since Obama was inaugurated, the Dow Jones has increased more than 50% -- from 8,000 to more than 12,000; the wealthiest recieved a massive tax cut; the top marginal tax rate was three times less than during the Eisenhower years and substantially lower than during the Reagan years; income and wealth inequality are so vast and rising that it is easily at Third World levels; meanwhile, "the share of U.S. taxes paid by corporations has fallen from 30 percent of federal revenue in the 1950s to 6.6 percent in 2009." During this same time period, the unemployment rate has increased from 7.7% to 8.9%; millions of Americans have had their homes foreclosed; and the number of Americans living below the poverty line increased by many millions, the largest number since the statistic has been recorded. Can you smell Obama's radical egalitarianism and Marxist anti-business hatred yet?
Then there are those whom Obama has empowered. His first chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is a business-revering corporatist who made close to $20 million in 3 short years as an investment banker, while his second, Bill Daley, served for years as JP Morgan's Midwest Chairman. His Treasury Secretary is undoubtedly the most loyal and dedicated servant Wall Street has ever had in that position, while Goldman Sachs officials occupy so many key positions in his administration that a former IMF and Salomon Brothers executive condemned what he called "Goldman Sachs's seeming lock on high-level U.S. Treasury jobs." Obama's former OMB Director recently left to take a multi-million-dollar position with Citigroup. From the start, Obama's economic policies were shaped by the Wall Street-revering neo-liberal Rubinites who did so much to serve corporate America during the Clinton years. Meanwhile, the President's choice to head his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness -- General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt -- heads a corporation that "despite $14.2 billion in worldwide profits - including more than $5 billion from U.S. operations - [] did not owe taxes in 2010": an appointment the White House still defends.
Some of these trends pre-date Obama, but few have been retarded during his presidency, while many have accelerated. Whether one finds this state of affairs desirable or not, no rational person can describe them as the by-product of a Marxist, business-hating egalitarian. Quite the opposite. The political power of America's richest has never been greater, and the level of their responsibility and collective burden has never been less. Meanwhile, for ordinary Americans, the remaining remnants of their financial security and middle class comforts rapidly erodes. It's true that the U.S. Government has little regard for the free market: they intervene constantly in the free market on behalf of the nation's wealthiest and most powerful business interests; it's crony capitalism, corporatism: government run by corporations (or, as Dick Durbin said of the Congress in which he serves: "the banks own the place").
For billionaires to see themselves as the True Victims, to complain that the President and the Government are waging some sort of war against them in the name of radical egalitarianism, is so removed from reality -- universes away -- that's it's hard to put into words. And the fiscal recklessness that the Kochs and their comrades tirelessly point to was a direct by-product of the last decade's rule by the Republican Party which they fund: from unfunded, endless wars to a never-ending expansion of the privatized National Security and Surveillance States to the financial crisis that exploded during the Bush presidency. But whatever else is true, there are many victims of fiscal policy in America: the wealthiest business interests and billionaires like the Koch Brothers are the few who are not among them.
Then, quite relatedly, we have a slew of complaints that the Koch Brothers are being so terribly persecuted by all the protests and criticisms directed at them. Just behold this carousel of whiny self-victimhood:
Koch's secretary said that an editor for a left-wing website, the Buffalo Beast, had telephoned the governor posing as David Koch and recorded the conversation. And Walker had fallen for it! He'd had a 20-minute conversation with this bozo, not once questioning the caller’s identity. . . .
Anger washed over David like a red tide. He'd been victimized by some punk with a political agenda. "It's really identity theft," he told me a month later, during an interview at Koch Industries’ headquarters. "And I think it's extremely dishonest to misrepresent yourself. I think there’s a question of integrity. And the person who would do that has got to be an incredibly dishonest person."
David found the whole affair disturbing. "One additional thing that really bothered me," he said, "was that the press attacked me rather than the guy who impersonated me! And I was criticized as someone who’s got a death grip on the governor and his policies. And that I control him -- I mean, that’s insane!” . . .
As the media campaign intensified, demonstrators started showing up at the Koch campus in Wichita. A left-wing blogger ambushed David when he traveled to Washington to see the 112th Congress sworn in. The liberal group Common Cause organized a protest at the most recent Koch fundraising seminar in Palm Springs. The lefties outside the hotel unfurled a white banner with the words "Koch Kills" printed in red. Drops of blood fell from each letter. "These people were very, very extreme," David said, "and I think very dangerous" . . . "But that was pretty shocking, to see what we’re up against, or what the country’s up against: to have an element like this."
Oh, my: journalists were more interested in discussing the fact that the Wisconsin Governor spent a full 20 minutes briefing a billionaire donor in the middle of his career-defining political crisis than they were analyzing the journalistic ethics of an obscure Internet muckraker. And what a travesty that the Koch Brothers -- after spending hundreds of millions of dollars to shape American politics and advocate for policies that will affect the lives of tens of millions of people -- have to endure scrutiny, and questions, and protests, and criticisms, and anger! Does the unfairness never end for them?
As anyone who writes about politics can tell you, having vitriol and slander regularly heaped on you is part of the price one pays for the benefit of having a platform; only the most self-absorbed complain and see it as some sort of unique cross to bear. But the Koch brothers go far beyond mere writing about political issues. They single-handedly fund advocacy groups and covert campaigns on a wide variety of highly controversial issues that adversely impact huge numbers of people. That they expect to be able to do that without any vigorous response or opposition or anger is just reflective of their oozing sense of entitlement: the same syndrome that leads them to perversely believe that the True Victims in America's political culture are its wealthiest and most powerful.
This strain of delusional self-victimization is not uncommon. One commonly finds those who are the strongest and most powerful convincing themselves that they are the oppressed and the marginalized. Many Americans believe that -- as they invade, bomb and occupy countless Muslim countries -- that they are the ones being victimized by the Muslim world, while many Israelis and their loyalists believe that the nuclear-armed, constantly invading, occupying and bombing nation is the real victim of aggression and militarism in the Middle East. In Imperial Ambitions, Noam Chomsky described this inverted sense of victimhood in the foreign policy context this way:
In one of his many speeches, to U.S. troops in Vietnam, [Lyndon] Johnson said plaintively, "There are three billion people in the world and we have only two hundred million of them. We are outnumbered fifteen to one. If might did make right they would sweep over the United States and take what we have. We have what they want." That is a constant refrain of imperialism. You have your jackboot on someone's neck and they're about to destroy you.
The same is true with any form of oppression. And it's psychologically understandable. If you're crushing and destroying someone, you have to have a reason for it, and it can't be, "I'm a murderous monster." It has to be self-defense. "I'm protecting myself against them. Look what they're doing to me." Oppression gets psychologically inverted; the oppressor is the victim who is defending himself.
This is exactly the psychological affliction that leads Wall Street plunderers and tycoons and billionaires to see themselves as the victims of the resentful lower-classes and the "radical egalitarians" who run the U.S. Government. Even as they get richer and everyone else gets poorer, even as the very few remaining restraints on their political power are abolished, even as the disparities in wealth and power grow ever-larger, they become increasingly convinced that everything is stacked against them, that there is a grand conspiracy to deprive them of what is rightfully theirs. All of this could be confined to a fascinating, abstract psychological study if not for the fact that the people who think this way exercise the most political power and continue to exercise more and more.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/03/27/kochJudge approves $250,000 settlement for Bush inauguration protesters
By David Edwards
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011 -- 3:48 pm
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011 -- 3:48 pm
A group of about 70 protesters who were arrested after the 2005 inauguration of President George W. Bush will receive at least $2,000 each, according to a settlement approved in a Washington federal court.
Police had arrested the demonstrators, claiming the group was vandalizing a Washington D.C. neighborhood.
"It's not a reflection on all demonstrators," Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey said the following day. "But a hard-core group came to town and caused damage to property... You can't let them destroy the city. Nobody has a right to do that."
"They are just thugs and hoodlums who did that," he added.
Many of those arrested said that they were just bystanders who didn't deserve to be prosecuted. Others claimed that the police shot pepper spray directly in their eyes even after being restrained.
In 2008, U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huevelle ruled that all of the arrests were unconstitutional because police could not determine which of the people had actually broken the law.
A three-judge panel overturned that ruling, saying that the arrests were only proper if the crowd was "acting as a unit."
The case was scheduled for a retrial on Feb. 1, but a settlement was reached on Jan. 20.
"U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle granted preliminary approval to the settlement on March 24, subject to final approval following a public fairness hearing scheduled for Aug. 1," according to Legal Times.
The final settlement (.pdf) amount was set at $250,000. The American Civil Liberties Union and Kirkland & Ellis worked on the case pro bono and are not eligible for compensation. The Washington D.C. firm Gaffney & Schember could receive $50,000.
Two class members who claim they were assaulted by police could also receive as much as $20,000. The five class representatives are set to receive $5,000 each. The entire class, as many as 69 people, will split the remaining $160,000.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/29/judge-approves-250000-settlement-for-bush-inauguration-protesters/Wisconsin Judge AGAIN Blocks Anti-Union Law
By: David Dayen
Tuesday March 29, 2011 3:46 pm
We all know how this turned out the first time, but for the record, Judge Maryann Sumi extended the temporary restraining order against the anti-union law which strips most collective bargaining rights from public employees, and warned of sanctions for any public official who continues to implement the law.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/03/29/wisconsin-judge-again-blocks-anti-union-law/
Tuesday March 29, 2011 3:46 pm
We all know how this turned out the first time, but for the record, Judge Maryann Sumi extended the temporary restraining order against the anti-union law which strips most collective bargaining rights from public employees, and warned of sanctions for any public official who continues to implement the law.
The court hearing arose from the publication of the law by the Legislative Reference Bureau, essentially a printer for the legislature. Republicans took that to mean the bill was now law, despite the fact that a temporary restraining order was already in place blocking the Secretary of State, the only constitutional officer with the power to publish laws, from any action. Judge Sumi was clearly angered by the disregard for her order displayed by the Scott Walker Administration in this case, saying that they acted in “willful defiance” of the TRO. She added that any further actions would lead to punishment.
Walker, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau), Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald (R-Horicon), Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen and Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch all had contended the bill became law after it was published by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
In doing so, Sumi, who was appointed to the bench by former Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson, said they either “ignored or misunderstood” her original restraining order, which prohibited Democratic Secretary of State Douglas La Follette from publishing the law. According to statutes, the Secretary of State must publish a bill in the newspaper of record (Wisconsin State Journal) before it becomes a law.
“Apparently that language was either misunderstood or ignored, but what I said was the further implementation of Act 10 was enjoined. That is what I now want to make crystal clear,” Sumi said.
Sumi also noted that the Republicans could avoid the costly delays and legal proceedings by reconvening the legislature and properly approving the bill.
Judges definitely don’t like it when their rulings are completely ignored, I think that’s the moral here.
As Judge Sumi says, there’s a simple fix to the question at hand: simply run the meeting again, with the proper notice under open meetings laws. There’s no stopping the Republicans, who control both houses of the Legislature and who, according to them, are forwarding a non-fiscal bill with no quorum implications, from putting that in motion today. They have curiously refused to do so. Do they think they won’t have the votes?
Now, whether or not the bill has a fiscal impact is the subject of future litigation. But with the Democrats back from Wisconsin and the second half of the budget repair bill, the part with fiscal implications, set to come up for a vote, technically speaking this isn’t even a hurdle at the moment, granting that the Fab 14 could leave at any time.
You can read the Twitter feeds of ACLU Madison and Jessica Arp, who were in the courtroom, for more.
UPDATE: Here’s the thing. Though the judge blocked the law again from being published by the Attorney General, there is a bit of a gray area as to whether it’s currently law now. Judge Sumi’s latest restraining order “does NOT declare that the bill is not law. Sumi said she needed to hear more arguments to that effect,” according to Jessica Arp. However, she did say she would sanction anyone who tried to implement the law.
None of this matters to the state Attorney General:
But minutes later, outside the court room, Assistant Attorney General Steven Means said the legislation “absolutely” is still in effect.
The state’s just going to defy the order. Again. Eric Kleefeld has more, including linking to this story:
“There is so great a divergence now between the position that the attorney general is taking in this court and the court of appeals and now the Supreme Court and the interests of the secretary of state and the office of the secretary of state that I believe Mr. La Follette is entitled to independent counsel at the expense of the state,” said Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi.
The issue arose after La Follette grew frustrated that his attorneys were not asking questions of a witness.
“My attorney won’t ask a question on my behalf,” La Follette told the court.
The Attorney General gave an attorney to the Secretary of State who wouldn’t work on his behalf.
It’s hard to be surprised anymore by anything these guys do.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/03/29/wisconsin-judge-again-blocks-anti-union-law/
Bipartisanship Gained: Tax Cuts for the Rich, Shared Sacrifice for Everyone Else
By: Jon Walker
Monday March 28, 2011 9:59 am
Bipartisanship is rare, but it seems there is one thing governors of both parties can agree on: “Shared sacrifice” really means more tax cuts for the rich to force regular people to share all the sacrifice. This is effectively what New York’s Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo is about to push through in his state by letting the current tax rate on millionaires revert to a lower level. From the New York Times:
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/03/28/bipartisanship-gained-tax-cuts-for-the-rich-shared-sacrifice-for-everyone-else/
Monday March 28, 2011 9:59 am
Bipartisanship is rare, but it seems there is one thing governors of both parties can agree on: “Shared sacrifice” really means more tax cuts for the rich to force regular people to share all the sacrifice. This is effectively what New York’s Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo is about to push through in his state by letting the current tax rate on millionaires revert to a lower level. From the New York Times:
Dashing the hopes of many Democratic lawmakers, including the bulk of the New York City delegation, the budget did not include an extension of a temporary income tax surcharge on wealthy New Yorkers, a measure that has drawn support among Democrats and even some Senate Republicans as a way to further offset Mr. Cuomo’s proposed cuts in money for schools and other programs.
Mr. Cuomo persuaded legislative leaders to agree to a year-to-year cut of more than $2 billion in spending on health care and education, historically the two largest drivers of New York’s budget. Over all, officials said, the budget deal would reduce year-to-year spending by about 2 percent.
This is the same basic game plan we have seen from several Republican governors this year who pushed for corporate tax cuts while cutting public services or pushing regressive changes to the tax code.
Billionaire Warren Buffett is right, there is a class war underway, and his class is winning.
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/03/28/bipartisanship-gained-tax-cuts-for-the-rich-shared-sacrifice-for-everyone-else/
The New American Dream
Tuesday 29 March 2011
by: William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
by: William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
If you are wealthy, you are living in the Golden Age of your American Dream, and it's a damned fine time to be alive. The two major political parties are working hammer and tong to bless you and keep you. The laws are being re-written - often by fiat, and in defiance of court orders - to strengthen the walls separating you and your wealth from the motley masses. Your stock portfolio, mostly made by and for oil and war, continues to swell. Your banks and Wall Street shops destroyed the economy for everyone except you, and not only did they get away with it, they were handed a vast dollop of taxpayer cash as a bonus prize.
The little people probably crack you up when you bother to think about them. Their version of the American Dream is a ragged blanket too short to cover them, but they still buy into it, and that's the secret of your strength in the end. So many of them walk into the voting booths and solemnly vote against their own best interests, and for yours, because the American Dream makes them think they, too, will be rich someday. They won't - you've made sure of that - but so long as they keep believing it, your money will continue to roll in.
The Citizens United Supreme Court decision swept away the last tattered shreds of the façade of fairness in politics and electioneering, and now you own the whole store. You can use your vast financial resources to lie on a national level now, lie with your bare face hanging out, because it works. You're not the bad guy in America. Teachers, cops, firefighters, union members and public-sector employees are the bad guys, the reason for all our economic woes. NPR and Planned Parenthood are the bad guys. You did that, and when governors like Scott Walker rampage through worker's rights on your dime, you chuckle into your sleeve and enjoy your interest rate.
We're firing teachers and missiles simultaneously, to poach a line from Jon Stewart, and the inherent disconnect fails to sink in among those serving as dray horses for your greed and ambition. They're in the traces, bellowing about what you want them to focus on thanks to your total control of the "mainstream" news media, and they plow your fields with the power of their incoherent, misdirected rage.
They pay their taxes. Isn't that a hoot? They pay their taxes dutifully and annually, and that money gets shunted right to you and your friends, thanks to the politicians who love you and the laws that favor you, not to mention the wars that sustain you. They pay their taxes when they should just pay you, right? Talk about getting rid of government waste. They should just pay you directly and cut out the middle man, because it all goes to the same place in the end. You.
You are General Electric, and you paid no taxes in 2010. You made $14.2 billion in worldwide profits, $5.1 billion of which was made in America, and you're tax burden amounted to a big fat zero. In fact, you claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion, thanks to your anti-tax lobbying efforts in Washington and your use of offshore tax havens that protect and defend your profit margin.
You are ExxonMobil, and you paid no taxes in 2009. In fact, you got a $156 million return.
You are Bank of America, and despite receiving a massive chunk of the taxpayer-funded bailout, despite recording a profit of $4.4 billion, you paid no taxes and received a $1.9 billion rebate.
You are Chevron, and you made $10 billion in 2009. You paid no taxes, and got a $19 million refund.
You are Citigroup, and you paid no taxes despite earning more than $4 billion, and despite getting a sizeable chunk of the taxpayer-funded bailout.
Your favorite part of it all?
The part that makes you laugh out loud?
It's when you hear the politicians you own talk about "shared sacrifices" and "fiscal responsibility." Man, that's a hoot. You watch them rave and froth on Capitol Hill about shutting down the government because the country doesn't have enough money to fund "entitlement programs" the little people have been paying into for decades. The very term - "entitlement" - cracks you up; how is it an entitlement if people paid for it? Nobody asks that question, of course. Nobody asks about cutting the bloated defense budget. Nobody asks where the billions diverted to Iraq and Afghanistan actually went, or where the money for Libya is going. For damned sure, nobody demands that you pony up and pay your fair share. You made sure of that, and the show goes on.
The United States of America has undergone a powerful transformation over the course of a single generation, and you are right up there in the catbird seat, watching it all unfold. For you, the New American Dream is "I got mine, kiss my ass, work and die (if you can find work, sucker), and pay me." For everyone else, the New American Dream is about simple survival, about running as fast as they can while going inexorably backwards.
Maybe you can even see the cancer eating away at the country that has treated you so royally, but you don't really care. You are safe and comfortable behind your gilded walls.
For now, anyway.
http://www.truth-out.org/the-new-american-dream68847Leaving the Democrats
By: vector56
Tuesday March 29, 2011 4:35 am
After being told by Senator Tom Harkin that “half a loaf is better than none” during the health care debate; sold out by Obama’s back room dealings with big pharma; having Rahm Emanuel spit in the face of liberals as a hobby; having Obama double crossing us on the public option; Chris (banker boy) Dodd, and Barney Frank pretending to be populist crusaders, while selling us out to the “banksters”; watching Obama totally reversing his position on NSA spying on US citizens; Max Baucus and Obama taking single payer off the table; Nancy Pelosi taking impeachment off the table; on to infinity….
I have decided to join the Green Party.
For years I have been stuck in a dysfunctional relationship with the Democratic party. As the disappointments accumulated over the years I have tried to leave time and time again only to be told by my party abusers;” where else are you going to go?”At the point they (the Dems) can convince us that they are our only option they own us. Yes the Green Party may be somewhat disorganized, but their platform and their hearts are in the right place.
Have you noticed for the last 30 years (more or less) our major elections have been about 50-50? It would seem that the country is political and ideologically split. If this is the case, then the Democrats can not afford to loose any part of their base no matter how small with such tight margins. We liberals have power we are not using. I almost feel that we are enabling the lack of representation on the part of the Democrats by obediently showing up to vote them back into office year after year.
http://my.firedoglake.com/vector56/2011/03/29/leaving-the-democrats/
Tuesday March 29, 2011 4:35 am
After being told by Senator Tom Harkin that “half a loaf is better than none” during the health care debate; sold out by Obama’s back room dealings with big pharma; having Rahm Emanuel spit in the face of liberals as a hobby; having Obama double crossing us on the public option; Chris (banker boy) Dodd, and Barney Frank pretending to be populist crusaders, while selling us out to the “banksters”; watching Obama totally reversing his position on NSA spying on US citizens; Max Baucus and Obama taking single payer off the table; Nancy Pelosi taking impeachment off the table; on to infinity….
I have decided to join the Green Party.
For years I have been stuck in a dysfunctional relationship with the Democratic party. As the disappointments accumulated over the years I have tried to leave time and time again only to be told by my party abusers;” where else are you going to go?”At the point they (the Dems) can convince us that they are our only option they own us. Yes the Green Party may be somewhat disorganized, but their platform and their hearts are in the right place.
Have you noticed for the last 30 years (more or less) our major elections have been about 50-50? It would seem that the country is political and ideologically split. If this is the case, then the Democrats can not afford to loose any part of their base no matter how small with such tight margins. We liberals have power we are not using. I almost feel that we are enabling the lack of representation on the part of the Democrats by obediently showing up to vote them back into office year after year.
http://my.firedoglake.com/vector56/2011/03/29/leaving-the-democrats/
Koch-Backed Right-Wing Group Goes After More Professors, Asking for Emails on Unions and ... Rachel Maddow?
By Julianne Escobedo Shepherd | Sourced from 358
Posted at March 29, 2011, 10:19 am
Union busters have long relied on scare tactics to boost anti-worker legislation -- fear, threats and intimidation are standard fare for politicians trying to weaken labor laws, and can be effective if they're holding, say, your family's food stamps over your head.
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/542785/koch-backed_right-wing_group_goes_after_more_professors,_asking_for_emails_on_unions_and_..._rachel_maddow/#disqus_thread
Posted at March 29, 2011, 10:19 am
Union busters have long relied on scare tactics to boost anti-worker legislation -- fear, threats and intimidation are standard fare for politicians trying to weaken labor laws, and can be effective if they're holding, say, your family's food stamps over your head.
In one of the most recent examples of this, right-wing think tanks are going after universities and professors for emails that might mention anything regarding the mass protests across the Midwest. Yesterday, in a blog post republished on AlterNet, Steve D. talked about the case of William Cronon, a historian at the University of Wisconsin, who was targeted by the GOP for his emails in an effort to smear his reputation. 'But more significantly,' wrote Steven D., 'by going after a hitherto unknown, renowned and reasonable moderate scholar they are attempting to intimidate anyone else in Academia or who works for any governmental body from expressing their opinions.'
Though it seemed Cronon might be an isolated case, it looks like the GOP is planning to use this tactic against more and more public institutions using Freedom of Information Act requests. Today, Talking Points Memo revealed that labor departments at Michigan universities have been targeted by The Mackinac Center for Public Policy -- a right-wing think tank funded by those scions of union-busting, the Koch Brothers.
Even more absurd than professors targeted were the topics being sought in the FOIA request: 'all electronic correspondence carried out to our from employees, contractors, etc. of the University of Michigan Labor Studies Center in which the following terms (or their derivatives) appear:
'Scott Walker,' 'Wisconsin,' 'Madison,' 'Maddow,' Any other emails that deal with the collective bargaining situation in Wisconsin.'
The FOIA then goes on to request the information free of charge as it is a 'non-partisan, non-profit research and educational institute,' but the fact that Mackinac is seeking emails about Rachel Maddow is a dead giveaway. When TPM called the Mackinac Center's managing editor, Ken Braun, he declined to comment on the nature of the FOIA.
The targeted University of Michigan's Labor Studies Center 'has developed educational offerings to address the issues arising between management and labor' since 1957, according to its mission statement, with an emphasis on peer training for women and minorities. It also 'focus[es] on the self-defined needs of particular subsections of the population (women workers, Latina/o and African American workers) who are often underrepresented and without adequate access to labor issues education' and trains them in issues such as basic union skills and organizing.
In other words -- exactly the kind of thing the union-busting GOP is not trying to see succeed.
Roland Zullo, a professor at the Labor Studies Center, told Talking Points Memo he thought the Mackinac Center was looking for any illegal political advocacy on the state's watch. "It sounds like they're trying to catch us advocating for the recall or the election of a politician," Zullo said. "Because we're not supposed to do that, we're not supposed to use our University of Michigan resources for something like that."
And, in turn, we hope the University of Michigan charges the GOP-funded Mackinac Center for its time.
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/542785/koch-backed_right-wing_group_goes_after_more_professors,_asking_for_emails_on_unions_and_..._rachel_maddow/#disqus_thread
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
