Political MoJo

DNC Outsources Work to Union-Busting Company

Mon Oct. 10, 2005 7:01 PM PDT

There are a few things I expect of the Democratic Party and groups that it hires, employs, works with, etc. 1) Provide great healthcare to all employees and 2) Respect your workers by honoring their right to strike, organize, and collectively bargain.

Unfortunately, this does not always happen. Nathan Newman directed me towards a rather disturbing story: a Denver-based company called Telefund has been allegedly engaging in Union Busting. What makes this so upsetting is that many progressive organizations outsource their fundraising efforts to Telefund, including, among others, The Democratic National Committee, Amnesty International, the Sierra Club, and Mother Jones.

Now, there is no indication that any of these organizations are aware of the union busting activity as it has only just come to light. But now that the story has surfaced, an investigation is needed.

Nathan is right, the DNC (and these other progressive organizations) should not associate itself with any institution that so egregiously violates its workers' rights. I can only hope that they act swiftly to resolve the matter.

[Story originally found at YAL]

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Preparing for the Flat Tax Assault

| Mon Oct. 10, 2005 6:11 PM PDT

I see that Andrew Sullivan has made the flat tax his new pet issue, noting, among other things, that the Eastern European countries that have implemented the flat tax have all seen stunning rates of growth in recent years. Well, good for them. Since this issue is likely to come up sooner or later, though, here are a few initial, mostly scattered points:

  • It's unclear what's boosting those Eastern European economies, exactly. These are all countries that have emerged from communism, privatized industry, and seen an influx of western investment over the past decade. You'd expect them to grow quickly, no? I'd like to see more before ascribing magical powers to the flat tax. Slovakia, for instance, had 4.2 percent growth in 2003, "the strongest growth in Central Europe," right before it moved to the flat tax. Huh. And President Ivan Gasparovic has recently said that the wave of new foreign investors are attracted by the country's cheap labor costs rather than its flat tax rates.
  • Similarly, this IMF paper wonders whether Russia's boost in tax revenues following its flat-tax reform in 2001 were due to voodoo economics or merely to better enforcement. See also "Demythologizing the Russian Flat Tax" by Clifford Gaddy and William Gale.
  • Flat-taxers love to hype the simplicity of the "postcard size tax return," but as analysts have pointed since the days of Cain and Abel, the simplicity of a tax system has nothing to do with the tax rates. Progressive tax rates don't make our system complicated. Once you know your income, you can just as easily multiply it by 23 percent as by 17 percent with a calculator. Try it! The real difficulty comes in actually defining one's income and calculating all those deductions and exemptions. That will never be easy for some people, say, Dick Cheney, no matter what kind of tax system we have. We can still have a simplified tax code that happens to have different rates for different income levels. There are good and fair ways of doing this.
  • It's worth noting that when you add up all federal, state, and local taxes, this country already has fairly "flat" tax rates. According to CTJ, the top 20 percent of earners pay about 32 percent of their income in taxes, the next quintile 29.8 percent, the next quintile 27 percent, and the next quintile 23 percent.
  • Popular resistance to a flat tax, at least in the United States, will come from people who don't want to give up the concrete deductions and exemptions they currently have in exchange for theoretical future gains down the road (from supposedly higher economic growth). I have a feeling that this is a psychological phenomenon that's very difficult to get around.
  • Home values would very likely decline in the short term if we switched to a flat tax and eliminated all deductions, on the theory that right now, the home-mortgage deduction enables buyers to bid up the prices of real estate. The price decline wouldn't change anything on net, but people who currently own homes would obviously be screwed.
  • So, for that matter, would many large businesses. Some corporations get deductions for interest on loans that they've taken out to purchase new equipment, as well as deductions for the depreciation of current equipment. Businesses that have been borrowing and investing in new equipment aggressively would get a kick in the teeth if the United States eliminated all deductions and moved to a flat tax. I daresay that manufacturing would suffer the worst; just don't tell Clyde Prestowitz.
  • If Congress can't, for political reasons, eliminate all those deductions and exemptions, then the effective flat tax rate is going to be very, very high. Certainly higher than the 15 percent effective federal rate that about 60 percent of all taxpayers currently pay. Of course, those are the bottom 60 percent of income-earners, and they have precisely zero sway over the current Republican Party, so that's obviously not a political concern for anyone in power.
  • In theory it's possible to design a progressive flat tax, or simplify the tax code in all sorts of progressive and sensible ways, as Dick Gephardt has suggested. But that's not the flat tax that Andrew Sullivan, John Breaux, or George W. Bush have in mind. Any tax reform that lowers the rate on the wealthy will have to raise taxes elsewhere, obviously. There's no getting around this, except with deficits. If I had to bet, I'd bet that the GOP shies away from real flat-tax reform (for reasons #5, 6, and 7 above) this fall and instead just enacts further tax cuts for its allies. Democrats are in danger of coming to power soon; best to leave them a nice big deficit mess and let them reap the political whirlwind.

    Second Term Revolving Door

    | Mon Oct. 10, 2005 3:34 PM PDT

    The Center for American Progress has a new report out called "The Second Term Revolving Door," documenting new Bush administration officials who have ties to business, as well as former officials who are moving on to plush lobbying careers. In a the abstract, it's hard to see the big deal: clearly a number of appointees in the executive branch are often going to have business experience; nor is it a big deal if civil servants want to cash out after they leave government. This administration, on the other hand, deserves very little benefit of the doubt, especially after it let industry lobbyists infiltrate the Environmental Protection Agency and Food and Drug Administration (see here for a long list) and corporate cronies oversee their former companies in Iraq.

    Perhaps most notably among the current batch, both Philip Perry, the General Counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, and Michael P. Jackson, Deputy Secretary for DHS, have ties to Lockheed (Perry a former lobbyist; Jackson a former COO). Tim Wiener reported in the New York Times last fall that Lockheed is "increasingly putting its stamp on the nation's military policies" through its corporate connections. That process seems to be accelerating.

    No child left behind, though some may die in Iraq, and others may become invisible

    | Mon Oct. 10, 2005 3:16 PM PDT

    Thanks to Louisiana Senator David Vitter, the No Child Left Behind Act contains a clause which requires schools to give military recruiters the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of high school students. As most people have heard by now, parents may opt their adolescents out of this process. However, No Child Left Behind also provides that schools that do not hand over the information are subject to losing federal funding.

    In Florida's Duval County, school officials have made a bargain with parents: It's okay to opt your kids out of the military recruiter list, but if you do so, your teenager's photo will not appear in the yearbook, and she will not be listed in sports activities or on the honor roll. Where I come from, this practice is known as extortion, but I'm sure the Pentagon sees it as negotiation. Duval County officials, though they believe they are operating within the confines of the law, have agreed to make some changes next year, which would give parents more options. However, these changes do not appear to effect the "negotiation" aspect of the process.

    Though all credit goes to Senator Vitter for this particular aspect of the mess that is known as No Child Left Behind, it would be unfair of me to not ask alll of Congress to take a bow for its passage.

    Just the right bit of religion

    Mon Oct. 10, 2005 2:33 PM PDT

    Since the final draft of the new Iraqi constitution was released last Thursday to citizens in Baghdad, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom has released a review of its human rights protections, especially those regarding religious freedom. While noting some improvements, USCIRF sees the inclusion of Islam as the state religion and its designation as the "a fundamental source of legislation" as a danger to civil liberties. Especially troubling to the Commission is that the interpretation and implementation of the laws will be determined by the Iraqi high court, which will contain Islamic jurists with no training in western-style civil law legal traditions. The majority Shiite Muslims in Iraq support the final draft of the constitution, while militant factions of the Sunni minority are calling for a boycott of the referendum and threatening participants with violence.

    The concerns raised by the Iraqi constitutional draft and court nominations add an interesting element to the somewhat parallel civic conversation surrounding the Supreme Court nominee debacle in the US. As Miers' evangelical history is simultaneously attacked, right and left by some, and touted as a selling point by others, some Americans may be left wondering exactly when and how the principle of church-state separation gets implemented; then again, some have already made up their mind.

    Plots Aplenty

    | Mon Oct. 10, 2005 12:34 PM PDT

    Via Cursor.org, the AP has a White House-released list of the ten terror plots that President Bush last week claimed to have disrupted since 9/11. One wonders, though, how loosely the White House is using the word "plot," when something like this appears on the list:

    The Jose Padilla Plot: In May 2002, the U.S. disrupted a plot that involved blowing up apartment buildings in the United States. One of the plotters, Jose Padilla, also discussed the possibility of using a "dirty bomb" in the U.S.

    As far as I can tell, "a plot that involved blowing up apartment buildings" is an actual crime, one for which there are actual consequences. According to the Justice Department, Padilla allegedly met with senior al-Qaeda leaders and scouted sites that would be bombed by a radioactive "dirty bomb"; yet as District Court Judge Henry Floyd said in March, the government faces "no impediments whatsoever" to trying Padilla on precisely these charges in civilian court. For all I know, Padilla really did do these things, and really is a dangerous guy who deserves prison, but the government certainly hasn't proved that to anyone, and until that happens, there's no reason why it should be allowed to tout these arrests as success stories. As the New York Times reports today, Belgian officials are learning how to use the courts to prosecute terrorism and uncover plots, despite the country's fairly weak domestic intelligence capabilities, and there's no reason why the U.S. should be unable to do the same.

    Advertise on MotherJones.com

    "These guys are bullies"

    | Mon Oct. 10, 2005 11:00 AM PDT

    I haven't been following the Valerie Plame investigation very closely, but judging from this Time story, it seems like Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor on the case, is really getting to the Mayberry Machiavellis:

    As top Bush aide Karl Rove prepares for his fourth grand-jury appearance, the federal probe into who leaked CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to the media is believed to be wrapping up. But the investigation has taken a toll on White House aides, many of whom now fear that the special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, is intent on issuing indictments. "Fitzgerald's office, although very professional, has been very aggressive in pursuing people," the adviser said. "These guys are bullies, and they threaten you."

    Poor babies.

    Arbitrary Healthcare

    | Mon Oct. 10, 2005 10:35 AM PDT

    Over the weekend, Kevin Drum had a fantastic post about why we need universal health care. Just to add to everything he said, it's utterly bizarre and twisted that a person in this country can receive government health insurance after losing all their life savings in a hurricane, but if a person who loses their job—through no fault of their own—and can't pay for chemo injections, well, tough luck. It's bizarre that Medicaid will cover those under the poverty line but not, quite frequently, those at twice the poverty threshold, or just over the cutoff, or often certain parents below the threshold. At present, people in very similar circumstances aren't at all treated equally, and we'd do just as well tossing darts at a dartboard to determine who gets coverage and who doesn't.

    "A General Sense of Urgency"

    | Fri Oct. 7, 2005 4:56 PM PDT

    As concern about a flu pandemic sweeps official Washington, Congress and the Bush administration are considering spending billions to buy the influenza drug Tamiflu. But after months of delay, the United States will now have to wait in line to get the pills.

    Had the administration placed a large order just a few months ago, Roche, Tamiflu's maker, could have delivered much of the supply by next year, according to sources close to the negotiations in both government and industry.

    New York Times
    After Delay, U.S. Faces Line for Drug
    October 7, 2005

    Certainly the leading influenza researchers, from the first H5N1 outbreak in 1997, have been doing their utmost to alert medical colleagues worldwide to the urgent threat of avian flu, as well as outlining the immediate steps the Bush Administration and other governments needed to take. As befitted his position as "pope" of influenza researchers, Robert Webster of Saint Jude Hospital in Memphis tirelessly preached the same sermon…

    Webster stressed the particular urgency of increasing the production and stockpiling of the NA inhibitor Tamiflu. Because this strategic antiviral was "in woefully short supply"--it is made by Roche at a single factory in Switzerland--Webster and his colleagues underlined the need for resolute government action.

    The Nation
    Avian Flu: A State of Unreadiness
    June 29, 2005

    According to his official biography, Stewart Simonson is the Health and Human Services Department's point man "on matters related to bioterrorism and other public health emergencies." Hopefully, he has taken crash courses on smallpox and avian flu, because, prior to joining HHS in 2001, Simonson's background was not in public health, but ... public transit. He'd previously been a top official at the delay-plagued, money-hemorrhaging passenger rail company Amtrak. Before that, he was an adviser to Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, specializing in crime and prison policy. When Thompson became HHS secretary in 2001, he hired Simonson as a legal adviser and promoted him to his current post shortly before leaving the Department last year. Simonson's biography boasts that he "supervised policy development for Project BioShield," a program designed to speed the manufacture of crucial vaccines and antidotes.

    The New Republic
    Welcome to the Hackocracy
    October 7, 2005

    A year after President Bush signed Project BioShield into law, only one big contract has been awarded -- $878 million for a novel anthrax vaccine -- and none of that money has been disbursed. A few smaller contracts have been handed out, but others for promising vaccines and drugs have stalled in the federal health bureaucracy.

    Wall Street Journal
    U.S. struggles for drugs to counter biological threats
    July 11, 2005

    To many infectious-disease experts, Project Bioshield was Bush and Thompson's version of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland: with priorities established in inverse relation to actual probabilities of attack or outbreak. "It's too bad that Saddam Hussein's not behind influenza," complained Dr. Paul Offit, a dissident member of the government's advisory panel on vaccination. "We'd be doing a better job."

    Indeed, HHS's zeal to combat hypothetical bioterrorism contrasts with its incredible negligence in exercising oversight of the nation's "fragile" influenza vaccine supply. As the GAO had warned Clinton's HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, vaccine availability in a pandemic would depend on the stability and surge capacity of existing production lines. But as shocked Americans discovered in the winter of 2003-04 and again in early fall 2004, the entire vaccine manufacturing system had decayed almost to the point of collapse. While Bush and Thompson were trying to bribe the pharmaceutical industry to join Project Bioshield, the same industry was abdicating its elementary responsibility to maintain a lifeline of new vaccines and antibiotics.

    The Nation
    Avian Flu: A State of Unreadiness
    June 29, 2005

    "A general sense of urgency informs all of our homeland security work," said Stewart Simonson, an assistant secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, which jointly administers Bioshield with the Homeland Security Department.

    Copley News Service
    Congress urged to streamline Bioshield Program
    July 12, 2005

    Outrage over Red Cross--why the surprise?

    | Fri Oct. 7, 2005 3:13 PM PDT

    In our culture, learning what is going on in the nation and in the world is simply not a priority, and even when people do learn, their memories tend to be very short.

    In Louisiana, citizens are extremely frustrated over some of the treatment they have received from the American Red Cross. When they called, they were on hold for hours, only to get a recorded message telling them to hang up and call another number--which took them back to where they had started. Instead of installing more phone lines, the Red Cross--5 weeks after Hurricane Katrina hit-- opened service centers, but so few that people have had to camp out in their cars all night to have any hope of getting in. Many people had trouble learning where the centers were located, and the Red Cross has admitted to being purposefully vague in giving directions. In New Orleans, there were no Red Cross workers to be seen until 10 days after Katrina's landing.

    Despite the fact that the Red Cross is a volunteer agency, and that, in many cases, its efforts were obstructed by FEMA, the organization stil did not adequately meet the needs of hurricane victims. What is interesting is that people are surprised. The American Red Cross, despite doing a lot of good work, has a history of inefficiency and scandal that just doesn't seem to penetrate the American consciousness, no matter what.

    When the September 11 money collected by the Red Cross was diverted to other causes, people became angry, but again, that shouldn't have been a surprise. The organization has had to deal with numerous financial scandals, most of them at the chapter level, for a long time. The 2001 New Jersey debacle was a prime example, as was the 2001 Michigan case. A situation similar to the September 11 one also occurred during the aftermath of a northern California earthquake. Charges of inefficiency and lack of planning were also directed at the Red Cross during Hurricane Hugo.

    Perhaps nothing the Red Cross has done is quite as alarming as what happened in the 1980's. During the peak of the AIDS crisis, the Red Cross, along with the American Association and the Council of Community Blood Centers, issued a joint statement decrying fears about poison blood. They were aided by then-Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler, who assured the nation that the blood supply was "100% safe." Later, afer several people had died of AIDS from blood transfusions, the Red Cross simply changed it tactic to say that only those who needed excessive amounts of blood were at risk. In And the Band Played On, Randy Shilts wrote that in 1984, the American Red Cross continued to oppose hepatitis core antibody testing for people with hemophilia. One Red Cross spokeswoman said she thought Bay Area blood banks had been bullied into testing because of "political pressure" from "people worried about the gay community."

    All in all, the Red Cross's record is not exactly admirable, yet every time there is inefficiency or scandal, Americans--citizens and journalists alike--act as though it is an aberration.