Political MoJo

Ken Cuccinelli's Running Mate Is More Moderate Than Him on At Least One Thing: Banning Gay Sex

| Mon Jun. 10, 2013 7:24 AM PDT
E.W. Jackson, the Virginia GOP's pick for lieutentant governorE.W. Jackson, the Virginia GOP's pick for lieutentant governor.

E.W. Jackson, the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in Virginia, holds awfully extreme views on gay rights and has no qualms about venting them. On his now-dormant personal Twitter feed, as my colleague Tim Murphy pointed out, Jackson frequently aired his hatred toward gays: When President Obama declared June "LGBT Pride Month," Jackson tweeted, "Well that just makes me feel ikky all over." In October 2009, he tweeted, "The 'homosexual religion' is the most virulent anti-Christian bigotry & hatred I've ever seen." Those kinds of comments put Jackson in step with his running mate, Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli, a conservative who is as hard-line as they come on social issues.

Yet there is one crusade on which Jackson says he doesn't intend to join Cuccinelli: banning gay sex.

Buried in a recent National Review profile of Jackson, who is conservative minister, is this paragraph:

After chatting with attendees, Jackson sat down with me for an interview. While his sermon ended with flair and bombast, he was soft-spoken and earnest as I questioned him about how his religious beliefs interact with his political views. Christian values make us free, Jackson told me, and people should live as they see fit as long as they don’t hurt others. While he opposes same-sex marriage, he said he wouldn’t support any sort of ban on gay sex. He also said there shouldn't be any legal sanction of a religion, and that he would oppose a constitutional amendment naming Christianity as America’s official religion. But that doesn't mean that our culture isn’t historically Judeo-Christian, he added, and influenced by the Bible. Acknowledging that isn’t an imposition of religion.

The emphasis above is mine. Jackson saying he doesn't support banning gay sex is a significant break from Cuccinelli. Remember, in 2003 the Supreme Court's ruling in the Lawrence v. Texas case struck down anti-sodomy laws at the state level. But Virginia kept its gay-sex ban on the books after Lawrence. Then, in March, the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit deemed that Virginia's anti-sodomy law was unconstitutional. A month later, Cuccinelli, who is Virginia's attorney general, raised eyebrows when he asked the 4th Circuit to rethink its decision. (Cuccinelli's office said it was defending the state's anti-sodomy law to more harshly punish a 47-year-old man who solicited oral sex from teenagers. Here's why that is a problematic response.)

Cuccinelli explained his opposition to gay sex in 2009: "My view is that homosexual acts, not homosexuality, but homosexual acts are wrong. They're intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law-based country it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that...They don't comport with natural law." This is a long-running fight for Cuccinelli. As far back as 2004, when he was a Virginia state senator, he warned of a plot by the LGBT community to "dismantle sodomy laws" and "get education about homosexuals and AIDS in public schools."

On this issue, though, Cuccinelli and his running mate appear to see things differently. Ken, you might want to call your office.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

"This Is Morally Wrong": Watch Elizabeth Warren on GOP and Student Loans

| Fri Jun. 7, 2013 3:17 PM PDT

On Thursday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren slammed Republicans for blocking a bill that would give Americans relief on their student loan debt.

Student loan interest rates are set to double from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent on July 1 unless Congress acts. Warren has introduced a short-term plan that would drop rates on federal loans for needy students to near zero for a year, and Sens. Jack Reed (D-RI), and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) have co-sponsored a bill that would freeze interest rates at 3.4 percent for two years. But the GOP has other ideas. Yesterday, Senate Republicans blocked passage of Reed and Harkin's bill, arguing instead for plans that Republicans in both chambers have introduced that would increase interest rates on student loans.

Warren suggested the GOP was morally bankrupt for blocking the student loan proposals. Here is part of her speech:

There are strong proposals on the table that would keep interest rates low while Congress has time to work out a permanent solution. And yet, Congress fails to act. Why? Two issues: money and values.

First, money. Some have argued that we can’t afford to keep interest rates low. But let’s be clear: Right now the federal government is making a profit from our students. Just last month, the Congressional Budget Office calculated that the government will make $51 billion this year off student loans…

[Yet] two weeks ago, House Republicans passed a plan that would produce higher profits off the backs of our college students. And here in the Senate, Senator Coburn has introduced a similar bill that makes student loans more profitable…

The second issue is values….Have we become a people who will support our big banks with nearly free loans, while we crush our kids who are trying to get an education?...This is morally wrong, and we must put a stop to it.

Lawsuit Against Mississippi Prison Is the Stuff of Nightmares

| Fri Jun. 7, 2013 9:47 AM PDT
a rusty lock on a door

In the solitary confinement unit of East Mississippi Correctional Facility, it's common for inmates to set some clothing or an old milk carton on fire to get an officer's attention when they are in desperate need of a doctor—or if, say, their cell has been flooded by a broken pipe. Otherwise, it might be days before anyone took notice, according to a class-action lawsuit filed last week by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The fires sometimes got the guards' attention, but not always in the way the inmates were hoping: At least one inmate, the suit claims, was maced by a corrections officer through his feeding slot. EMCF is a private, for-profit prison that houses seriously mentally ill patients, and the ACLU's lawsuit reads like a catalog of horrors.

US Economy Adds 175,000 Jobs, Economy "Putters" Along

| Fri Jun. 7, 2013 7:29 AM PDT

The US economy added 175,000 jobs in May, more than economists had predicted, the Labor Department reported Friday. More people started looking for jobs again, too. But because the government's main measure of unemployment only counts people as unemployed if they're seeking work, the increase in job-seekers increased the official unemployment rate to 7.6 percent, up from April's four-year low of 7.5 percent.

Employment increased in the service sector—in retail, hospitality, temporary help agencies, and education and health services, i.e. in the low-wage work that has been the hallmark of the current economic recovery. New jobs were also added in high-salaried professional services, such as accounting, consulting, PR, and legal work. And employment ticked upwards in construction, as new housing construction begins (barely) to come back to life. Factory work and government employment decreased.

Here's what job creation in various industries looked like last month, via Quartz:

 

And here's where the economy lost jobs:

 

Women did better than men last month, though in general men have fared better during the recovery:

The economy is only recovering gradually. Consumer confidence is up and stock and home values are up, but the total labor force is still a much smaller percentage of the population than it was before the recession.

"In general, the economy is just puttering along," Joshua Shapiro, chief US economist with the consulting firm MFR Inc., told the New York Times Friday. "Companies can get by without hiring people, so they do." A private-sector jobs report released earlier this week partially blamed government spending cuts and tax increases for mediocre job growth.

Even with the small improvement in jobs numbers, there has been little gain in wages: wages are up only 2 percent over the past year, Bloomberg reports.

And those who are still unemployed are faring worse. As the Times reports, the sequester cuts have forced almost every state to cut back on unemployment insurance benefits.

Corn on MSNBC: This Is Bad, But Not George W. Bush Bad

Thu Jun. 6, 2013 6:41 PM PDT

As DC bureau chief David Corn noted on Thursday, "the Obama gang may finally have a real scandal on its hands" with the news that the National Security Agency has been collecting phone records from Verizon (and possibly others). Listen to Corn discuss the NSA scandal with The Grio's Joy Reid on MSNBC's Martin Bashir:

David Corn is Mother Jones' Washington bureau chief. For more of his stories, click here. He's also on Twitter.

Silicon Valley's Awful Race and Gender Problem in 3 Mind-Blowing Charts

| Thu Jun. 6, 2013 11:11 AM PDT

Catherine Bracy moved to San Francisco from Chicago during the 2012 campaign to run Team Obama's technology field office, a first-of-its-kind project that enlisted Silicon Valley's whiz-kid engineers to build software for the campaign. (That tech savvy, of course, played a pivotal role in Obama's victory.) What struck Bracy about the tech-crazed Bay Area, she recounted Thursday in a talk at the Personal Democracy Forum tech conference, was the jarring inequality visible everywhere in Silicon Valley—between rich and poor, between men and women, between white people and, well, everyone else.

Bracy's talk featured some eye-popping charts on Silicon Valley's race and gender divide. Here are three of them.

In 2010, the latest year for which Bracy could find data, 89 percent of California companies that got crucial seed funding were founded by men. What percentage were all-female founding teams? Just three percent.

CB Insights, Venture Capital Human Capital Report, January-June 2010

Bracy looked at that funding breakdown by race—and there's even less diversity. In 2010, less than 1 percent of the founders of Silicon Valley companies were black, a figure so small Bracy didn't put it on her white-guy-dominated pie chart.

CB Insights, Venture Capital Human Capital Report, January-June 2010

And when looking at the economic winners and losers in Silicon Valley, that racial disparity really pops out. From 2009 to 2011, income for blacks living in Silicon Valley dropped by 18 percent, compared to a decrease of 4 percent nationally. Hispanics fared badly, too. The big winners were whites and Asian Americans.

Silicon Valley Foundation/Joint Venture Silicon Valley, 2013 Silicon Valley Index

Oh, one more thing: According to Bracy, women make 49 cents for every dollar men make in Silicon Valley. You don't need a chart to feel the force of that statistic.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Report: When It Comes To the Deficit, Washington is Still Acting Like It's 2010

| Thu Jun. 6, 2013 9:41 AM PDT
deficit cutting

Washington's obsession with the nation's budget deficit is a mistake, according to a new report released Wednesday by the liberal Center for American Progress (CAP). Congress and President Barack Obama are locked in a budget-cutting state of mind, still hoping to reach some sort of a grand bargain deficit reduction deal later this year that would replace the sweeping spending cuts that went into effect in March.

But as the report notes, the state of the economy has changed since 2010, the year that talks over how to reduce the deficit began:

  • The deficit has fallen by $2.5 trillion, due to tax increases and big spending cuts already enacted.
  • Growth in health care costs has slowed.
  • Inflation and interest rates are still low, despite concern that running a big deficit would increase them.
  • The key academic argument that high debt causes slower economic growth has fallen apart.
  • Austerity policies in Europe have not worked out so well.
  • The US economy has not come back to life as quickly as was projected when all the budget cutting began.

"Much has changed," Michael Linden, the author of the CAP report, writes, "and the debate should change with it."

Although the initial push for austerity came from the right, Obama and congressional Democrats soon fell in line. As Ezra Klein noted at Wonkblog Thursday, lower deficit forecasts didn't change Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wisc.) budget-cutting mania. "With some of the urgency gone, did Ryan ease up on the cuts to programs like Medicaid and food stamps?" Klein writes. "Of course not....The facts changed. The policies in the Republican budget didn't." As for Democrats, Klein says, "they’ve kept pursuing the exact kind of budget deals that led to sequestration in the first place." Obama put forward a budget in April that, as Linden says, "goes well beyond halfway to meet the demands of conservatives in Congress."

"It is time to reset the entire budget debate," Linden says. "No more pretending that the sky is falling."

New Report Shows How Walmart Forces Its Employees to Live on the Dole

| Thu Jun. 6, 2013 9:10 AM PDT
walmart

Walmart's wages and benefits are so low that many of its employees are forced to turn to the government for aid, costing taxpayers between $900,000 and $1.75 million per store, according to a report released last week by congressional Democrats.

Walmart's history of suppressing local wages and busting fledgling union efforts is common knowledge. But the Democrats' new report used data from Wisconsin's Medicaid program to quantify Walmart's cost to taxpayers. The report cites a confluence of trends that have forced more workers to rely on safety-net programs: the depressed bargaining power of labor in a still struggling economy; a 97 year low in union enrollment; and the fact that the middle-wage jobs lost during the recession have been replaced by low-wage jobs. The problem of minimum-wage work isn't confined to Walmart. But as the country's largest low-wage employer, with about 1.4 million employees in the US—roughly 10 percent of the American retail workforce—Walmart's policies are a driving force in keeping wages low. The company also happens to elegantly epitomize the divide between the top and bottom in America: the collective wealth of the six Waltons equals the combined wealth of 48.8 million families on the other end of the economic spectrum. The average Walmart worker making $8.81 per hour would have to work for 7 million years to acquire the Walton family's current wealth.

Using data from Wisconsin, which has the most complete and recent state-level Medicaid data available, the Democrats' report finds that 3,216 of Wisconsin’s 29,457 Walmart workers are enrolled in the state's Medicaid program. That figure that balloons to 9,207 when Walmart employees' children and adult dependents are taken into account. The study also looked at the costs of other taxpayer-funded programs that Walmart employees on state Medicaid could also use. Here's the tab: 

  • At least $251,706 for state Medicaid
  • Between $25,461 and $58,228 for reduced-price school lunches
  • Between $12,938 and $29,588 for reduced-price school breakfasts
  • Between $155,406 and $355,350 for subsidized Section 8 housing
  • Between $72,160 and $165,000 for the Earned Income Tax Credit, which gives money to low-income workers
  • Between $11,414 and $26,100 for assistance under the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), which helps poor families pay for heating costs
  • Between $96,007 and $219,528 for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits (food stamps)
  • Between $279,450 an $639,090 for Wisconsin Shares Child Care Subsidy Program benefits, which helps low-income workers pay for child care

At a minimum, Walmart workers in Wisconsin known to be enrolled in Medicaid rely on at least $9.5 million a year in taxpayer funds. If the study's low-end estimate of $900,000 per store in taxpayer-funded benefits is right, Walmart's 300 Wisconsin stores could be forcing the state to provide as much as $67.5 million per year in benefits that employees of Walmart's higher-wage competitors, such as Costco, don't need.

House Democrats are pushing two pieces of legislation that would address the drag Walmart's low wages place on the economy. One would raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10; another would allow employees to share salary information, bolstering their bargaining power. A study published last year found that raising average retail wage salaries from $21,000 to $25,000 a year would create 100,000 new jobs and give a $13.5 billion annual boost to the overall economy.

Walmart has pushed back against the Dems' report. "Unfortunately there are some people who base their opinions on misconceptions rather than facts, and that is why we recently launched a campaign to show people the unlimited opportunities that exist at Walmart," Brooke Buchanan, a spokeswoman for the company, told the Huffington Post. "We provide a range of jobs—from people starting out stocking shelves to Ph.D.'s in engineering and finance. We provide education assistance and skill training and, most of all, a chance to move up the ranks."

Research suggests that Walmart could increase wages significantly and still turn a profit. But the company has worked for years to avoid doing that. An internal memo obtained by the Huffington Post in November, "Field Non-Exempt Associate Pay Plan Fiscal Year 2013," outlined how Walmart capped raises for hourly workers, lowing costs and bolstering their bottom line profits. In 2012, the company's net sales were higher than Norway's entire economic output.

The ranks of near-poor households enrolled in Medicaid have been swelling in Wisconsin since the late 1990s. Although Walmart isn't the only force driving this trend, it certainly isn't helping.

Flashback: Bush Aides Used Alternate Email Addresses, Too

| Wed Jun. 5, 2013 2:46 PM PDT
secret emails

Multiple top Obama administration officials have been using secret alternate email addresses to conduct government business, the Associated Press reported Tuesday. Conservatives were already outraged by former Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson's previously revealed use of an alias, Richard Windsor, to send emails, so this latest news has the potential to create a firestorm on the right.

The Obama administration claims there's nothing to see here, and that officials were using the alternate addresses so they could do their jobs  without having to wade through a deluge of spam. The alternate email addresses uncovered by the AP have all been governmental—the alternate email for Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of Health and Human Services, was KGS2@hhs.gov, not sebelius@gmail.com, to cite one example. Several government agencies told the AP that the alternate email addresses "are always searched in response to official requests and the records are provided as necessary." Although the addresses themselves may be secret, the emails that are sent to and from those addresses are subject to normal government recordkeeping and public disclosure rules—at least according to the Obama administration.

The AP, however, notes that it "could not independently verify" that the Obama administration did in fact search officials' unlisted email accounts in response to public records requests. In fact, the news agency found only one example of an email from an official's unlisted account being disclosed in response to such a request.

Figuring out whether or not these emails are being properly archived and searched is crucial. During the presidency of George W. Bush, a scandal erupted over Bush aides' use of private, non-governmental email accounts to conduct government business. All emails from federal employees conducting government business are usually subject to public records laws, regardless of what addresses are used to send them. But the Bush-era accounts were, unlike the Obama administration accounts, non-governmental—some, for example, were operated by the Republican National Committee. That means those emails were less likely to be archived and maintained for posterity than emails sent or received by governmental addresses.

If Obama administration officials' secret-address emails are being archived under federal records laws and being properly searched in response to public records requests, they're likely above board. (The administration claims that using alternate email addresses was common under past presidents, too.) If that's the case, the secret email addresses are no more than a modern day equivalent of an unlisted phone number. But if these private emails aren't being properly archived and searched, it may—and should—be a real scandal.

Court: Some Types of Emergency Contraception Must Be Available Over the Counter ASAP

| Wed Jun. 5, 2013 1:45 PM PDT
plan b

An appeals court has ordered the Obama administration to make at least some forms of emergency contraception (EC) available over the counter immediately.

There are two types of EC, a.k.a. the "morning after pill"—one that has two separate pills that contain hormones to prevent pregnancy, and another that requires only one pill. A three-judge panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that varieties of EC that are sold as two separate pills need to be made available over the counter to everyone immediately. The availability of the one-pill variety will be determined after the full appeal is heard later this year.

Judge Edward R. Korman ruled in April that emergency contraception should be made available to everyone—without a prescription and regardless of age—within a month. The Obama administration appealed that ruling and asked Korman to delay its implementation. Korman refused, calling the administration's argument "something out of an alternate reality." After that, the Obama administration asked the appeals court to delay implementation of Korman's ruling. That's what led to Wednesday's decision, when the appeals court said it wouldn't delay Korman's ruling as it applied to two-pill EC, but would postpone a final decision on the one-pill products.

Although they were surely hoping that an appeals court would just deny the administration's request in its entirety, reproductive rights groups were pleased with Wednesday's decision. The decision means that, for the first time, some form of emergency contraception will be available over-the-counter for all women. "Finally, after more than a decade of politically motivated delays, women will no longer have to endure intrusive, onerous, and medically unnecessary restrictions to get emergency contraception," said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the original suit against the FDA, in a statement.

But this does mean that, for now, Plan B One-Step—the most common form of one-pill emergency contraception—will be available over-the-counter only to women ages 15 and over who have government-issued ID to prove their age. And generic brands of one-pill EC will be available over-the-counter only for women ages 17 and over with ID. Confusing, right?