Where Is Hillary In This Crucial Midterm Election?

We have an election where Democrats are in trouble and could lose the Senate, and we have a “pre-candidate” with the supposedly highest polling numbers for any pre-candidate in history.

I smell a disconnect. Why isn’t the highly popular Hillary Clinton going from state to state campaigning for Senate Democrats, tirelessly doing everything she can to help Democrats keep the Senate?

I feel like Hillary is sitting on sidelines while we are fighting in the streets. As far as I can tell she is not even asking her extensive list of followers to do something, never mind showing up herself.

It better not be something like this. NY Times: Loss for Democrats in Midterm Elections Could Be Boon for Clinton.

Think of the damage Republicans will do for two years.

Those Political Geniuses In Washington

NY Times: Obama Weighing Delay in Action on Immigration,

President Obama is considering a delay of his most controversial proposals to revamp immigration laws through executive action until after the midterm elections in November, mindful of the electoral peril for Democratic Senate candidates, according to allies of the administration who have knowledge of White House deliberations.

Well there goes any hope of energizing “the base” to come out and vote in November. No wonder people don’t bother to vote anymore.

Why are they doing this?

“Such a move by the president, some senior officials worry, could set off a pitched fight with Republicans and dash hopes for Democratic Senate candidates running in Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina and potentially in Iowa.”

Right, because this will persuade all those right-wing anti-immigration voters to vote for Democrats.

This tells all the pro-Democrat voters in those states not to bother to vote.

If Obama does this he is going back on his promise in June to do something “by the end of summer” to help the millions of people trapped by Republican obstruction.

From the NY Times story: “Representative Luis V. Gutiérrez, Democrat of Illinois, who has at times been critical of the administration’s approach, said that delay “comes at a tremendous cost in terms of families split up and children placed in foster care.”

Doing the right thing is always the right thing politically.

Will We Let Congress Hand Billion$ More To Big Corporations?

This one is simply outrageous. Corporations currently owe up to $700 billion in unpaid, “deferred” taxes. The country needs the money – partly because these companies owe so much in taxes. Which of the following choices should the country make?

1. Tell the companies to pay up what they owe, bringing us hundreds of billions to use now and tens of billions a year more from now on.

2. Let them off the hook from ever paying most what they owe, if only they please would let us have a little bit of it now.

Who Is The Boss Of Whom?

The choice depends on who you think is supposed to be the boss of whom. If you believe that We the People are in charge of this country, then obviously you’d say these corporations should just pay the taxes they owe. But if the corporations are in charge of us they’ll tell us they aren’t going to pay these taxes unless we give them something.

Not surprisingly, Congress appears to be working toward option ’2.’ It’s called a “repatriation tax holiday.” They are proposing to tell the companies that moved jobs, factories and profit centers out of the country that it was the right thing to do. Unfortunately that will tell companies that didn’t do these things that they were chumps.

What Is A Tax Holiday?

Here is what’s going on. Giant, multinational U.S. corporations owe our government up to $700 billion in taxes on about $2 trillion in profits they have made (or made it look like they made) outside of the country. But there is a loophole that lets them hold off on paying those taxes owed until they “bring the money home.” So of course, many corporations have been engaged in all kinds of schemes to make it look like they make their money elsewhere – and/or move jobs, factories and profit centers out of the country.

Why is this important right now? In a New York Times “politics” story Tuesday, “Plan to Refill Highway Fund Stokes Conflict in Congress,” this nugget:

[Sen. Harry] Reid and [Sen. Ron] Paul are quietly pressing for a one-time tax “holiday” — a special and lucrative tax deduction — to lure multinational corporations to bring profits home from overseas, producing a sudden windfall.

Instead of telling these corporations that it’s time to pay up, it looks like Congress is preparing to just let them keep much (85 percent) of the money. It’s called a “tax holiday.”

What is the “conflict” the headline talks about? It isn’t a conflict between those who want to hand corporations hundreds of billions of dollars and those who do not want to. The conflict is over how to hand them the money!

Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, the Finance Committee chairman, and Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, the ranking Republican, want that money to help smooth passage of a broad rewrite of the tax code.

So if Senator Reid is on board for a tax holiday and Senator Wyden is on board for a tax holiday, it looks like the idea of giving this huge amount of cash to these corporations is baked in to the thinking in the Senate. And we’re talking about Democrats here. One side wants (Reid) to give them a tax holiday and get a little bit to use to pay for infrastructure, the other side (Wyden) wants to use it as a bribe to get these giant corporations to let the U.S. government “reform” the tax laws. Both sides are conceding that they’ll accept a tax holiday.

But no one in this discussion is just saying, “Hey, we’d get up to $700 billion and tens of billions every year from now on if we just told these companies to pay the taxes they owe.”

The cost: At Least $95.8 Billion

The idea is to give these companies an 85 percent deduction – the “tax holiday” – on their foreign profits and only taxing 15 percent of the profits. In other words, instead of taxing $2 trillion of profits being held out of the country they’ll only tax $300 billion. If these corporations “bring the money home.”

Bloomberg News looks at the cost of this, in “Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Cost U.S. $95.8 Billion.” The “holiday” would bring in a quick $19.6 billion, but would cost $95.8 billion of tax revenue that would come in anyway over the next decade with no changes – not even making these companies just pay up. (Note: This calculation assumes Congress won’t just tell these companies to just pay their taxes. That would bring in up to $700 billion at the top tax rate of 35 percent and tens of billions a year from now on. Companies can deduct any taxes already paid elsewhere, so “up to” means $700 billion minus taxes paid elsewhere.)

An Engineered “Crisis”

That’s right, after all these years of propaganda about budget deficits and the hostage-taking and the “fiscal cliff” and the “debt ceiling” and the sequester and all the resulting budget cuts in essential services and “austerity” and how this has held back the recovery … it looks like Congress is going to just let companies off from paying hundreds of billions of taxes they already owe. This is not about passing another tax break/subsidy, etc. These are taxes that are due and payable on profits that have already been made but that these companies are keeping outside of the country (and away from their shareholders).

Why would Congress even consider letting these corporations off from paying the taxes they owe? Because of rules about not increasing the deficit Congress “needs” the money. This is a “realpolitik” deal, recognizing that the companies have enough power to keep Congress from just making them pay up what they owe. The thinking is they can appease the corporations with an 85 percent tax holiday to get them to pay at least 15 percent of that they owe.

This is another engineered “crisis” where the country is made to believe that deficits are keeping us from doing things we need to do. We need to fund transportation infrastructure, we can’t borrow the money to invest in things like this that make our economy more efficient, hence the need to “incentivize” the corporations to please bring home some of the money they owe us.

They Did This In 2004 And It Made Things Worse

In 2004 corporations ran the same scam on Congress, except that time they promised to use the money they brought back to “create jobs.” So what happened?

In 2011 the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) looked at the results of the 2004 tax holiday and found that “their holiday didn’t just fail to create the promised jobs. Their holiday enriched corporations that actually destroyed jobs in the months right after they received their tax windfall.” IPS found that 58 multinationals who used the “American Job Creation Act of 2004″ tax holiday not only immediately laid off tens of thousands, they continued laying off, and laid off close to 600,000 workers between 2004 and now. From the IPS summary of the study,

One government study looking at the first two years after the repatriation windfall found that 12 of the top recipients laid off more than 67,000 American workers. These firms collectively brought back home more than $100 billion …

According to IPS, the companies that gained the most from the tax holiday actually cut jobs, on top of that they used the tax gift money to buy back their own stock, increasing its value, and pay out dividends, both thereby enriching executives and shareholders.

(This is from 2011. Another half a trillion of profits have been shifted offshore since then.)

From the Times story,

In 2004, when Congress approved a similar holiday, lawmakers vowed never to do it again. If it became a habit, they reasoned, companies would keep their profits overseas waiting for the next tax holiday. That, the bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation explained, is the idea’s “moral hazard problem.”

The 2004 tax holiday only made things worse because companies realized they could get out of paying taxes entirely if they moved profits offshore and held out until the next holiday season. If we do it again, every company will be compelled to move jobs, factories and profit centers out of the country to stay competitive.

They are going to try to sneak this through under the radar. Maybe We the People can stop it if we make enough noise.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary and/or for the Progress Breakfast.

Full Employment: First Principle Of New Populism

Word is there’s an economic recovery going on. The New Populism ConferenceBut approximately 99 percent of us have no reason to believe that.

The public sees that the government bailed out the biggest banks and that the “recovery” is going really well for a very few people. But most Americans are actually falling behind, and know it. Wages are still stagnant at best and the minimum wage has fallen so far behind that people working full time remain in poverty. Unemployment is down largely because of people “leaving the workforce.” And all along government services are being cut and cut and cut.

People see the government working for a wealthy few at the top, and against the rest of us. People see the rigged game at work against them. This is not just an economic and human catastrophe. With an election coming, key Democratic constituencies have simply been left behind during the Obama administration. “Are you better off now than you were 4 or 8 years ago? HELL NO!”

So this could become a political catastrophe as well, potentially bringing the return of the very people and conditions that got the country into this mess.

An Ongoing Catastrophe For Regular People

What Washington has done since the “Reagan Revolution” and especially since the 2008 crash has benefited the few, usually at the expense of the general public. Washington rescued the big banks, and left homeowners and the rest of us to fend for ourselves.

Anti-inflation monetary policy has been a catastrophe for regular people. (Protecting Wall Street at the expense of Main Street? Really?)

Washington’s austerity, budget-cutting fixation has been a catastrophe for regular people. (Laying off hundreds of thousands of public employees, cutting public investment and cutting back on the safety net during an unemployment crisis? Really?)

Washington’s “free trade” policies have been great for giant, multinational corporations but have been a catastrophe for regular people, sending millions upon millions of jobs out of the country. (Not even confronting blatant currency manipulation that is costing 5.8 million jobs? Really?)

Washington’s corporate tax policies have been a catastrophe for regular people. (Giving companies huge tax breaks for moving jobs, factories and profit centers out of the country? Really?)

One catastrophe after another hitting regular people. And people see it coming from a system that is rigged against them, working just fine for a wealthy few.

We did get the “stimulus.” The stimulus reversed the terrible plunge in jobs and showed that our government could fix the jobs emergency.

But that was all it did, and that was it. It worked but it was just not enough to get things going again. And now it’s five years later. As most people can see, after the stimulus the Obama administration capitulated to Republican/Wall Street demands for austerity – and outright budget blackmail. The President even at times reinforced the right’s ideological position by boasting about government progress in balancing its books rather than emphasizing the human cost of not boosting government resources to drive job creation. Democrats even voted to cut food stamp spending and the president signed the bill! (Cutting Food Stamps in the middle of a national jobs and poverty emergency? Really?)

We Demand Full Employment

The New Populism Conference on Thursday will demand full employment as the first principle of the new populism.

We demand full employment! Full employment means there is a job for everyone who wants a job. There is simply no reason whatsoever that we can’t have full employment – except for policies that are intentionally keeping us from having full employment.

We demand full employment! Why isn’t our government stepping up and just hiring all of the people who need jobs? It’s not as if there are not enough things that need to be done. Our infrastructure is in serious need of repair. We need to retrofit millions of buildings and homes in the country to be energy efficient. We need to build a modern energy grid to bring energy from wind farms that we need to build in the plains states (where the wind is) to the cities and industrial centers (where the need is). We need to cut the number of children per classroom in half. We need to do … so many things. Why isn’t our government the employer of last resort, just hiring people to do those things we need done – in the middle of an employment emergency?

We demand full employment! Unemployment is a human and economic catastrophe. There are so many things our government could do besides direct hiring (which they should be doing). Our government could fix our job-sucking trade deals and balance the trade budget. Our government could demand that corporations return the trillions of dollars they are holding outside of the country to avoid paying the taxes due on that money. That’s a double whammy; take away the huge incentive to move jobs out of the country because of the tax break – and use the money they already owe to just hire millions of people!

The New Populism Conference

Two speakers at this week’s New Populism Conference, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and economist Jared Bernstein will talk about the importance of growth and jobs in order to bring about a rapid change in inequality.

Rep. Ellison will talk about the Progressive Caucus investment strategy for full employment. Bernstein will talk about full employment and his recent book, “Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better Bargain for Working People,” co-written with economist Dean Baker.


The New Populism Conference on May 22 in Washington (featuring Sen. Elizabeth Warren) will discuss ways to fight for an agenda for economic change that strong majorities of Americans already support. (See the Populist Majority website containing polling numbers showing that Americans support this New Populist agenda.) Click here to register or to watch the conference live online.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary and/or for the Progress Breakfast.

Democrats Should Be For Jobs, Against Corporate Tax Giveaways

The country needs jobs. The country needs to start fixing up its crumbling infrastructure. The country doesn’t need more corporate tax breaks. Guess which of these three is in legislation the House is passing – unfortunately with help from many Democrats. If this keeps up, how will voters be able to decide who to vote for this fall?

Last week the House passed a huge – $156 billion worth of huge – Research and Experimentation Credit tax break for corporations. This is one part of a package of “tax extender” corporate tax breaks that is sneaking through the House. Sixty-Two Democrats joined the Republicans in approving this huge corporate tax break.

This $156 billion corporate tax break was passed by the same House of Representatives that won’t even bring up a vote on restoring unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed.

While the R&E tax credit is worthwhile, it was wrong for some Democrats to join with Republicans in voting for that research tax credit. Such credits should have been awarded as part of a package that included a full employment program, infrastructure funding, restored long-term unemployment benefits, restoring food stamps and many other things the public needs. Instead of using the corporate desire for this break as leverage – and making a political statement going into the midterm election – 62 Democrats just went ahead and voted for it.

The Country’s Jobs And Infrastructure Needs Go Hand In Hand

The main reason the economy is just sort-of slogging along is “austerity” – all of the cutbacks in government spending. Never mind that the country is not hiring for new construction, etc., in the middle of this jobs emergency we have instead laid off construction workers, teachers, police, Social Security workers, and other public servants. At the very time the economy needed a boost, government cutbacks have cost businesses and suppliers. Cutbacks have meant foreclosures, bankruptcies, people spending less in stores – all acting as dampers on economic growth.

America desperately needs public investment to create jobs and grow the economy. But the country has been deferring spending on maintaining – never mind modernizing – our infrastructure since the Reagan tax-cut years – especially when it comes to transportation. When Reagan came in (with huge oil company backing), the solar panels were removed from the White House roof and many public transit projects were removed from the national agenda.

We need to fix our infrastructure and people need jobs – can our elected officials connect the dots? But instead of voting to help Americans by maintaining (never mind modernizing) our infrastructure the House – with 62 Democrats joining in – voted for a huge, $156 billion corporate tax break. So now there is even less money to use to hire people to fix up the infrastructure.

Example: Congress Needs To Act On The Highway Trust Fund

Next up before Congress, the Highway Trust Fund is running out of money and the current surface transportation bill expires in September – just before the election. This threatens 6,000 projects and 700,000 jobs. (Yes, “government spending” really does bring a lot of jobs.) Congress has to either raise the gas tax against oil company opposition – and Congress doesn’t do anything against the interests of oil companies – or find other sources of funding.

The Senate Finance Committee recently reported, “According to the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, just maintaining the existing conditions and performance of U.S. roads and transit infrastructure would require a 50 percent increase in current funding levels.”

Again: just maintaining the infrastructure at current miserable levels (never mind modernizing) requires a 50 percent increase in funding. Democrats and progressives should be for that. This is public investment that pays for itself over time. There is no reason to “offset” this with cutbacks elsewhere.

The Republican Strategy Is Obstruction Coupled With Unprecedented Election Spending

This is happening because the Republican strategy for the fall elections is to do everything they can to deny people jobs and keep wages, benefits and the economy down – and then campaign blaming Obama and Democrats for the bad economy, lack of jobs and low wages. Republicans are obstructing everything that might help working people, while handing the treasury over to the billionaires and their giant corporations – especially oil companies. (The Koch Brothers are rich because they inherited one of those oil companies.)

This strategy could work unless Democrats expose it and offer sharp contrasts – all in ways that will reach the public. And reaching the public will be difficult. The Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity have stated they will be putting up at least another $125 million to elect Republicans – on top of the more than $35 million they have already spent to defeat Democrats in this year’s elections. This is just the one Republican organization, along with all the other spending coming this year by billionaires and corporations to elect Republicans.

Elite Frustration With Obstruction

The country’s elites understand that nothing is getting through the Congress, even as they do not tell voters who to blame. A recent Bloomberg news editorial, Creative Ways to Fill the Nation’s Potholes, expresses the national frustration with the gridlock. They say we need “creative thinking” to get important things funded and offer up with a scheme to bribe giant corporations. They write, “In a perfect world, the money for this essential work would be appropriated in a straightforward and transparent way. You’re right to laugh: That won’t happen.”

After not explaining to readers why “that won’t happen” – it is Republican obstruction – they offer some “creative thinking,” namely a huge bribe to corporations. They cite New York Democratic Rep. Steve Israel’s proposal “allowing companies holding large cash stockpiles abroad for tax reasons to bring their profits home at a preferential rate – on the condition that they spend about 10 percent of the repatriated income on a new kind of infrastructure bond.” (Because just telling these companies to pay their taxes is off the table.) Even Bloomberg admits, “A repatriation tax break worsens the convolution of a corporate tax code that is already far too tangled.”

Similarly, Norm Ornstein writes at the Atlantic:

Among the most embarrassing and unconscionable failures of the 113th Congress has been the inability to act in any way to help the economy through an infrastructure initiative, including but not limited to energy. The country’s infrastructure is crumbling, and the energy infrastructure is outmoded. Among the long-term unemployed, there are huge numbers of construction workers and skilled tradespeople who could be given a new lease on life, while energizing a continuing sluggish economy. And the money to pay for a major infrastructure initiative can be borrowed now at the lowest rates imaginable.

Ornstein also understands that nothing is going to get through Congress without bribing the giant multinationals. He also suggests letting companies off the hook for taxes on offshore profits if they use some of their cash to invest in infrastructure. He refers to bills before Congress that would “create a fund that would be capitalized with $50 billion in infrastructure bonds with 50-year terms paying a fixed interest rate of 1 percent. Corporations could repatriate a substantial amount of the profits they have accumulated overseas tax-free if they buy the bonds.”

Later, on another proposal, “The Green Bank would use a model that would incentivize companies to repatriate some of their profits abroad in return for investing in the bank as well.”

Again, this is just a bribe to the people Ornstein understands now control the Congress. Instead of Congress just making these companies pay their taxes and using that money to fund infrastructure, these are bribes to let them off the hook on their taxes if they would please let us fix the infrastructure a bit and thereby hire a few unemployed workers.

Draw A Contrast For The Election

The Republican strategy is simple and effective: Block everything, make everything feel worse for regular people, and then spend unprecedented amounts campaigning that nothing is getting done and everything feels worse under Obama and the Democrats. This will work, as long as the public feels everything getting worse without understanding that Democrats are trying to make things better but are being obstructed.

The only way to fight this obstructionist strategy is expose it and draw sharp contrasts between where conservatives want to take us and where a progressive populist economic agenda would take us. And these contrasts have to be sharp and clear enough to reach the public in ways that sink in.

Democrats should draw that contrast for voters in the coming elections and not confuse voters about what they are for and not for. Democrats should resolve to support only bills and deals that fix our infrastructure and create jobs. At the same time Democrats should say no to these tax giveaways to corporations. Democrats have to be seen fighting for jobs and being blocked. They have to be seen as trying to stop the corporate giveaways, not voting for huge corporate tax cuts.


Note – See the President’s transportation plan. Also see the National Priorities Project’s Report: “The Big Money in Tax Breaks Continues“:

In 2013, the cost of tax breaks was equal to the entire U.S. discretionary budget. However, the discretionary budget is subject to an annual appropriations process, where Congress debates the proposed spending. Tax breaks, on the other hand, remain on the books until lawmakers modify them. As a result, over a trillion dollars a year in lost revenue – more than 1.6 times the 2013 budget deficit – goes largely unnoticed.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary and/or for the Progress Breakfast.

Democrats Who Move Right Lose Elections – There Is No “Center”

p5rn7vb

Mainstream Democratic campaign consultants and pollsters typically tell candidates they should “move to the right” and campaign to the “center” with positions that are “between” the “left” and the “right.” This is the way, they say, to “attract swing voters” who would be “scared off” by a candidate who takes populist positions that favor the interests of the 99 percent over the interests of the 1 percent.

Polling and experience show that exactly the opposite might be true.

This week Lynn Vavrek writes at the New York Times Upshot blog, in “The Myth of Swing Voters in Midterm Elections“:

There just aren’t that many swing voters. … Ultimately voters tend to come home to their favored party. There are relatively few voters who cross back and forth between the parties during a campaign or even between elections.

Looking at the Democrat loss in the 2010 election, this is the key:

The results clearly show that voters in 2010 did not abandon the Democrats for the other side, but they did forsake the party in another important way: Many stayed home.

Again: In 2010 “swing” voters did not “shift” toward Republicans. What happened was that Democrats stayed home.

2011 Pew Poll: Independents Aren’t ‘Centrists’

Who are the “independent” voters? In 2011 The Washington Post’s “The Fix” looked at a Pew Research Center poll. In the post, “The misunderstood independent,” Aaron Blake and Chris Cillizza wrote (emphasis added)

In politics, it’s often tempting to put independents somewhere in the middle of Republicans and Democrats, politically. They identify somewhere in between the two, so they must be moderates, right?

A new study from the Pew Research Center suggests that’s not so true anymore. Independents, in fact, are a fast-growing and increasingly diverse group that both parties are going to need to study and understand in the years ahead.

. . . Pew identifies three different kinds of independents. Libertarians and Disaffecteds are 21 percent of registered voters and lean towards Republicans; Post-Moderns are 14 percent and lean towards Democrats.

A look at their views on issues shows those three groups can often be among the most extreme on a given topic.

Disaffecteds, for example, believe in helping the needy more than most Democrats. Libertarians side with business more than even the solidly Republican Staunch Conservatives. And Post-Moderns accept homosexuality more than most Democrats. The three independents groups are also less religious, on the whole, than either Republicans or most Democrats.

In other words, polling shows that many “independents” are to the left of Democrats and many others are to the right of Republicans. They are not “in the middle” or “between” but rather are more likely to stay home and not vote for candidates who move “to the middle.” Those independents to the right of Republicans are not going to vote for Democrats no matter how far “to the right” the Democratic candidate goes.

2010 PPP Poll: The Independents Who Stayed Home

In 2010 Greg Sargent wrote at the Washington Post’s Plum Line blog, “Progressives and centrists battle over meaning of indy vote” (emphasis added):

Independents are not a monolith, and what really happened is that indys who backed Obama in 2008 stayed home, because they were unsatisfied with Obama’s half-baked reform agenda, while McCain-supporting indys turned out in big numbers.

. . . The key finding: PPP asked independents who did vote in 2010 who they had supported in 2008. The results: Fifty one percent of independents who voted this time supported McCain last time, versus only 42 percent who backed Obama last time. In 2008, Obama won indies by eight percent.

That means the complexion of indies who turned out this time is far different from last time around, argues Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. His case: Dem-leaning indys stayed home this time while GOP-leaning ones came out — proof, he insists, that the Dems’ primary problem is they failed to inspire indys who are inclined to support them.

“The dumbest thing Democrats could do right now is listen to those like Third Way who urge Democrats to repeat their mistake by caving to Republicans and corporations instead of fighting boldly for popular progressive reforms and reminding Americans why they were inspired in 2008,” Green says.

March Florida Special Election

In the March special election in Florida’s 13th District, the Republican candidate strongly embraced the values of “the base” while the Democratic candidate took “centrist” positions, even embracing austerity and cuts to Social Security – in Florida. In Did Dems Have A Reason To Show Up And Vote In Florida House Race? I wrote about what happened, but in summary, R’s voted and Dems stayed home.

The Republican won by about 3,400 votes out of about 183,000 votes cast. Turnout was 58 percent in precincts Romney won in 2012, and 48.5 percent in precincts Obama won in 2012. There were 49,000 fewer people who voted in this election than in the 2010 general mid-term election (down 21 percent), and 158,500 fewer than in the 2012 Presidential (down 46 percent). So it was the failure to get Democratic voters to show up that lost them the election.

The Republicans ran “the furthest right a GOP candidate had run in the area” in 60 years. Meanwhile the Democrat tried to “reach across the aisle” to bring in “centrist” and “moderate” voters, and emphasized “cutting wasteful government spending” and “introducing performance metrics to hold government accountable for waste and abuse and creating the right fiscal environment for businesses to create jobs.”

Again, the Republican campaigned to the right, the Democrat campaigned “in the middle.” The result: Republicans showed up to vote, Democrats stayed home.

What The Heck Do “Centrist” And “The Middle” Even Mean?

Think about the words we use to describe voters and policy positions. “Left,” “right,” “between,” “center” and “swing” force the brain to visualize policy positions as endpoints on a straight line. The visualization forces people to imagine a “centrist” that is someone who holds positions that are somewhere “in the middle” and “between” the policy positions that are these endpoints. There is a bulk of voters who are imagined to “swing” from the positions on these endpoints, who are looking for politicians who don’t go “too far” in any policy direction. Politicians can “attract” these “swing” voters by taking positions that are “between” the endpoints.

But polling and experience tell us:

1) There are very few actual “independent voters.” Instead there are lots of voters who agree with the left or agree with the right, but are further to the left or right and so do not register as Democrats or Republicans.

2) There is no “swing voter” block “between” the parties. There are different groups of voters who decide to vote or stay home. No conservative “independent” who is to the right of the Republican party will vote for any Democrat, no matter how far right they move. All that moving to the right accomplishes is to cause many Democratic “base” voters to hold their noses if they do vote, and possibly just stay away from the polls.

Karl Rove got this. He understood that you can get the right-wing voters roused up to come to the polls by moving Republican politicians to the right. Instead of “moving to the center” he got Bush and the Republicans to stand up for conservative principles and refuse to compromise, and the result was that more of “the base” enthusiastically showed up at the polls.

Conclusion: You Have To Deliver For And Campaign To Your Base Or They Don’t Show Up

Here is what is very important to understand about the “swing” vote: Few voters “switch.” That is the wrong lesson. There are not voters who “swing,” there are left voters and right voters who either show up and vote or do not show up and vote.

The lesson to learn: You have to deliver for and campaign to YOUR “base” voters or they don’t show up and vote for you. If Democrats don’t give regular, working people –- the Democratic base -– a reason to vote, then many of them won’t.

To learn what the American voter wants, please visit Populist Majority, Exposing the gulf between American opinion and conventional wisdom.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

Tell Your Member of Congress To Vote For The ‘Better Off Budget’

Tell your member of Congress (MOC) to vote for the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) “Better Off Budget’ (BOB). Click to call.

This week the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on the “Ryan”/Republican corporate/conservative budget and the CPC “Better Off Budget.” This is a chance to offer the country a real and visible contrast that clearly shows off the advantages of a progressive approach to our economy over a conservative/corporate approach to our economy.

Please call and write your member of Congress and ask him or her to vote for the “Better Off Budget” from the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

CLICK TO CALL

The “Ryan” Republican Corporate/Conservative Budget

Rep. Paul Ryan’s Republican corporate/conservative budget favors the interests of the wealthiest few Americans and their giant multinational corporations at the expense of American-based manufacturers and other companies, America’s middle class working people and the poor. It actually takes heath care and protections away from millions of people, transforms Medicare towards a complicated voucher system for the profit of insurance companies and drastically cuts the “safety net” that now enables millions of poor and unemployed Americans to get by, (even as Republicans obstruct increases in the minimum wage and extending unemployment benefits for millions.)

  • The Republican budget cuts taxes on the wealthy and corporations. (Millionaires get an average tax cut of $200,000)
  • The Republican budget cuts $5.1 trillion from things government does to make our lives better.
  • The Republican budget keeps and expands loopholes in corporate taxes that encourage companies to move jobs and factories out of the country.
  • The Republican budget repeals the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), leaving millions with no insurance or possibility of getting insurance.
  • The Republican budget cuts Pell Grants for attending college by more than $125 billion over the next decade.
  • The Republican budget makes deep cuts to Medicaid, converts the program to a block grant administered at the state level, and repeals the Medicaid expansion.
  • The Republican budget cuts Food Stamps (SNAP) by at least $135 billion and converts the program to a block grant.
  • The Republican budget cuts domestic programs substantially – nearing 20 percent in some cases – for total cuts of $791 billion over a decade.
  • The Republican budget increases military spending by $483 billion.

According to Joshua Smith at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) the Republican budget “would decrease GDP by 0.9 percent and decrease nonfarm payrolls by 1.1 million jobs in fiscal year 2015… The following fiscal year, when Ryan’s cuts to discretionary spending kick in … [it] would decrease GDP by 2.5 percent and cost 3.0 million jobs.”

The Congressional Progressive Caucus “Better Off Budget”

The CPC “Better Off Budget” translates progressive values into a national budget that puts people to work, invests in our infrastructure and economy to drive our future prosperity, assists and provides greater opportunity for the less fortunate, protects our environment, drives down future budget deficits and demonstrates how a progressive approach actually addresses and fixes a number of our pressing national problems.

Here are some of the things this budget would do for the country if passed:

  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” increases employment by 4.6 million jobs in 2015 – 9 million by 2017 – and boosts gross domestic product (GDP) by 3.8 percent.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” increases taxes on the wealthiest by restoring Clinton tax rates for households making over $250,000 and implements new brackets for those making over $1 million.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” cuts out corporate tax loopholes that encourage companies to move jobs out of the country.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” ends subsidies provided to oil, gas and coal companies.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” enacts a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) on various financial market transactions to protect markets from excessive speculation and rigged high-speed trading.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” adds a public option and expanding payment reforms to Obamacare, and allows states to transition to single-payer health care systems.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” addresses the climate change crisis by enacting a price on carbon pollution while “holding low-income families harmless” – meaning paying back what they are taxed.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” restores food stamp – Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) – benefits and restores unemployment insurance.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” creates jobs in our building and construction industries with funds to repair and modernize roads, bridges, water and other infrastructure.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” includes a direct-hire Public Works and Education program that will hire physicians, students, construction and community workers, and an education program boost to hire more teachers and improve schools.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” enhances federal programs targeted at creating equity and improving outcomes for women, people of color, and their families.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” provides assistance to states to allow them to hire and rehire public employees such as police, firefighters and health care workers.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” invests in clean and renewable energy, which creates middle-class jobs, boosts the economy, and cuts pollution.

But wait, there’s more!

  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” implements comprehensive immigration reform, including a pathway to citizenship.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” funds public financing of campaigns to curb special interest influence in politics.
  • The CPC “Better Off Budget” endorses “Scrapping the Cap” – it would require high-income individuals to contribute payroll taxes at the same rate as people earning less than $100,000 a year – and expanding Social Security benefits separately from the federal budget process.

What The Public Wants

Here’s the thing: The CPC “Better Off Budget” respects what the American people want Washington to do. Take a look at the website Populist Majority to see what the polls show. It also fixes a number of America’s serious problems, like jobs and infrastructure, addresses climate change, and gets to work on helping people out of poverty. At the same time the public really does not like the things that are in this Republican budget.

If enough Democrats support the CPC “Better Off Budget,” the public will have the opportunity to see that we have real and different choices in the Fall elections.

Please call and write your member of Congress and ask him or her to vote for the “Better Off Budget” from the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

CLICK TO CALL

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

Close The Loophole That Lets Companies Avoid Paying Taxes

Big companies have discovered a loophole that lets them avoid paying their taxes. These tax-dodgers are holding $2 trillion-plus of taxable profits outside of the US, on which they could owe as much as $700 billion in taxes. What could our country do with this $700 billion it is owed? Why won’t Congress just make them pay what they owe?

These companies discovered that they can move jobs, factories, labs, call centers and profit centers out of the country and by doing that they can avoid paying U.S. corporate taxes. Instead of figuring out how to get these companies to pay the taxes they owe, Congress is considering proposals to reward them and encourage more companies to do this.

The Loophole That Lets Companies Avoid Paying Taxes

Current tax laws let companies defer paying the taxes they owe on profits made outside the country until they “bring the money back.” The reason for this is that some companies want to use this money to expand, leading to increased future profits. This is good for these companies and our country because they expand profits and the country gets additional tax revenue later.

But more and more companies have been cheating, using this “deferral” to avoid paying taxes at all. They are holding profits outside of the country simply to avoid taxes and not to invest and expand, even though this is not the intent of this tax rule. Some companies are even inventing ways to make it look like their US profits were made outside of the US so they can take advantage of this mistake in the tax laws. Other companies actually move jobs, factories, call centers and profit centers out of the country to take advantage of this loophole.

$2 Trillion!

It has gotten so bad that U.S. companies are holding as much as $2 trillion or more outside of the country. If this were taxed at the top tax rate of 35 percent, that would mean $700 billion in taxes is already owed, but is being kept away from being used to fix bridges, improve schools, pay judges and the other things We the People (government) do to make our lives better. Also those profits are being kept away from use investing in the US, as well as from shareholders.

Meanwhile companies that keep jobs and production inside the U.S. and don’t cheat on their taxes are at a clear disadvantage. They have to compete with companies that lay off U.S. workers and close U.S. factories, and get to not pay their taxes because they did that. And, of course, they have less money to use for bribes lobbying to get what they want.

Here are the proposals currently being discussed in Congress to address this:

  1. Make these companies just pay the taxes they owe and stop moving jobs and factories, etc. out of the country. (No one is actually suggesting this, these companies are very powerful and spread a lot of bribe lobbying and campaign money around.)
  2. Let them just keep doing what they have been doing, which encourages more companies to move jobs, factories, etc. out of the country. This is the current status quo.
  3. Let them off the hook and have a “tax holiday” that lets off the hook for some or all of the taxes they owe. There are proposals before the Congress to do this. (Too bad for those companies that actually paid their taxes.)
  4. Change the tax laws so companies that move jobs, factories, call centers and profit centers out of the country don’t have to pay taxes. This is called a “Territorial Tax System” and there are proposals before Congress to do this. (Too bad for companies that don’t want to move jobs, factories etc out of the country, they won’t be able to compete.)

Two of the proposal in front of the Congress include,

  • Republican Rep. Dave Camp’s House Ways & Means proposal gives a tax holiday to companies that owe taxes (#3), and then cuts taxes on profits made from moving jobs and production out of the U.S. by 90 percent (#4). Finally it would cut top U.S. corporate tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent.
  • The Partnership to Build America Act (sponsored by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. John Delaney (D-Md.)) would let companies that owe taxes bring home offshore profits tax-free (#3) if they use some of the money to buy bonds in an “infrastructure bank.” This would be a loan, so the companies get even this money back, with interest.

Call your member of Congress and ask them to just make these companies bring those profits home and pay their taxes, period. Tell them no “tax holidays” and no “territorial tax.” Just make them pay their taxes.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

FL-13 – Did Dems Have A Reason To Show Up And Vote?

Republicans won in Florida’s 13th district special congressional election on Tuesday. What does this mean?

Here is the key point about why the Republican candidate: More Republican voters went to the polls and voted than Democrat voters. The Republican won by about 3,400 votes out of about 183,000 votes cast. Turnout was 58 percent in precincts Romney won in 2012, and 48.5 percent in precincts Obama won in 2012. There were 49,000 fewer people who voted in this election than in the 2010 general mid-term election (down 21 percent), and 158,500 fewer than in the 2012 Presidential (down 46 percent). So it was the failure to get Democratic voters to show up that lost them the election.

The obvious conclusion is that the Democratic candidate did not give Democratic voters sufficient reason and motivation to show up and vote. If just a few more Democrats – 3,400 – had decided to show up and vote the election would have gone the other way.

Factors and Non-Factors

Obamacare? Maybe not. According to David Weigel at Slate, “both rejected the national “narrative” that the race was a clear referendum on Obamacare.”

It wasn’t spending. Outside groups showed up and helped the Democrat, balancing out the usually enormous Republican spending advantage.

Medicare counted. Republicans accused Democrats of “$716 in Medicare Cuts.” This was the same theme that shifted the 2010 election to Republicans, and it helped again.

)

The Democrats fell short in getting their absentee voters to mail in their ballots. According to Sean Sullivan at The Washington Post, the Democratic candidate “did not build a big enough lead in absentee voting to prevail on election day.”

It’s The Base

Republican strategy is to feed red meat to “the base” to whip them up and get them to show up, (and do what they can to suppress Democratic turnout). In this race the Republican candidate ran to the right. Kartik Krishnaiyer of The Florida Squeeze, in a great analysis of the election, wrote that “this is the furthest right a GOP candidate had run in the area” in 60 years.

The Republican appeared on and was promoted by FOX News.

Apparently the Democratic candidate tried to “appeal to the middle,” thinking this would bring in “moderate” and “independent” voters who are thought to be “between” the left and the right. Her website emphasized “breaking the gridlock in Congress,” and offers, “I’ve proven again and again that Republicans and Democrats can work together to get things done.”

The website also emphasizes “cutting wasteful government spending” and “introducing performance metrics to hold government accountable for waste and abuse and creating the right fiscal environment for businesses to create jobs.”

So the Democratic candidate decided not to appeal to base Democratic voters, instead hoping to “reach across the aisle” to bring in “centrist” and “moderate” voters instead. One way or another this “appeal to the middle” failed to bring enough “moderate” voters to the polls to overcome the left-leaning voters it repelled.

Democrats Let It Happen

Thomas Frank summed up the problem in “The matter with Kansas now: The Tea Party, the 1 percent and delusional Democrats” at Salon. The subhead is “Democrats believe demographics alone will defeat the Tea Party. It’s a smug fantasy: Economic populism’s the answer.”

Even more alarming for Democrats were the stark implications of “Kansas” for their grand strategy of “centrism.” As I tried to make plain back in 2004, the big political change of the last 40 years didn’t happen solely because conservatives invented catchy conspiracy theories, but also because Democrats let it happen. Democrats essentially did nothing while their pals in organized labor were clubbed to the ground; they leaped enthusiastically into action, however, when it was time to pass NAFTA and repeal Glass-Steagall. Working-class voters had nowhere else to go, they seem to have calculated, and — whoops! — they were wrong. The Kansas story represented all their decades of moderating and capitulating and triangulating coming back to haunt them.

If Democrats don’t give regular, working people – the Democratic base – a reason to vote, then they won’t. In Florida’s 13th District, 3,400 of them decided there was not enough reason to bother.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

No Fast Track To TPP: Fix NAFTA First

The big corporations and the Obama administration are trying to push through a giant new trade treaty that gives corporations even more power, and which will send even more jobs, factories, industries and money out of the country. This is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and they are pushing something called “fast track” in Congress to help push it through.

We have to stop this, and we should take the momentum we have generated in our push-back on this to demand Congress and President Obama instead fix NAFTA first. Then fix all of our trade relationships to help working people on all sides of our borders.

TPP, Fast Track And NAFTA

There has been a lot of news about the upcoming TPP trade agreement. The agreement is being negotiated in extreme secrecy in a corporate-dominated process that appears to be leading to an agreement that would give corporations even more power than they already have. Now there is a push to pass a process called fast track through Congress in order to enable the large corporations to strong-arm TPP into law mobilized organizations around the country to sound the alarm.

Continue reading

Senate Democrats: Change Filibuster Rules, Make Them Talk

Republicans filibustered the extension of unemployment benefits on the Senate floor Tuesday. Why? Because they can get away with it. Look at how the press reported what happened.

If the public doesn’t know that filibusters are occurring, how can democracy hold Republicans accountable for doing it? Instead they hear from the corporate media that the bill is “stalled,” “the Senate failed” or “the Senate deadlocks” due to “finger-pointing” or “partisan squabbling.” What message does the public get from that? Probably that they shouldn’t bother to vote.

The New York Times: “Unemployment Extension Is Stalled, With 2 Proposals Defeated in the Senate“: “Unemployment benefits for 1.3 million of the long-term unemployed — and millions more in the future — were imperiled on Tuesday after Senate efforts to reach accord on legislation to revive them collapsed in partisan finger-pointing.”

Continue reading