Mobility and Choice: Things to be Grateful For

David Cates, the father of a friend of mine, has a book about to be published entitled X Out of Wonderland. A farce, the book follows a character named X as he looks deeper and deeper into the dark side of the Global Free Market.

I mention the book not merely because it is an excellent read or because it does a wonderful job of poking fun at the free market (including the wonderful character, Dr. Fingerdoo, who I interpreted to be a Tom Friedman-ripoff), but because it increasingly seems like farce is simply unnecessary as a way of understanding what is going wrong with global markets.

Poverty is rising and median wages are falling even as our economy (measured by GDP) grows. The average CEO now makes 430 times what the average worker makes. 15 years ago, that ratio was 100-to-1. Gasoline prices are spiking and natural gas prices are expected to increase with a 27 percent rate hike in Montana just approved.

In other words, America's working families are making less and less money while their overhead costs are getting bigger and bigger. In October, they'll be hit again by an increase in minimum payments on their credit card bills.

Meanwhile, the Administration is doing virtually nothing to help deal with the rising costs of health care.

In X Out of Wonderland, Cates portrays a world in which workers are to be grateful for the twin values of "Mobility and Choice" -- a world where we go places we don't want to be so that we can "choose" to take jobs we don't want. The book is hilarious, in the makes-you-want-to-cry sort of way.

So, these days in America we can be grateful, that there are so many jobs to choose from even if we don't want them and that, since they're so awful, we're free to leave them whenever we want.

Mobility and choice. It's something, I guess.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

One Trick Pony

I've been awfully repetitive these last couple days, but, frankly, Hurricane Katrina is the only game in town. Check out this fresh-from-the-wires AP story:

"'We know there is a significant number of dead bodies in the water,' and other people dead in attics, Mayor Ray Nagin said. Asked how many, he said: 'Minimum, hundreds. Most likely, thousands.'

"The frightening estimate came as Army engineers struggled to plug New Orleans' breached levees with giant sandbags and concrete barriers, while authorities drew up plans to clear out the tens of thousands of people left in the Big Easy and all but abandon the flooded-out city.

"There will be a 'total evacuation of the city. We have to. The city will not be functional for two or three months,' Nagin said."

Meanwhile, Andrew Sullivan cautions against saying that this in any way worse than 9/11. After all, Sullivan says, we don't yet know how many people died and this hurricane was not pre-meditated. Interestingly, this last point highlights an interesting philosophical problem for people who would say 9/11 is worse but maintain that hate crimes consist of thought policing. This much is clear: Hurricane Katrina, along with last year's tsunami, is a reminder of how powerful natural forces are in this world. They simply are more powerful than virtually anything humans have yet to create.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Assessing Responsibility

In high school, I participated in a model government program that was big on pushing "servant leadership." Part of what the woman who ran the program emphasized was that leadership appears in different forms. To do this, she used the story of a building on fire.

Imagine a burning apartment building. In such a scenario, you'll have the organized crowd who already has checked for stairwells to exit and will be making sure everyone gets out of the building, running through mental checklists. Emotionally caring people will get outside and immediately work to get blankets and hot chocolate to people standing in the cold and comforting people who are scared. Firefighters will be running into the building to fight the blaze (people with "firefighter" style personalities are often also the sort of people who end up starting fires). And fire inspectors will spend time looking at evidence in order to determine who started the blaze.

Each of these actions requires different strengths, but all of them share the fact that they require leadership skills. But there's something else that you could do outside a burning building, something that shows absolutely no leadership: patently denying that the drunk kids playing with matches and everclear had anything to do with the blaze.

Let's face it. The Bush Administration diverted money from safety projects in Louisiana to the Iraq War. They have helped stop the country from doing anything about global warming, despite the fact that climate change may be partially responsible for triggering this event. And the fact that they've relied so heavily on guard troops and equipment means that we're facing critical shortfalls in Louisiana.

Of course, the people at RedState are merely saying that the left is using human tragedy as a way to attack the Bush Administration. Look, the simple truth is that many of these problems were foreseen, but advice was ignored, and Bush was running around playing guitar while Rome burns. That's not leadership, it's incompetence and calling it out is called accountability. In other words, some of us need to be the fire inspectors, because getting to the truth ain't exactly the Bush Admin's strong suit.

That said, there is an immense human tragedy in the gulf, so the drumbeat goes on: Donate to the Red Cross today. Do something to help people. But don't forget to assess who is responsible.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Helping in the Short Term

I don't often donate to charities, not because I'm stingy with my money, but because I prefer to donate to political action that better addresses problems in the long-term. But right now there's a number of people in New Orleans who can't wait for the long term.

Please, donate to the Red Cross today. This storm is awful. And we can and should discuss the impact of global warming on tropical storms, the poor planning of having our National Guard dispatched across the globe, or merely the incompetent leadership that speechifies on Social Security privatization while New Orleans drowns.

But those are debates for tomorrow. Today, people need our help. Please, offer some.

I'm in for $20. It ain't a lot, but it's what I can afford.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Homeland Response (by Matt Singer)

With Louisiana recovering from Hurrican Katrina, oil prices are rising. And this event is only proving too clearly that Bush's leadership has failed again.

For the past 6 months, Montana's Governor Brian Schweitzer has been publicly questioning the dispatch of state National Guard troops across the planet to fight wars. It turned out that this year, Montana could tackle its fires without as much Guard assistanc, but Louisiana is facing some serious problems as a result of a lack of equipment.

Amazingly, a couple years ago, this simply wasn't a partisan issue. Gary Hart and the Heritage Foundation agreed that the proper role of the National Guard, with members all over the nation, is to respond to local emergencies and be a first line of defense at home. But this Administration sent the Guard to Iraq and has left local Guard leadership in Louisiana so nervous that they are speaking out against Pentagon policy, not exactly a common occurence in chain-of-command situations.

Clearly, the Bush Administration's policies have failed us again, with a clearly human cost to their incompetence.

(My apologies for my lack of posting yesterday. I got quite busy and lacked internet access for most of the day. I promise it will get better.)

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Hostile Takeover In Bookstores Spring 2006

Yesterday, I finally completed the book I have been working on for the last 6 months for Random House's Crown Publishers. The book is called "Hostile Takeover" - it is about how Corporate America has bought our politicians into spewing their dishonest justifications for squeezing America's middle class. It is expected to be in bookstores Spring 2006.

Make no mistake about it - the book is a look at both parties, and how they have consistently sold out America's core economic interests. There are stories about the heroes who have fought the hostile takeover, and those who have aided and abetted it. It will be quite a ride when it comes out, as the book pulls absolutely no punches.

It's time the political elitists that have run this country into the ground be confronted with the key issue that rarely gets talked about in our political debate: how Corporate America has performed a hostile takeover of our government.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Are Americans' Freedoms Under Threat?

This report from Raw Story is pretty damn scary - the FBI is apparently focusing its post-9/11 counterterrorism resources on a civil rights/peace group. Add this to Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' questionable record on privacy issues, and it becomes clear that many freedoms are being severely threatened here in America these days.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Heh

Fafblog has outdone itself in this portrayal of the Democratic Party struggling with how to deal with "the best worst idea in the world."

Utterly hilarious.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Non-Industrial Unions

One of the common threads I hear in conversations with friends, even pro-labor friends, is that they don't understand so-called professional unions, white collar unions, or unions for jobs outside the blue collar world.

This reasoning has always struck me as a bit off, if for no other reason than that the underlying issues of corporate v. employee power don't change simply because of what the work-a-day task is. In fact, in many ways, the service economy is the area most in need of unionization.

To realize that, you needn't look much further than a blog post by a college student in my homestate of Montana. James Greer, the author of the post, is currently juggling three jobs to pay for school. At one of these jobs, he is subjected to minimum wage pay and hate speech from his boss. If this story doesn't, in three lines, encapsulate what is wrong with our economy in many ways, I'm not sure what would.

And that's what is important to realize about James' story. Workers in non-union service industries are often left as alone and intimidated as non-union industrial workers. Two years ago, I worked in a kitchen were my boss would refer to women who had abortions as evil, while women were in the room. I don't know whether any of those women had ever had abortions. I do know that the manager was out-of-line for the workplace. I also know that employees aren't exactly going to pick a fight over being called evil or immoral when the other option is being empty-walleted and hungry.

Unions aren't fundamentally in place to protect those who engage in back-breaking physical labor. They're in place to restore a semblance of balance between employer and employee. That's a balance as necessary in the store room, stock room, class room or kitchen as it is on the assembly line.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

CAFTA, Bankruptcy, the Energy Bill, and Roberts (by Matt Singer)

One of the interesting things happening out in Washington, DC, this year is witnessing how the religious right and Republican Party are doing their strange dance, embracing and then separating, flirting then criticizing.

But a steady drumbeat coming out Washington, DC, this year shows that the city really is now corporate-owned. Between the bankruptcy bill, the energy bill, and CAFTA, it's tough to think of three worse pieces of legislation that big business could seek. And now, they're looking to go after the Supreme Court.

And they aren't exactly hiding it, either.

Nathan Newman takes some time to highlight the National Association of Manufacturer's blog endorsement of John Roberts. In their own endorsement, they note that 80% of a federal court's caseload "involves issues with direct impact on manufacturers: torts, contracts, employment law, etc., not social issues."

NAM also pledges to fight for Roberts' confirmation just as they fought for the bankruptcy and energy bills and CAFTA.

Make no mistake about it, the indications of where Roberts will fall on social issues are mixed. His record on corporate issues is clear. He carries water for them and they are his clients of choice. Big business knows that and it is salivating, because it wants to achieve its 4th coup this year.

Just as the votes on bankruptcy, energy, and CAFTA couldn't really fall into place without the support of some Democrats, Roberts nomination is only assured if Democrats play ball.

But already, Dems like Senator Feinstein are making social policy, not economic policy, the litmus test for Roberts. That's not going to be a tough bar for this Administration. When it comes to cutting off their base on social policy to line up another win for big business, I'm thinking the Texas oilmen will cut a deal.

--Matt Singer

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Power of Working Assets

One last post before I go - make sure to check out what Working Assets is doing to help show support for Cindy Sheehan down in Crawford. The company continues to help busy people make a difference in the world, and be involved in politics at all levels.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Singer Takes Over As Sirota Goes "Down the Shore"

I'm headed out for a week to visit my family, who are vacationing in what is one of America's most exotic summer locales: The Jersey Shore (and if you didn't get the humor in that, well...you've never been "Down the Shore"). In my place, my good friend Matt Singer from Left in the West is taking over. I know that while I am strolling on the boardwalk or eating greasy pizza on the beach, this blog will be in good hands.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

U.S. Energy Independence, Montana-Style

Go read about it.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Would Dems Really Deliberately Drive Into a Ditch?

I have given proper applause to Pennsylvania Senate candidate Bob Casey (D) for raising questions about the Iraq War in his 2006 race for the U.S. Senate against Rick Santorum. But I must say, I was disturbed when I read today about his Kerry-2004-style position on the Iraq War vote itself.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that "on the major Iraq votes - authorizing force and funding the operation - Casey said he would have supported those measures, just as Santorum did." Now, you can make a credible argument that his position on the Iraq war funding vote is honest, as the logic is, at least, defensible: once the troops were over there, the argument goes, we had to fund their armor and equipment. That's fine.

But to say that knowing what we know now - which is that Iraq had no WMD (the very reason we were told we were going to war) and didn't pose an imminent threat to America - you still would have voted for the Iraq War is just plain silly, regardless of whether you support a withdrawal now or not. That is sort of like getting out of your wrecked car after making a wrong turn into a ditch and saying knowing what you know now about there being a ditch there, you'd still have made that wrong turn, destroyed your car, and gotten it stuck there.

The fact that there are only a few Democrats who are willing to say the obvious - that the country was misled and people who voted for the war made a mistake - transcends the war itself and cuts to a deeper and more damaging problem for the party: the public perception that Democrats are so afraid to stand up for anything, they openly embrace policies even after they've been proven to be terribly misguided.

But even beyond the illogic of this "still would have voted for it knowing what I know now" position is the fact that it has been road-tested and shown to be politically dumb. Kerry said the same thing in August of 2004 - and in doing so, effectively took the war off the table for debate in the 2004 presidential election. Do Democrats really think that was a winning strategy? And do they really think it will be a winning strategy with polls showing Americans are even more opposed to this war now than they were in 2004?

Santorum's Pants are En Fuego

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Senator Rick Santorum's pants are officially on fire. Go read.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Attacking Freedom to Fight for Freedom

Editor & Publisher reports that "the American Legion, which has 2.7 million members, has declared war on antiwar protestors, and the media could be next." Speaking at its national convention in Honolulu, the group's national commander, Thomas Cadmus, called for an end to all "public protests" and "media events" against the war. He said war critics "demoralize our troops [and] endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples."

Not surprisingly, the right seems to be reading right off the same talking points. First there was Ashcroft ("critics aid terrorists, erode our national unity and diminish our resolve"), then Rumsfeld (critics are "encouraging terrorists and complicating the ongoing U.S. war on terrorists"), then the White House (critics "don't share [our] view that we must win the war on terror"), and now Cadmus.

Apparently, Cadmus - who purports to represent the beliefs of all veterans - hasn't read this piece from the Pensacola News-Journal. If he had, he'd realize that many veterans pretty well understand that criticism of the war is not criticism of the troops.

And Cadmus also doesn't seem to realize the true ridiculousness of his comments. We are being told that we are fighting a war in Iraq to create democracy and protect freedom. Yet, Cadmus is actually attacking democracy and those freedoms right here at home. It is really insane - but it highlights once again how the American public has been sold a false bill of goods about the war since it started. All the shifting reasons for war - WMD, democracy, fighting terrorists, etc. - have left the neocon, pro-war right running around making hypocritical arguments, as if the public is just plain stupid. And that's ultimately one of the key reasons why polls show Americans oppose the war and feel deliberately misled.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

DLC Helps Spread Claim That "Progressives Destroyed America"

There is a case to be made that Democrats should go on Fox News, even if it is a right-wing network, because the network blasts its content to the general public. But there is no case to be made that any non-right-wing lunatic should take part in an event at the fringe-conservative Heritage Foundation entitled "Did the Progressives Destroy America?" Unlike a Fox News show where you are speaking to potentially swing voters, there is no "general public" audience at this event - it is an event designed to perpetuate among the Washington, D.C. insider establishment the worst right-wing dishonesty. Any participation by our side helps legitimize this nonsense. Yet, incredibly, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is headlining the event.

That's right, Will Marshall - President of the DLC's Orwellian-labeled "Progressive Policy Institute" - is lending his name to the event and taking part. I guess we shouldn't be surprised - this is the same Will Marshall who calls war critics "anti-American". Sure, Marshall will disingenuously argue that he is there to "debate" the issue. But he's been in Washington long enough to know exactly what he's doing: deliberately helping to legitimize the worst right-wing lies. If there was ever a question as to whether the DLC is actively trying to undermine Democrats and the progressive movement in general, there shouldn't be anymore. The answer is, yes they are.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Support Feingold on Iraq

Go urge your Member of Congress to support Sen. Russ Feingold's (D) demand for a timetable for bringing our troops home from Iraq.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Groupthink & the Decay of American Health Care

Malcolm Gladwell has a truly fascinating article in the New Yorker about how economists group think and genuflecting to the theory of "moral hazard" has justified an immoral health care system that is damaging this country. Go read the whole piece - it is really terrific.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

2006 Dem Candidates Ignoring D.C. Dems

A few weeks ago, the D.C. Democratic Establishment did its best to downplay the Iraq War as a political issue. Apparently, the Democrats who loudly supported the war are afraid to even address it now. Luckily, more and more top-tier 2006 Democratic U.S. Senate candidates are ignoring that strategy, and frontally addressing the Iraq War.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Who Will Say "No More"?

Gary Hart asks the question about Iraq - and in doing so, he offers up one of the most crisp and disturbing indictments of both parties I've seen in a long while.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

TV Station Rejects Ad, Says There's "No Proof" Bush Lied About WMD

This is really incredible. A CBS television affiliate in Boise, Idaho is refusing to air an ad by critics of the Iraq War because, unlike the American public, it says "there is no proof" that President Bush lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. No proof? I mean, really? No proof?

How about the CIA's October 2004 report, which CNN noted said:

"Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them...Iraq's WMD program was essentially destroyed in 1991 and Saddam ended Iraq's nuclear program after the 1991 Gulf War."

How about President Bush's own top weapons inspector, David Kay, in 2004? Again, the excerpt from CNN:

"David Kay said Sunday that his group found no evidence Iraq had stockpiled unconventional weapons before the U.S.-led invasion in March...'My summary view, based on what I've seen, is we're very unlikely to find large stockpiles of weapons, he said on National Public Radio's 'Weekend Edition.' 'I don't think they exist.'"

I could go on here, but instead, if you want more, just go read this piece I wrote in 2004, when this issue was settled.

Seriously, folks - are we actually still having this argument? Or is this really once again another transparent effort to simply silence criticism of the war?

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

White House Says Majority of Americans Don't Want to Win the War on Terror

Editor & Publisher reports today that the White House's top spokesman today "said that President Bush believes that those who want the U.S. to begin to change course in Iraq do not want America to win the overall 'war on terror.'" When asked about war critics, Trent Duffy, press secretary subbing for Scott McClellan, said that Bush "can understand that people don't share his view that we must win the war on terror." Using that logic and looking at polls, that means the White House is accusing the majority of Americans of not believing "that we must win the war on terror." And they said McCarthyism was bad...

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Media Want The War

The media is now openly attacking those who oppose the Iraq war, leading to the only logical conclusion: reporters actually want the war to continue, no matter how many American casualties, no matter how much damage is done to U.S. national security, and no matter what the outcome.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Exposing Lies About Malpractice & Health Care Costs

The insurance industry is airing ads in Washington, D.C. claiming that malpractice cases are driving up insurance premiums for the District's doctors, thus inflating health care costs for consumers. It is true – the city's largest medical malpractice insurer had raised premiums on doctors by 51 percent in just four years. But that insurer also acknowledges in its own filings with the city government that its total paid claims declined by 9 percent in that same time, meaning it is raising premiums even though it is paying out less.

Bottom line, as with this issue nationally: Corporate America is dishonestly claiming that malpractice cases are the cause of high health insurance premiums in order to justify legislation that limits citizens' legal rights to fight corporate abuse. It is doing this, even though the hard data shows that the real problem in health care is insurance industry profiteering.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Pollster Says Iraq Opposition Shows "Vitality in the Dem Party"

In this Houston Chronicle story, nonpartisan pollster Andrew Kohut points out that progressives' resurgence and our fight against the Bush administration's Iraq War policy is very positive for the Democratic Party in general.

Here's the excerpt:

"Pollster Andy Kohut at the Pew Research Center said agitation by liberal groups may be evidence 'of vitality in the Democratic Party' and a sign that party leaders have lost touch with many supporters."

That's exactly right.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Follow the Money & Change Your Community

The New York Daily News had a story yesterday that teaches us all a little something about how to really make change in our community: follow the money.

The story is about the grassroots group ACORN, and its "Fix It Now" campaign that is targeting slumlords. The story notes that "tenants in one of New York's worst apartment buildings got nowhere when they complained to their landlord but after complaining to his banker, they got results." ACORN's Bertha Lewis noted that "In our research, we saw that Citibank had a mortgage on 13 of [the landlord's] buildings, and 552 Academy was one of them. We told Citibank that it's not whether you like us or don't like us - it's whether your collateral is going bad." And after showing Citibank that the landlord wasn't living up to his obligation, the bank pressured the landlord to meet with the tenants and set up a timetable for repairs.

That, in a nutshell, is how you do it.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Pat Robertson's Unhelpful Call for Assassination

Here's an interesting question: To an objective non-American looking at the situation from an outside vantage point, is there really much of a difference between a terrorist leader going on television and issuing a fatwa against American political leaders, and Pat Robertson going on television and essentially issuing a fatwa against democratically-elected leaders in other countries?

It's an interesting question - and one that bodes poorly for America's image throughout the world. Here we are in Iraq, supposedly fighting against the fatwa-issuing terrorists and for democracy in Iraq (though that was never the reason for the war), and one of America's top conservative leaders issues a fatwa against a democratically elected leader in a neighboring country to the south.

This isn't to say that Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is a great guy - but he was twice democratically elected in elections that were verified to be legitimate. Additionally, America currently relies heavily on Venezuela for oil.

So, really, no matter how bad you think Hugo Chavez is, it's pretty fair to say that Pat Robertson's latest bout of wild-eyed extremism (and it is just one of many) is extraordinarily unhelpful almost any way you look at it.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Rep. Greg Meeks Becomes Dems Cautionary Tale

Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY) is quickly becoming an important cautionary tale about what happens when Democrats sell out their working class base. After voting for things like the Central American Free Trade Agreement and the bankruptcy bill, Meeks has been the target of much local criticism in his home district. And he hasn't taken it too well.

First, New York's powerful Working Families Party and top unions held a public rally to demand the House Democratic Leadership remove Meeks from his committee assignments. Meeks responded by having a staffer claim that the criticism of his votes were somehow "racist." Ridiculous.

Now, Meeks' hometown paper hammered him for selling out. Meeks responded by trying to stop other papers from publishing critical stories about his votes (see one of those stories here).

Here's a little advice to Meeks and other Democrats who are consistently undermining their party and America's middle class: if you don't want to be criticized for selling out, THEN DON'T SELL OUT. It's just that simple.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

TNR Complains About Dems Lying In The Bed TNR Made

I like New Republic writer Michael Crowley - he's one of the good ones at an increasingly dreadful (and irrelevant, in terms of circulation) magazine. However, Crowley really laid a doozy this morning over at Talking Points Memo.

Crowley decries the fact that Democrats are divided on, among other things, the Iraq War. Yet, it was his publication, the New Republic, which is in part responsible for that divide. After all, it was the New Republic which backed the Iraq War, and whose highest-profile figure - editor Peter Beinart - was out on TV vehemently attacking the majority of the party who opposed the war. For just some taste of how the New Republic has tried to sow divisions in the party, sSee my earlier posts here and here - or, better yet, just read Eric Alterman's writeup.

Now, it is true - I have done my share of criticism of Democrats - but my criticism is generally targeted at those few who are undermining the party's consensus position. That is, I go after those few turncoat politicians who undermine the rest of what is basically a pretty unified party. The New Republic (and the DLC) does exactly the opposite - they trumpet the turncoat and the undermining position.

Now, hilariously, the New Republic seems to be the decrying the division it helped exacerbate. Are they that divorced from reality that they can't even see how ridiculous they look?

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Vets Understand Iraq War Criticism Is Not Criticism of Our Troops

In case Democrats were worried that opposing the Preisdent's Iraq War policy will raise the ire of those in the military, they should read this piece in the Pensacola News-Journal. The story, from a town with a sizable military population, notes that "If there's growing sentiment against the war in Iraq, many area veterans of the fight aren't taking it personally. Vets see the opposition as a protest against policy, not them or their service."

The thing is, it insults the intelligence of our soldiers to think that they will automatically believe that questioning the President's misguided Iraq War policy - and the lies that got us to that policy - is undermining the troops. In fact, as I wrote earlier today, when Democrats demand answers and an exit strategy, they are being pro-soldier, in that they are saying it is unacceptable for our political leaders to leave our troops in a perilous situation without a serious plan to bring them home.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Pressing Dems to Get a Backbone On Iraq

The Philadelphia Inquirer has a great piece today on how many of the highest-profile Democrats are still unwilling to take a serious position on the Iraq War. Take a look at the Inquirer story, and then, if you are interested, take a look at my commentary about the piece, and about the bigger issue at hand. There's some bad news, but there's also some good news.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

He's Right, They Are Stooges

Reuters reports today that Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) has riled up the hacks at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) when, after revelations of Mad Cow disease, he announced plans to test Canadian cattle entering his state and charge meat processing companies for the extra inspection. Schweitzer said he wasn't surprised by the USDA's willingness to fight for the meat industry and against his pro-consumer efforts. "A few years ago, the four big meat companies, they expanded their role in this country," he said. "They bought a U.S. company called the United States Department of Agriculture." Schweitzer said the USDA officials "are a bunch of stooges" and noted that "The USDA crawled right into bed with them (the meat companies) and they run our internal policy and our international (beef) policy." He's exactly right.

As Knight-Ridder reported on 5/18/03, President Bush has made sure USDA "is staffed with former executives of the meat industry, now in charge of regulating their former employers." USDA "Chief of staff Dale Moore, senior adviser Elizabeth Johnson, and Chuck Lambert, deputy undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs, all came from the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. Deputy Undersecretary James Butler joined USDA after serving as partner in Butler & Son Charolais Ranch, a Texas cattle company, while Deputy Secretary James Moseley was managing partner of Infinity Pork L.L.C., an Indiana hog farm. Donna Reifschneider, the agency's administrator of inspection is the former president of the National Pork Producers Council."

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Big Question for Northwest Airlines Execs

The New York Times reports that executives at Northwest Airlines are trying to squeeze the pay of its employees, claiming the company is in severe financial straits. That might be believable, until you read down a few paragraphs to a key section, which those same executives have no explanation for.

With workers now striking the Times notes:

"In the last several months, the airline had spent more than $100 million to hire and train 1,500 substitutes, many of them licensed mechanics who had worked at other airlines. The airline had also hired and trained 1,100 substitute flight attendants, in case their union stages a sympathy strike."

Here's the simple question (that the media, of course, hasn't asked): If the company is supposedly in such severe financial straits that worker pay cuts are required, how do these executives have $100 million of company money to throw around for anti-union activities?

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Media's Culpability for Iraq

Lots of different groups are to blame for America's misguided policy in Iraq - a policy that has carelessly put our troops in harms way. But as Editor & Publisher notes in this article, few are more responsible than the media. As an article I wrote a while back shows, it was clear before the war that the Bush administration was deliberately lying to justify an invasion, but the media refused to call them on it.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Cuellar Getting Blowback For Disloyalty

As I wrote before, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) is one of the Democrats who consistently undermines his party and sells out America's working class. Now, thankfully, it looks like he's facing some serious blowback from his Democratic colleagues.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

How States Can Lead the Way On Energy

The Billings Gazette has a nice writeup of how Montana's efforts to increase its renewable energy supply are heading in the right direction. The picture (right) with the article tells it all: wind energy is going to be greatly expanded in the Big Sky state, and it will undoubtedly be supported by the recent legislation forcing energy companies to generate a minimum amount of their energy from renewable sources.

This project, along with Montana's new efforts on ethanol and coal-to-liquid-fuel shows that states can really lead the way in helping get America off foreign oil and into cleaner domestic sources of energy (and rest assured PLAN will most certainly get into energy policy when we get up and running). That will be especially important considering how inadequate the recently passed federal energy bill is in addressing our country's energy challenges.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

AP Story Shows Exactly Why PLAN Is Necessary

The Wyoming Associated Press has a story about how the state is experiencing increased political lobbying expenditures. In the process, it provides a crystal clear description of how conservatives are able to buy state governments and why the Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN) is so desperately needed.

The story notes that, much like other states with part-time legislatures, "lawmakers in Wyoming do not get staff, so they often rely on lobbyists to do research." One staffer to Gov. Dave Freudenthal (D) noted that "Legislators simply don't have the tools in terms of staffing to follow up every question they may have on particular pieces of legislation." An official with a nonprofit group said that lobbyists tell legislators "think of me as your staff."

This is exactly how the corporate-funded, archconservative American Legislative Exchange Council has been able to dominate state politics for so long. The right-wing has seized on this void and used it to push some of the most extreme economic policies possible, employing sophisticated corporate lobbyists with a financial stake in the legislation in question.

That is where PLAN will come in - we are going to provide progressive legislators with the policy support they need to fight for an agenda that represents the concerns of ordinary citizens - not just the fat cats. We are going to give lawmakers the necessary tools and staff resources our side has been lacking for far too long. And in the process, we are going to start taking state government back from the corrupt influences that have bought our public policy.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Dems & The Dangerous Culture of Capitulation

Rep. Greg Meeks' (D) hometown paper, the Queens Chronicle, has a terrific editorial on why Democrats need to worry about people within its ranks like Meeks who consistently sell their votes on economic issues to the highest corporate bidder.

The newspaper first notes the problem:

"Representative Meeks has crossed the aisle on several GOP pet causes this year from bankruptcy reform to the energy bill to CAFTA, making him 1 of only 10 Democrats (and the only New Yorker) to vote for all 3 measures. On CAFTA, which passed by only two votes, his switching sides ultimately meant the difference between passage and defeat."

Then the paper explains why that is a problem not only for these critical issues, but for others like Social Security:

"These actions, even for someone who has publicly pledged to preserve and protect Social Security from retirement age increases and benefit cuts, are worrisome. That the chairperson of the New Democrat Coalition caucus, to which Meeks belongs, has said that Social Security reform is an issue that “urgently needs our attention,” is downright frightening. This fall you can bet Republicans will try to portray Democrats as obstructionists, intent only on stopping so-called progress and devoid of any ideas of their own. Make no mistake, their ultimate goal is to bury Social Security, not to save it. Democrats who seek to work with them on this issue threaten to start us down a slippery slope that will eventually end a program that has protected elderly New Yorkers for 70 years. On this issue, there can be no compromises."

That is exactly right - when people like Meeks and others create a culture of capitulation on core issues, all of the other core issues are in peril, and thus so are the political prospects of the Democratic Party.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Amen, Mark Leon Goldberg

The American Prospect writer Mark Leon Goldberg nails a big problem: Democrats continue to regurgitate dishonest right-wing spin on Iraq, and we need to let them know it is unacceptable. Thankfully, as noted earlier today, Russ Feingold is stepping up.



COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Pro-Business Case For Minimum Health Care Bills

Most Americans strongly support laws that mandate a minimum wage. The rationale is simple: companies should have to pay their workers some bare minimum, so as to prevent slave labor. Now, that same simple rationale is growing in a different area: health care.

In cities and states across America, there is a quiet but growing understanding that this country should have minimum health care laws, just like we have minimum wage laws. In New York, the city council passed a bill that forces large employers to provide minimum health care to their employees (more on the bill here via Nathan Newman). This follows legislation that passed both houses of the Maryland legislature that did the same (though it was vetoed by the state's bought-off Governor). And in case you thought this was just a "blue" state/region phenomenon, think again: the GOP House Speaker in the ultra-red state of Idaho is considering crafting a similar law there.

The arguments against this are not surprising: Corporate America says it is "anti-business" because it forces companies to shell out more money for their employees. But as New York City Councilor Christine Quinn noted, the measures are "a pro-business response that protects both the responsible employers who currently provide health insurance as well as the taxpayers who are seeing an increasing pressure put upon the publicly financed health care system."

Think of it this way: without these mandates, companies that provide health care to their workers are at a competitive disadvantage with companies that don't. That creates a race to the bottom, allowing our economy to reward companies that shaft their workers. These mandates are pro-business because they erases that competitive disadvantage by forcing responsible business's competitors to also provide health care.

Additionally, the minimum health care bills are pro-business because they keep taxes down. The fact is, when companies like Wal-Mart don't provide workers health care, those workers go on public assistance - programs paid for by higher taxes. Thus forcing companies to provide minimum health care, prevents state and municipal governments from having to raise taxes on individuals and businesses in order to fund public assistance.

Mark my words, this fight is only starting. If disparate places like New York City, Maryland and Idaho are all independently addressing the problem, it means the issue cuts across party and geographic lines. And while it is certainly true we also need comprehensive health care reform that brings down health care prices, these efforts are a major step in the right direction. It's about time we start coming together around the economic issues that should unite us.

Feingold Steps Up On Iraq, Demands Exit Strategy

Finally, one of the top 2008 Democratic presidential contenders has the guts to take a major stand on the Iraq War. According to the Associated Press, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) is announcing his support for the United States to set a firm timetable for withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Though that is a position that polls show a majority of Americans support, high profile Democrats have been unwilling to come out and make that stand. In fact, just a few weeks ago, the Democratic campaign committee in Washington is actually trying to pretend the Iraq War doesn't exist.

Feingold is the highest profile Democrat to join a group of courageous (though largely ignored) Democrats in Congress who are demanding that Americans' concern about Iraq are heard and acted upon by our government.

To be sure, Republicans will claim that any timetable would be helping the terrorists - an entirely dishonest and shortsighted argument that the media continues to buy. Why is it dishonest? Because it doesn't take into account the other side of a timetable: pressure on the Iraqi government to get its act together. A timetable for withdrawal would create a much-needed sense of urgency and a big incentive for the Iraqis to step up their security efforts. If they know American troops aren't going to be there forever to stabalize the country, they will know they have to dramatically improve their own operations, which ultimately is the goal anyway.

Democrats would be wise to follow Feingold's lead, instead of either parroting right-wing lies themselves like Sen. Evan Bayh (D), or cowering in a corner on Iraq because they believe any support for withdrawal will mean they will look weak on national security. That just isn't the case. Polls show Americans believe the Iraq War has made this country less safe. That means trying to end the war and get out of the situation as Feingold is calling for is a credible pro-national security position in the eyes of the public.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

When a PLAN Comes Together

Just got back from Seattle and caught this piece on NPR about the PLAN kickoff event (you can listen to the audio here). Also, my friend sent me this classic sound file to celebrate our launch's success.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Contrast Democrats Should Aim For

Read this story about a high-profile GOP governor being charged by prosecutors for violating ethics rules and accepting gifts from special interests. Then, read this story about a Democratic governor removing someone from their position after revelations that he had connections to a corporate lobbying firm. The first story shows a corrupt Republican Party, the second shows a Democratic Party willing to back up its clean-government pledges with serious action. That is the contrast Democrats should be working to sharpen all over America.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Sanders Labeled "A Folk Hero"

The Rutland Herald has a big editorial today labeling Vermont's Independent Congressman Bernie Sanders a "folk hero." The article notes that Sanders, who is running for the U.S. Senate in 2006, has a "relentless in his focus on economic issues: the excesses of large corporation, the dangers of media concentration and lobbyist corruption...And those qualities have won him a following so dependable that few front-rank Republicans have stepped forward to challenge him, and the Democrats have given him a pass." It's a great piece - give it a read.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

AP Reports on PLAN Kickoff

Exhausted after a long day. Read the Associated Press story for some coverage. More tomorrow. Long story short - it was a truly amazing success.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Big Day Is Here

As anyone who has read this blog recently knows, today is the big kickoff of the Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN). It is an exciting day, an exciting event, and an exciting endeavor for all of us who want to take our country back from the Big Money special interests who have bought our government. Posting today will be light here, though if possible, I will have some updates from the PLAN kickoff event here in Seattle. For a sneak peek at a draft of the speech I will give to open the conference, click here.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Pathetic

Enough said.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Apollo Alliance in the States

FYI - for anyone in Seattle this week, make sure to check out the event right before the Progressive Legislative Action Network's kickoff about the Apollo Alliance's work on energy policy in the states. The event is on 8/16 at 9:30am at the Seattle Labor Temple, Hall 8, 2800 1st Ave.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

THE NATION: Here's the PLAN

The Nation magazine wrote a terrific overview of the Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN) that really goes over what we're all about. Check it out.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Right-Wingers Take Battle to States

Just got to Seattle, where I am working with the Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN) to get our final details in order for tomorrow's big launch. On the plane, I came across this article, which shows yet another reason why PLAN is so important. Right-wingers are now invading states and pushing the most extreme fiscal policies - even frontally assaulting conservative GOP governors who don't go along. Progressives need to push back, and PLAN will be one of the ways we can do just that.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

PLAN Launches This Tuesday

From now until about Wednesday, I won't be posting only sporadically because I will be in Seattle helping launch the new Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN). Take a look at the Great Falls Tribune's front-page profile of PLAN in today's Sunday paper. It does a good job of analyzing what we are trying to do. The Tribune also ran this piece on me and my involvement in PLAN. This is an exciting endeavor, and one our side needs to support. It is time to start taking back our country - and that fight starts with the states.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Resurgence of Movement Politics

The Nation Magazine has published an essay of mine based on the speech I gave to the United Steelworkers earlier this week. On the eve of the 8/16 kickoff of the Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN), I lay out what my vision for a successful progressive politics really is. Give the piece a read.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Putting Actions Behind Rhetoric

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) has said lobbyists cannot serve on state boards or in his administration. And as the Helena Independent Record today shows, he means it, no matter whether you are a Democrat or a Republican.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Strategic Class & the Iraq War

Ari Berman is one of the best young writers out there, and his new article in the Nation magazine shows why. He methodically takes apart why the Democratic establishment continues to have no real position on Iraq - a concern I and many others have continued to raise. Read his article in full - whether you agree with every detail or not, it is extremely well done, and very thought provoking.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Sirota, Zogby & DCCC Debate Iraq on NPR

I debated America's Iraq policy on National Public Radio today with the spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). Also appearing in the roundtable was pollster John Zogby; Dante Zappalla, the brother of a National Guardsmen killed in Iraq; and Andrew McCarthy, an archconservative from the so-called Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (a group set up to advocate for war in Iraq). Listen to the debate here (it really gets going at around 24 minutes in).

I found a few things interesting. First, as noted on this website with regard to the DCCC's attitude toward the Paul Hackett race, the Democratic Party as an institution really seems afraid to address the Iraq War at all, which is not only sad, but, as Zogby notes, is politically stupid. Second, the right-wingers who pushed deliberate lies that justified this war in the first place are resorting to claiming that Iraq is an extension of the War on Terror, coming once again very close to claiming that Saddam Hussein's Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and al Qaeda - claims that have been repeatedly debunked.

Both positions are really troubling. On one side, you have the Democratic Party still afraid of its own shadow on Iraq, and ignoring the courageous Democrats in Congress who are demanding answers about Iraq. On the other side you have conservatives so desperate to hide their lies and their disastrous Iraq policy, they are resorting to already-debunked lies. The result is that the majority of Americans who believe the Iraq War made this country less safe and want an exit strategy are being ignored by an ever-more insulated and out-of-touch political Establishment that purports to speak in our country's name.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Rolling Stone's Expose on Congress

Rolling Stone magazine just released an epic expose on the inner workings of today's Congress (for an alternate link because RS's site is acting up, go here and then click on the story). Here's my take on the article, but go read the piece for yourself - it truly is one of the best I've seen in years.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

GOP Governors Wage War on Workers

The Wall Street Journal today tells us what we already know: that Republican Governors all over America are ratcheting up their war on working people, this time by persecuting unions. Three governors - Mitch Daniels (R-IN), Matt Blunt (R-MO) and Ernie Fletcher (R-KY) - have each terminated public employees' rights to collectively bargain, while a fourth, Bob Ehrlich (R-MD), has refused to uphold previously negotiated contracts with his state workers. In each of their own ways, these governors highlight just how extreme the Republican Party has become in its willingness to openly persecute workers.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Big Surprise - Corporate America Salivates Over Roberts

The Financial Times and Bloomberg News today report that Corporate America is salivating at the prospect of having one of its own, John G. Roberts, on the Supreme Court. Specifically, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of Commerce are set to endorse Roberts' candidacy - as if we are expected to consider that big news, even though Roberts has made his name as one of the most high-profile corporate shills in the America's legal system.

The fact is, this shouldn't be a surprise - Roberts' nomination is a sign that Big Business sees its chance to not only own the Presidency and the Congress, but now the judicial branch. After all, it was these same groups who have spent months literally ordering the White House to consider certain nominees, and to discount others, based on the potential nominees' willingness to sell out ordinary Americans and whore for Corporate America. And it was these exact same groups who the Financial Times notes Roberts "represented or filed briefs on behalf of" during his illustrious legal career as Big Business's "go-to lawyer."

Not surprisingly, most of the attention on Roberts continues to focus on his views on social issues - not economic ones, which the Supreme Court is increasingly getting involved in. That is, of course, the way Corporate America likes it - keep the focus off Roberts' controversial career gutting workplace laws, and shafting workers, and that way the idiots in the mainstream media will continue to bill him as a "moderate" and thus he can get through the corporate-owned U.S. Senate.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Tell the Senate to Stand Up for Human Health

Earlier this year, the U.S. Senate passed an amendment creating a one-year ban on pesticide testing on humans. Though that bill has yet to become law, it was a very important step. Now, the Senate has a chance to act again, this time with bipartisan legislation to prevent the Bush administration from loosening restrictions on how much mercury power plants can emit into our air. Contact your Senators today, and urge them to support the bipartisan legislation.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

How Corporate America Rewards Immoral Behavior

The Institute for Southern Studies notes a trend in companies that abuse workers' rights are giving their executives and CEOs huge bonuses. That follows along an earlier report by the Institute for Policy Studies showing that CEOs who accelerated outsourcing were also being financially rewarded with bonuses and salary jumps. That's right - the new corporate ethos is that the more immoral your behavior is as an executive, the more you will be rewarded.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

GOP Ignores Culpability of Its Own Education Policies

It's good to know the Bush administration realizes its economic policies have meant huge wads of cash for a very wealthy elite, and very little for most ordinary Americans. It is also good to know that the administration is suddenly realizing that has something to do with education. What's troubling, however, is that there still seems to be a complete disconnect on the administration's part about how its continued underfunding of education has a lot to do with the problem.

Since the signing of the much-touted No Child Left Behind Act, President Bush has underfunded that legislation by almost $40 billion. That includes an almost half billion dollar cut to the Department of Education this year alone. Meanwhile, he is cutting tens of thousands of students off of Pell Grants - the major federal grants that help low-income students afford college. These come on top of major cuts to job training programs.

Those policy decisions and others are making the economic situation in this country worse. And apparently, those at the highest reaches of government don't understand a simple truism: When you take money that should be used to invest in America's workers and instead fritter it away on giant tax cuts for a tiny handful of already-super-wealthy fat cats, you get the terrible economic consequences we are now dealing with.

Up Close and Personal With the Labor Movement

Apologies for the light posting - I am in outside of Pittsburgh, PA giving a speech to the United Steelworkers' executive meeting. The meeting has been terrific - there is really a lot of energy in the labor movement these days, despite the media's constant claims that unions are a thing of the past. The Steelworkers in particular have been on the frontlines of all the big battles over trade and wages, and they are really working to build some innovative new coalitions like the Apollo Alliance to fight the labor fights of the future.

In the next week, I hope to publish the speech I gave here - I think/hope readers will find it interesting. I'll be back at home late tonight, so posting will still be light until then (unless I am lucky and can find a wireless outlet in the Pittsburgh Airport)...

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

PLAN vs. ALEC

Check out this article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution - it shows how the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has become so influential, and has a terrific mention of how the new Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN) is going to start countering it.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Local Forces Demand Pelosi Hold CAFTA Sellouts Accountable

Immediately after the vote on the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi held an emergency meeting with her caucus to discuss consequences for the 15 Democrats who each cast the deciding vote for the trade pact. Though no decision out of that meeting has been made public (if any decisions were actually made), powerful on-the-ground forces in some Democrats' districts are demanding that she follow up her call for accountability with action.

Specifically, a powerful coalition of unions and grassroots advocacy organizations in New York today have sent a letter to Pelosi asking her to remove Reps. Greg Meeks (D-NY) and Ed Towns (D-NY) from their positions on the Financial Services and Commerce Committees, respectively. And look at how sharply worded their demands are:

"We urge you to remove Reps. Meeks and Towns from their seats on the Financial Services and Energy & Commerce committees, respectively. They have used their committee membership cards to access corporate America’s ATM at the expense of working families for far too long. It is time for Meeks and Towns to turn in their cash cards."

long with this letter, this coalition has vowed to send letters to the roughly 75,000 union members in Meeks' and Towns' districts informing citizens about exactly how their congressional representatives are voting against their constituents' economic interests.

Just step back for a moment and really consider how big a deal this is: powerful local forces are asking the House Democratic leader to take away power from their local lawmakers, because their local lawmakers aren't representing them. And they are following up that call with action of their own.

No matter what comes of this, it can only be good for America's working families, progressives and the Democratic Party as a whole. You can bet these lawmakers and others are going to think very hard next time they decide to sell out the interests of ordinary Americans to fat-cat corporate interests, whether it be on trade or on another critical economic issue. And maybe then, Democrats will achieve the unity they so desperately need to be a true opposition party, and build better ideological credibility with the American people.

CAFTA's Dem & GOP Sellouts Feel the Heat

The Los Angeles Times reports that organized labor is ramping up its efforts to unseat House Members who sold out their constituents and voted for the Central American Free Trade Agreement. In their sights already are two Democrats on my earlier list of those who are consistently selling out their party, Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) and Greg Meeks (D-NY). And on the GOP side, Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC) is flailing around trying to avoid what should be a serious challenge in 2006. Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch has a special site devoted to documenting how these and other lawmakers hurt their constituents with their vote.

This is a good development, even if these members don't get unseated. It shows that progressives are starting to organize around principles and ideology, and not just party labels. And in the long run that is good for both progressives and Democrats, because it will create a much stronger sense of identity on our side, helping us overcome the "they don't stand for anything" image that has plagued us for years.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Bush Ignoring Domestic Alternatives to Saudi Oil

The New York Times today reports that Bush officials, supposedly "furious over Saudi Arabia's handling of the investigations after 9/11," nonetheless continue to say that "the alternatives to Saudi Arabian [oil] are fewer today than seemed to be the case just three years ago." But if you look at how the Bush administration is ignoring major domestic oil potential at home, it seems more like the White House is trying to justify its all-too-close relationship with the Saudis.

As the Billings Gazette reported last week, there is a huge potential to turn Montana's massive parcel of coal into oil, using decades old coal gasification technology proven to work. Right now, "Montana has 120 billion tons of state and federal coal reserves under its surface" and "115 billion tons of that coal is recoverable." Using the technology, "one ton of coal would produce 1.5 barrels of diesel fuel." In other words, that is one helluva lot of fuel.

Before you start raising environmental concerns, consider this: the fuels created from gasification "are also clean - no sulfur, mercury or arsenic." Sure, it isn't perfect, but to get us off foreign oil we can't afford to only be pie-in-the-sky - and this is pretty good. Because while coal gasification still produces a gas-based fuel, it is far cleaner than any fuel used today, and the gasification process itself does not create emissions either.

Up until now, America hasn't explored using coal gasification because it is not profitable unless oil is above $35 a barrel. But now oil is at around $60 a barrel, and at that level to stay. Combining coal gasification, with solar, wind, ethanol energy and hybrid technology really means we can get our country off foreign oil. But it is up to our leaders to take the initiative to make it happen.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Top GOPer Joins Battle Over Wal-Mart & Health Care

Big news - according to the Associated Press, Idaho's Republican House Speaker Bruce Newcomb is "mulling a proposal that could require businesses to provide employees with insurance, or reimburse Idaho for publicly funded health care costs." His target is Wal-Mart, which regularly pays its workers so badly states are forced to foot the bill for Medicaid for Wal-Mart workers. "Rather than taxpayers subsidizing the wealthiest family in the world, maybe the wealthiest family in the world ought to reimburse Medicaid," Newcomb told the Idaho Statesman.

To have a top Republican now saying what progressives have been saying for years is a tremendous step. The key here will be whether Newcomb's proposal makes sure to hit big-box stores, rather than small businesses, which often operate on very small margins. Wal-Mart is one of the wealthiest companies in the world, and has positively no excuse for paying its workers so poorly.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The D.C. Dem Party's Disconnect on the Iraq War

On the issue of the Iraq War, the disconnect between the Washington, D.C. Democratic Party establishment and political reality in America is growing by the day. Case in point is the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's attitude towards the tremendous special election run by Paul Hackett in the staunchly Republican Cincinnati suburbs.

Hackett, an Iraq War veteran, made headlines in the campaign for taking a strong position against the original decision to go to war in Iraq, even calling the President of the United States an SOB. And while it's true, Hackett didn't support full withdrawal from Iraq, few would deny that his position opposing the war was a key part of his campaign.

Ultimately, the anti-war position defined his candidacy, and was the clear reason he was able to do so well in such a Republican district. That should be no surprise: polls have been telling us for months that America agrees with Hackett in believing going to war in Iraq was a mistake. Meanwhile, Americans' view of President Bush's handling of Iraq is at its lowest level ever.

Incredibly, however, in a memo sent to all Democratic House Members about what Democrats should learn from the Hackett race, the DCCC makes not one mention of the Iraq War and its effect on the election. Not one. It is as if the party is going out of its way to deny the importance of Democrats taking a strong position against the war, or making the war a serious issue in their campaigns. See page 1 of the memo here, and page 2 of the memo here.

It is possible that Democrats who voted for the war are still embarrassed about that vote, and just want to pretend the issue doesn't really exist. If that's the case, they need to get over it and just do what others have done: tell the truth, admit they were lied to, and acknowledge that they made a mistake.

Let's be clear - I want to see Democrats win the majority, that's why I am pointing this out. The fact is that while polls show that Americans seem willing to consider changing party control in Washington, that won't happen if Democrats basically ignore almost every serious issue, whether it be the war or economic issues. It will happen if more Democrats take strong stands - stands that the public clearly supports. And it certainly is not going to win elections by buying into the media's dishonest reinforcement of right-wing characterizations about the war, nor by reinforcing those right-wing characterizations itself, as some of its high-profile 2008 presidential candidates seem to enjoy doing.

The hope, of course, is that Democratic Members of Congress are realizing on their own just how important it is to address the Iraq War, and that this drivel coming out of the DCCC will be ignored. There are already good signs that it is being ignored. Many Democrats, even those who originally voted for the war, are starting to support legislation that demands the Bush administration provide more details to Congress about its overall strategy in Iraq.

Still, this memo makes clear there really still is a disconnect within the D.C. Democratic cabal. Not only is the D.C. Democratic Establishment removed from the concerns of ordinary Americans, it actually goes out of its way to deny the existence of the messages that actually make campaigns successful. Here's hoping that individual Democratic candidates realize understand that such a disconnect exists, and that they better-understand the messages that are required to win elections.


COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Fight Against Reinforcing Right-Wing Lies

Over at Working Assets, I've set up a new category on called "Dishonestly Reinforcing Lies" - it will be a section devoted to Democrats and the media who shamelessly reinforce the most dishonest lies about Democrats and progressives (Media Matters does a terrific job on this on the media end). To give you a flavor of what I'm talking about, see this, this and this previous entry - they show that our side too often just regurgitates right-wing slanders instead of refuting them.

For the first entry in the new category, I will refer to a great post by MyDD's Scott Shields which anaylzes how Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh (D) is basing his early presidential campaign on - you guessed it - regurgitating right-wing lies about his own party. Shields also points to how Gen. Wesley Clark (D) shows that Democrats simply don't have to do this - if they have guts.

When you see a Democrat spit back right-wing lies, it should only remind us of how totally emasculated Democrats have been at the hands of Grover Norquist and the GOP. It is the equivalent of Democrats saying to the GOP "Thank you sir, may I have another?"

It should also serve as an inspiration that we can and must do better. Most Democratic elected officials in America have a lot of courage, and are fighting the good fight everyday. That takes guts - and when those within their ranks simply recycle right-wing lies, all of their efforts are undermined. It is time, once and for all, for us to reward those with guts, and call out those who are part of the problem.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Ignoring D.C.'s Fixed Permanent Election Losers

Conservative activist Grover Norquist once said about Democrats that "Any farmer will tell you that certain animals run around and are unpleasant. But when they've been 'fixed,' then they are happy and sedate. They are contented and cheerful." Sadly, if you read what some insulated, election-losing pundits who likely have little experience actually winning campaigns, you realize that Norquist has gotten his wish, and utterly neutered many who purport to speak for the Democratic Party and progressive movement.

Case in point is commentary by Mark Schmitt and Matt Yglesias. Neither's writing is surprising, especially not Yglesias's - for every decently well-supported argument he makes, he makes about five that have no basis in reality and that basically display both a fundamental lack of winning campaigns, and a fundamental disregard for ordinary people's economic concerns. Again, we shouldn't be surprised about this - he likely hasn't worked on a winning campaign, and from the confines of a cushy job in Washington, likely never has to experience the severe economic challenges ordinary Americans face on a daily basis.

Schmitt and Yglesias's criticism today is that progressives should reject any lessons about movement building that someone like Norquist has taught. They are both especially distressed about Democrats starting to use the trade issue to their advantage. That's not surprising - the free trade consensus in Washington spans elitists in both parties, again because they never have to actually deal with the real-world realities of trade deals that sell out America.

As I have written before, polling data shows that Americans want a party to stand up against corporate control of our government, and they want a party that re-evaluates America's sellout trade policy. But beyond the trade debate, the entire idea that Democrats should reject any lessons from Norquist and his party discipline efforts is really laugh-out-loud funny.

Why? It's simple: last I checked, Grover Norquist helped build one of the most powerful, disciplined, unified and politically potent movements in American history, helping Republicans seize power and emasculating his opposition. Yet there are still people on our side who say we should just ignore what he may be teaching us about the primacy of movement politics over the same tired split-the-difference shenanigans the Democrats use.

Schmitt and Yglesias seem to utterly reject lessons from Norquist and are clearly threatened by anyone who might try to get Democrats to embrace a principled ideology, and show, like Norquist to Republicans, there are consequences to undermining the Democratic Party.Still the question lingers: how many elections do we have to lose before even comfortable-in-the-minority elites like this realize its time to actually learn some tactical lessons from the other side?

It's not a shock, of course, that some Democrats in Washington, D.C. subscribe to Schmitt and Yglesias's argument. The fact is, these two writers are part of a Democratic circle in Washington, D.C. that has become all-too-comfortable losing elections. Loss after loss after loss piles up, and these people say, nope, we should keep doing the same thing, keep letting a handful of Democrats undermine their party, leading to more losses. Why? Because it doesn't really matter to Democratic elites like Schmitt and Yglesias whether Democrats win or lose or whether Americans keep getting economically stepped on - they get to stay comfortably employed, and offer pot shots from their insulated perches.

Here are thus two novel ideas: First, let's take this advice from one TPM Cafe reader and not listen to people who purport to be experts about what Democrats should and shouldn't do unless they've actually gone out and won some campaigns. Second, let's try to take some tactical lessons from people like Norquist - a person who has built a serious movement, and who has also exploited the fact that Democrats continue listen to bad ideas from self-purported experts that have never had to go out and actually make their ideas an electoral reality. Maybe then we'll start actually winning.

TAKE ACTION: Help Find The Missing Democrats

The Campaign for America's future has launched a letter-writing campaign, asking progressives to e-mail the chiefs of staffs of the Democratic Senators and Congressmen who have been consistenly selling out America's middle class with their votes, and thus undermining the Democratic Party. Most of these Democrats are safe-seat Democrats on the list of Democrats that I previously noted were among the most egregiously disloyal in Congress.

Go to CAF's special site and send an e-mail - let these Democrats know that they won't ever get to the majority if they keep undermining their party and selling out ordinary Americans.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Dems Get Pummeled At Home Over CAFTA

Last week before the vote on the corporate-written Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), I tried to predict which Democrats would face real trouble at home if they sold out and voted for it. This week, at least some of my predictions came true.

According to Crain's Insider newsletter, "Ten unions are planning a City Hall rally and press conference Sunday morning to blast New York City Democrats Rep. Ed Towns and Greg Meeks for voting for CAFTA."

Meanwhile, the Working Families Party - a statewide force in New York - has issued a press advisory about the event noting that "Meeks and Towns have drawn progressive wrath in recent weeks for voting in favor Central American Free Trade Agreement, as well as voting in favor of the recent anti-consumer bankruptcy reform bill (Meeks) and eliminating the federal estate tax (Towns)."

This, coupled with Paul Hackett's spectacular run for Congress in Ohio, is terrific news. Both examples show that there is real energy at the grassroots level to hold both Democrats' and Republicans' feet to the fire on a wide variety of issues. That energy is the first step to taking back our country.

If you live in New York City, make sure to go to the event on Sunday, August 7th at 11am on the steps of City Hall. Show these Members of Congress that they cannot continue to sell out to corporate interests - and sell out their constituents - without feeling some pressure back at home.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Rhetoric vs. Reality on Preventing Nuclear Terrorism

I am certainly not a fan of the New Republic. But with progressive-basher Peter Beinart on leave from his post as the New Republic's editor, I decided to take a look to see if the magazine had anything better to offer than its standard fare - and, surprisingly, it did.

A new article by acting editor Peter Scoblic takes a sobering look at how the Bush administration's claim that democracy will stop terrorism is really being used as a way to mask the fact that the administration is doing nothing concrete to ACTUALLY stop the most dangerous kind of terrorism - nuclear terrorism.

This isn't to undervalue America's need to support democratic reforms where we can throughout the world (and frankly, here at home too by supporting public financing of elections to fix our own system of legalized bribery). But the fact is, Bush's pro-democracy rhetoric is both false on its face, and no substitute for short-term, concrete steps to seriously address the threat of nuclear terrorism.

We know it is false everytime we see Bush genuflect to the Saudi or Egyptian governments (or any other of a handful of dictators Bush seems so comfortable with). And it should be obvious why high-faluting rhetoric about "freedom" is no substitute for making sure that vulnerable nuclear material is better secured throughout the globe - a priority the Bush administration has ignored.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

The Other Reason Why Dems Must Be Unified

Kevin Drum over at the Washington Monthly makes a great point about votes like CAFTA that I failed to make: Democrats need to do a better job of sticking together not only because it is the right thing to do and it will help them make a sharper message, they also need to stick together in order to make things harder for conseratives, by forcing them to take tough votes. In other words, unity is not only good policy and politics for Democrats, its makes things really bad for Republicans.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Orwellian Tactics & the Pro-War Media

In an almost uncountable number of ways, the "objective" media in Washington, D.C., which speaks with such self-importance on the TV talk shows, is still regurgitating shamelessly unsupported propaganda about the Iraq War.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Having An Honest Debate Over Trade & Low Prices

A friend of mine today regurgitated one of the saddest, most devious, yet most oft-repeated arguments for corporate-written trade deals: they lower prices for goods in America. He said "the fact that we can buy white cotton t-shirts 3 for $5 is a direct result of [free] trade." Then, challenging opponents of these "free" trade deals, he asked "Do people really want all of our prices to go up at the Wal-Mart?" The problem is, that is a classic "when did you stop being a criminal?" question, as the entire premise is dishonest.

Here is the truth: prices on many goods do go down because of corporate-written trade deals, as the "free"-trade-pushing corporate media is so happy to brag about. But so do wages, health care benefits, union rights, pensions, environmental standards, and all the rest of the economic standards that contribute to an ordinary American's quality of life. When you pass trade deals that have no labor/human rights/environmental protections, you force Americans to compete with workers in other countries that have none of these standards. That puts a downward pressure on Americans' quality of life (wages, health care, pensions, etc.), as American sacrifice their basic quality of life in an endless race to the bottom. No savings on your next batch of t-shirts is going to make up for that. That's why trying to make a debate over "free" trade into a debate over whether we want or don't want lower prices is so dishonest: because it doesn't tell the whole story.

The reason, of course, that Corporate America tries to distort the "free" trade debate in this way is because it avoids the side of "free" trade Corporate America doesn't want to talk about. And the tactics often work, because lower prices are more tangible to the public than the other bigger and more important consequences of "free" trade.

It is much easier to envision the benefits of cheaper t-shirts at Wal-Mart than it is to imagine the downside of getting paid less wages/benefits for the next 40 years, especially when you consider citizens understandable two-pronged defense mechanism of denial: we don't want to admit the lower wages/benefits will come with lower prices (too-good-to-be-true denial) and we'd like to believe lower wages/benefits in general won't mean lower wages/benefits for us in specific (it-won't-happen-to-me denial).

But all you have to do is look at how Americans' wages have stagnated, health care/pension benefits have been cut, and how many previously better-paid Wal-Mart workers are on low-income government assistance to know that the denial is not rooted in reality. Likewise, all it takes is a little guts to make this case effectively because really, Americans know deep down that it's true - they are just waiting for someone to speak truth to economic power.

Thus, when we debate trade and economic policy in general, let's reject the silly argument that it is a debate between low prices on one side and high prices on the other. The actual choice is between lower prices on one side, and lower wages, health care benefits, pensions, and environmental standards on the other side. It is a debate about saving $2 on t-shirts at Wal-Mart vs. some combination of making thousands of dollars less per year, maybe losing your job, seeing your health care/retirements benefits eliminated or reduced, and watching your community get polluted.

That is honest debate that Corporate America and its "free" trade apologists in the political establishment don't want to have - because it is a debate they will lose every time. And that's why we need to be so forceful in making sure that these trade debates are more honest: because only then can we embolden already strong public opposition to selling out America with corporate written trade pacts.

How Montana Can Get America Off Foreign Oil

Want to know one of the major ways the United States can actually get off foreign oil in a far more environmentally sound way than just drilling for more petroleum? We've got the answer right here in Montana.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

CAFTA Shockwaves Being Felt Among Dems

Roll Call reports that the vote over the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) could have serious implications in the 2006 elections for both Republicans and Democrats. But if you believe Crain's Newsletter, CAFTA's political ramifications may be felt sooner than that.

Specifically, Crain's reports "New York City Reps. Gregory Meeks and Ed Towns could lose key committee assignments as a result of voting for CAFTA...The threat [was] made in an emergency meeting of Democratic leaders the next night. Towns' spots on the energy and Commerce COmmittee and its trade subcommittee have helped him reap hefty business contributions. Meeks sits on the Financial Services Committeee."

This is a good thing - it shows that the Democratic Party is getting serious about creating a culture of accountability.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Bush Speech to ALEC Shows Importance of PLAN

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that President Bush is giving a major speech to the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) - the group that has engineered the passage of fringe-conservative legislation in states across America. Also speaking to ALEC are former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings. This high-profile list of speakers proves two things. First, conservatives are serious about taking their battle to the states. And second, the need for the Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN) to counter ALEC never been greater.

PLAN's kickoff event is on August 16th in Seattle, and will be headlined by, among others, former Sen. John Edwards, Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and former California House Speaker Willie Brown. These and the scores of legislators who have registered to attend realize that it is time for our side to fight back. Washington, D.C. may be owned right now by conservatives - but there are plenty of opportunities for progressives to win in the states.

Check out PLAN's website, and encourage your state legislator to attend the kickoff event in Seattle and become a part of PLAN today.

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

Crocodile Tears for Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott today complained about the quality of his lear jet on the very same day we find out that the company pays its workers so poorly, Arizona taxpayers are being forced to pick up the tab for low-income health benefits for 3,000 Wal-Mart workers. I know, Lee...its really a rough life you have...

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry