Report demonstrates new investments in education and science timely

 The answers to our problems don't lie beyond our reach.  They exist in our laboratories and universities; in our fields and our factories; in the imaginations of our entrepreneurs and the pride of the hardest-working people on Earth. 

President Barack Obama, February 25, 2009

 

The New York Times has a story on a new report showing the United States has slipped over the past decade when it comes to innovation.  The report, by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, concludes the United States ranks sixth among 40 nations based on factors  such as venture capital investment, scientific researchers, spending on research and educational achievement.

While the United States remains sixth overall, it ranked dead last in terms of improvement in its score from 1999 - the present.  It is troubling indicators like this President Obama was drawing our attention to in last night's speech when he stated "Right now, three-quarters of the fastest-growing occupations require more than a high school diploma.  An yet, just over half of our citizens have that level of education." 

In light of today's Information and Technology and Innovation Foundation report, the President's call for a new commitment to education, research and development, and a new energy efficient economy couldn't have been more timely.  It is indeed "time for America to lead again" and I am confident we will. 

Governor Huntsman tells it like it is

While I have never voted for Governor Huntsman, I have to give the Governor points for honesty.  In at least one recent interview he calls the GOP out for failing to come to the table with any ideas and dismisses the notion of not taking stimulus money, something some fellow Republican governors have suggested doing. 

The Governor also referred to Republican leaders in Congress as "inconsequential" and indicated he didn't even bother talking with them for that reason.  In addition, the Governor told the Washington Times "Our moral soapbox was completely taken away from us because of our behavior in the last few years.  For us to now criticize analogous behavior is hypocrisy. We've got to come at it a different way. We've got to prove the point. It can't be as the Chinese would say, 'fei hua,' [or] empty words."

Well said Governor.  Can't say as I will ever vote for you, but I have to say you hit the nail on the head when it comes to the GOP's ridiculous criticisms of the recovery package. 

Are Republicans refusing to participate in health care reform discussions?

   According to the New York Times discussions led by Senator Ted Kennedy have gotten underway on health care reform.  Participants in the discussions include representatives from labor, manufacturers, the US Chamber of Commerce, the health insurance industry, AARP and a variety of non-profit organizations with an interest in the issue. 

One major player is missing however, in spite of pleas from the business and health insurance lobby they come to the table.  Who are they?  The Republicans, that's who. 

According to the New York Times article "so far Republican aides have stayed away from the sessions, saying they felt they would be relegated to a secondary role, with no opportunity to set the agenda or choose outside participants."  Well, it is likely true the minority party in Congress will have a "secondary role", kind of like Democrats had a "secondary role" when they were the minority.  Minorities usually don't play as big a part as the majority.  If they did we would have to reverse the definitions of those two words. 

That said, their lame excuse for not participating in discussions leads me to believe when health care reform is rolled out we will hear something like the following from Republicans on Capitol Hill: "This reform effort is not bi-partisan and we were excluded from the process."  Sound familiar? 

Our Perspective on Economic Recovery

There are major differences between how Democrats and Republicans have addressed our current economic crisis. Here is how we see it:

George Bush and Republicans fought to spend billions to bailout Wall Street banks and CEOs.

President Obama and the Democrats passed a plan that bails out the middle class.

Democrats are working to end “business as usual” in Washington, DC and support those who yearn for the common good and encourage our leaders to remember this country’s basic founding principle, “We the people.”

Anxieties about the long-term consequences of deficit spending are very real. Democrats have both the short-term aspiration of stopping the bleeding now for middle class families, and our long-term goals of balancing the budget so future generations aren’t stuck with the tab for the Bush years.

Democrats sympathize with voters of all political stripes who express a real sense of frustration at the greed and irresponsibility of the banks and their CEOs who got us into this mess. Democrats understand those that use almost Biblical terms, noting that the actions that got us here are part of the seven deadly sins including gluttony and greed. Democrats agree that getting paid for failure engenders a good deal of anger and runs counter to basic American values.

Republicans AWOL again

Well, it is now clear the American people can count on no support or ideas from Republicans in the House or, with a very few exceptions, the Senate.  Well, that isn't entirely true.  Republicans have one idea; tax cuts.  Tax cuts alone didn't do the trick last year and they didn't stimulate economic growth above what was seen in the 90s after 2001, but why let facts - or your own record - get in the way of bloviating endlessly about your faux concern for the national debt? 

These resurrected fiscal conservatives took what was supposed to be a $5 trillion surplus over the course of the first six or seven years of the new millennium and turned it into a $10 trillion national debt.  Many of the less discrete among them admitted record deficits were part of a strategy to "starve the beast" and force significant cuts in government spending by essentially bankrupting the United States.  How were they to know the economy would tank before they could skip town and blame it all on a new Democratic administration?  For that matter, who could have predicted we would  elect someone with a decidedly Keynesian approach to economic crisis?  

In addition to the failure of Republicans to take responsibility for failed policies, record deficits or their blatant hypocrisy, some are now circulating the demonstrably false claim that tax cuts lead to more, not less, government revenue.  This argument has been raised before by conservatives and repeated efforts to show beyond all doubt that 2 - 2 does not equal 4 have so far gotten nowhere. 

Here are the facts.  Tax cuts do not stimulate significant economic growth above the historical norm and they do not generate more revenue.  As with any home budget, when you cut revenue you have less money coming in.  Seems obvious and redundant doesn't it?

After tax increases in the 90s during both the Bush 1 and Clinton administrations revenue went up and economic growth was in line with that seen following tax cuts in the early eighties and during the first year of the Bush II administration.  In fact, bringing revenue in line with spending during the 90s (also done without a single Republican vote) generated the longest post war period of economic growth so far.  Following the Reagan and Bush II tax cuts revenue declined and economic growth was no larger than the historical average.  (See figure 1)

These tired and predictable conservative arguments aren't made because the facts support them though, or even because the facts could be interpreted to support them.  Conservatives argue tax cuts do all kind of seemingly miraculous things because their ideology demands it.  This is the same reason they now refuse to follow Eisenhower's advice and drop their nonsensical opposition to the New Deal.

The ball when it comes to bipartisanship is clearly in the Republican's court, but they need to come up with some better ideas to make it happen.  That said, when it comes to growing the economy as a Democrat I am fine with the fact the credit will once again go to the party of FDR in spite of our best efforts to share with the party of Hoover. 

Congratulations Chairman Holland

Utah Democratic Party Chairman Wayne Holland was recently recognized by the United Steelworkers as USW PAC Member of the Quarter.  This award is only given to four individuals a year and if you read the message below taken from the USW website, it is obvious why he deserves the honor. 

Wayne Holland Jr of Utah is PAC Member of the Quarter

Wayne Holland Jr., a USW staff representative for Utah and northern Nevada, has a stellar track record in recruiting for Political Action Committees. How does he do it?

Knowing that PACs and the funds they raise play a key role in the USW’s ongoing activism on behalf of working people and their families, Holland asks members to sign up at the one occasion where he knows the attendance will be good - contract ratification meetings.

“It’s the only time I get the vast majority of members together. It’s an opportunity you can’t pass up,’’ said Holland, a third generation copper miner and political activist.

Politics, bargaining mesh

Contract ratification meetings are a good place to explain how the political and bargaining environments often mesh since the members expect to hear about the bargaining obstacles faced during the negotiations.

“Steelworker members never fail to step up to the plate and engage in the battle once they have a clear challenge and understand that the bargaining environment is directly affected by the political environment,” Holland said.

Health care is a prime example. Maintaining affordable coverage is a constant struggle as employers push for workers to pay more of the costs and move work to other countries to avoid the expense.

“We can’t solve that at the bargaining table,’’ said Mike Scarver, the USW’s PAC Coordinator. “The only way we’re going to be able to fix the health care mess is through the legislative process. If we can get the right people elected, we can make the problem go away.”

Holland was involved in five separate contract negotiations last year and said he was able to improve PAC participation at every one of those locations. On two different occasions, Holland said more members signed PAC cards than actually voted to ratify the proposed agreements, although in both cases the agreements were approved by comfortable margins.

In Holland’s view, it is a disservice to members to not use ratification meetings to discuss how bargaining successes and political successes intertwine.

“Asking members to be part of the solution so they are not part of the problem should be a natural part of every ratification meeting,” Holland said.

Stepping up at Dugway

At the Dugway Proving Ground, a U.S. Army facility 85 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, USW members negotiated PAC check-off language for the first time and agreed overwhelmingly to participate in the political fundraising.

PAC sign-up cards were distributed along with contract ratification ballots, Holland said, and 68 out of 78 members agreed to participate by pledging at least $1 a week. Seven members pledged $120 a year.

There are often fears that discussing PAC contributions at the contract ratification will have a negative impact. But Holland said those worries are usually unfounded.

“I still find staff reluctance,” he said. “But the ratification vote is going to go the way it is. You can’t pass up the opportunity to encourage the membership.”

Working family roots

Holland, 50, was born into a working family and raised in a mining community where most of the residents on his street worked for the Kennecott Copper Mine. He joined the union 30 years ago while working for Kennecott during summer breaks from college.

He was interested in politics at an early age. By age 6, he was helping his father, a union miner, put up political signs at intersections where workers would pass.

“I remember governor’s races and U.S. Senate races, putting signs in my dad’s old 58 Chevy pickup,” he said. “I’d hold them while they pounded.”

At 10, he was painting banners for Democrat Hubert Humphrey, and at 23, he was named the western director of Frontlash, an outreach program for young Americans that was funded by the AFL-CIO.

He then worked as a regional community relations director for the AFL-CIO before joining the USW as a staff representative in 1995.

“I guess looking back, it’s always been in my blood,’’ he said.

For more information about how you can get involved in PAC, contact Mike Scarver at 412-562-2342 or mscarver@usw.org.

Answering questions on the recovery package

DNC Chairman Governor Tim Kaine answers questions regarding the economic recovery package making its way through Congress in the above video. 

Utah Democratic Party Chair Wayne Holland Jr. also had an Op-ed in the Deseret Morning News over the weekend and in the Ogden Standard Examiner last week.  Use the links provided to read his take on the recovery package.

Snow College Democrats help laid off college employees

  In the midst of the ongoing debate regarding the recovery package making its way through Congress, it is easy to forget the stories of individuals directly impacted by the economic crisis.  These people now number in the millions and they are much more than mere labor statistics. They are our friends, family members and neighbors.

    Likewise, it is easy to overlook how people are responding to the growing number of people within their communities in need.  The generosity and concern people have shown in increasing numbers as the crisis continues highlights the better angels of our nature so often overlooked in evening newscasts. 

Over the course of the week leading up to the inauguration our office was humming with volunteers responding to then President-elect Obama's call to service over the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend.  Bags full of food were collected and delivered to food banks as local citizens and businesses stepped up to respond. 

Last week I received an email from Sanpete County providing another example of people stepping up to provide what help they can to those affected by the recession.  Starting today (February 9, 2009) the Snow College Democrats will be collecting donations at classes throughout the week with all proceeds going to assist workers that have lost their jobs at Snow College due to recent and ongoing budget cuts. 

Thanks to all those out there that have responded with their time, money and other donations to help those in need.  I for one am reassured by their efforts we will get through the current down turn a strong community, state and nation.

GOP content to let the perfect be the enemy of the essential

Today the Provo Daily Herald editorialized against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan now being debated in the U.S. Senate by providing a list of items picked out of the $900 billion dollar package and attacking these items one by one.  This has become an all too familiar approach taken by conservative Republicans with the support of the likes of Rush Limbaugh.

In picking out various individual small projects within the bill conservatives side step the larger and much more important question of what it will take to actually stimulate an economy that saw unemployment claims rise to a seasonally adjusted total of more than 600,000 last week.  Providing a simple laundry list of small projects (about $8.67 billion out of more than $900 billion in the Herald list) takes these projects out of context and ignores the possible merits of many of these small expenditures.  For example, the Herald is critical of $345 million for new computers at the Department of Agriculture.  The Herald does not ask or answer the question of how old the existing computers are at the Department of Agriculture, to what degree new computers would improve efficiency and thereby save taxpayers money in the long-term, or how many computer industry jobs may be saved with such a purchase. 

Of course, the Herald is also critical of some big ticket expenditures like the $300 billion for states to assist in providing health care or building and maintaining infrastructure.  However, the criticism here seems inconsistent with their alleged concern over the cost of the recovery package.  The Herald expresses disappointment Utah isn't receiving more aid calling this portion of the bill the "Too Bad for Utah provision".  Similarly, the Herald is upset some kind of "assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary school" (i.e. vouchers) is not included, even though Utah voters rejected this kind of spending at the ballot box in 2007. 

Conservatives have no credibility to begin with when it comes to fiscal conservatism having run up record deficits while in control of both the White House and the Congress between 2000 and 2006.  Focusing on a fraction of a necessarily large recovery and investment package and attacking its cost while simultaneously arguing for more money for Utah and things like private school vouchers proves conservative discontent with the legislation doesn't really lie with its cost.  Rush Limbaugh was at least honest when he said his desire was to see this president fail.  Today's Herald editorial and the conservative talking points it draws heavily from are an argument for obstructionism, pure and simple. 

Problems with Rep. Wimmer's secret ballot amendment

"The right of individuals to vote by secret ballot is fundamental. The right to vote by secret ballot in an election under state or federal law for public office, in an initiative or referendum, or to designate or authorize employee representation, may not be infringed."  HJR-008 sponsored by Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman

Who could possibly oppose the use of a secret ballot?  That is the question posed by Rep. Carl Wimmer in an Op-ed appearing in the January 30, 2009 issue of the Salt Lake Tribune by Rep. Carl Wimmer, sponsor of the above proposed constitutional amendment. 

Under the Utah Democratic Party bylaws and constitution, not to mention national party rules, delegates selected to represent voters in their respective precincts must have their votes available for review for a period of time following their vote.  This ensures the voters that selected local delegates at caucus meetings can hold these delegates accountable for their vote when they come up for reelection at the next caucus meeting.  This by the way is the same reason legislators don't get to cast secret ballots when voting on legislation.

Under Wimmer's amendment delegates at party nominating conventions voting to select people running for "public office" could not cast a public vote.  Their vote would have to be hidden from the public and delegates could not be held accountable for their votes at convention, even though they are representing the rest of us when casting those votes. 

Furthermore, if Republicans or Democrats gathering at a local caucus meeting elect party delegates by a show of hands or any means that doesn't guarantee anonymity, they could be violating the state constitution under this amendment.  The public does choose who gets to run for "public office" indirectly at caucus meetings through the selection of delegates that will represent them at party nominating conventions.  Do we really want to turn a group of citizens gathering town hall style at party caucuses into potential violators of the state constitution? 

Of course Rep Wimmer's sudden passion for the secret ballot really has nothing to do with protecting democracy.  His interest, and that of those supporting this amendment, is in keeping voting to a minimum when it comes to the question of organizing a union.  In HJR-008 supporters' ideal world there would never be any elections at all in the work place, secret ballot or not.

Kate Bronfenbrenner of Cornell University researched numerous union organizing campaigns and found employer intimidation of employees considering unionizing their work place is common.  From mandatory meetings behind closed doors where employees were forced to listen to anti-union rhetoric (92% of employers) to illegal firing of workers for wanting to form a union (25% of employers) corporations are clearly far more interested in seeing to it a ballot is never cast at the work place than they are in making sure that ballot stays secret. 

Secret ballots have their place.  Certainly Election Day is one of them.  However, we don't want our legislators voting on issues by secret ballot and we don't want to render illegal rules intended to keep the nomination of these legislators as transparent as reasonably possible.  The initiative and referendum petitions we sign to put issues to a vote are similarly open to public review.   Surely having a similarly open and transparent process when it comes to the decision to form a union at work will work just as well.