Blog

The chattering class is fond of far-fetched theories that lead to lots of intrigue, and one fanciful idea that has been floating around lately is that Scott Brown is ready for a comeback.

The hypothesis is that if John Kerry is nominated to President Obama’s cabinet, then Brown would be a strong contender to fill Kerry’s seat. It has even been speculated that Senate Republicans went after U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice so harshly just to improve Brown’s chance at a comeback.

If you look at the facts, though, you’ll see that Brown is far from the sure bet to win another contest that Republicans hope he is. Consider the following:

Who lost by a bigger margin than almost any candidate in a competitive Senate race in the country?

Scott Brown. The 7.5-point loss he suffered at Elizabeth Warren’s hands was even worse than the 5.5-point loss for Brown’s fellow Republican Richard Mourdock in Indiana–that’s right, the guy who said pregnancy from rape is “something that God intended.” In short, as convenient as it is to refer to the Massachusetts contest between Brown and Warren as a close race, Brown took a beating.

Who was the only incumbent in the entire U.S. Senate to lose in 2012?

Scott Brown. Every one of Brown’s colleagues in the Senate who vied for reelection managed to win. That includes Bill Nelson in the swing state of Florida. That includes Democrat Jon Tester, who held onto his seat in Montana. That includes Bob Casey in the perennial battleground of Pennsylvania. It includes the other Senator Brown–Sherrod Brown of Ohio. Scott Brown proved himself uniquely inept in his failure to fend off his challenger – and to in fact lose by 7.5%. And remember, this wasn’t months or even years ago – this was last month.

Who lost to Elizabeth Warren by the same margin that William Weld lost to John Kerry?

Scott Brown. Weld and Brown both lost by approximately 7.48 points, but Weld was going up against a popular two-term incumbent, whereas Brown was the incumbent facing a first-time political candidate. For all the talk about his special campaign skills and positioning, nothing in the results was very special.

Who in the Massachusetts Senate election appeared to pick up no last-minute support or votes from undecided voters?

You guessed it: Scott Brown. Dozens of polls conducted in the seven months leading up to Election Day show that Brown hovered around the 46% mark the whole time. Of course, 46% is what Brown actually ended up with on Election Day. In other words, Brown made no progress during his campaign, despite an enormous war chest of almost $40 million to spend on it.

These facts tell only part of the story, though. What’s most damning to Brown’s future prospects isn’t the margin of his defeat. It’s the campaign he ran and the issues he stood for. (more…)

John McCain and Mitt Romney share a secret. It’s 23 years of Mitt’s tax returns.

Mitt gave them to McCain in 2008 when McCain, then the GOP presidential nominee, was vetting VP candidates.

This time around, Mitt has won the GOP nomination, but now he’s hiding those 23 years of returns from the American people. He handed them to McCain in exchange for a VP bid. But Mitt is denying that information to the American people when he’s asking them for something more important – the presidency.

Mitt, a quarter billionaire, disclosed his federal payments to fellow one percenter McCain, who owns so many houses he couldn’t count them. To America’s middle class riffraff, Mitt has divulged significantly less — a partial return for 2010 and a promise of the 2011 return when he finishes it.

Ann Romney told ABC reporter Robin Roberts last week that the riffraff need far less to determine who will be their President than McCain did to pick a VP. Here’s what Ann said:

“We have given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how we live our life.”

You people. That would be the uppity riffraff who dare to question the rich Romneys.

Mitt has explained all this before. He’ll tell voters what’s good for them. And what’s good for them is part of one year’s return and maybe another year later. That’ll do it. Here’s how he put it to CNN:

“People always want to get more. We’re putting out what’s required plus more. Those are the two years that people will have, and that’s all that’s necessary for people to understand something about my finances.”

That’s all that’s necessary. Got it? Mitt told you. Now go home and shut up about it.

Mitt might do better with middle class voters if he got down off his high-steppin’ dressage horse. But if he did that, he might never get taxpayers to repay him the $77,000 he lost on that horse. That $77,000 loss, an amount larger than most Americans earn in a year, was revealed in the partial return Romney did release. No wonder he’s reluctant to disclose more.

Ann Romney described Mitt’s refusal to give additional years this way on ABC:

“There are so many things that will be open again for more attack. And you just want to give more material for more attack. And that’s really – that’s just the answer.”

The answer, Ann Romney said, is that there are so many things in those secret returns that would provoke criticism. And the quarter billionaire running for president don’t countenance no criticism from riffraff. (more…)

The National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB’s) modest, common-sense proposed rule to remove roadblocks for workers who want to vote on whether to form a union has drawn praise from working men and women, political leaders and activists around the country. Here’s a sample of the comments:

Electrical Workers (IBEW) President Edwin Hill:

By eliminating delays, the board is not only bringing some balance. It is also saving money for taxpayers who foot the bill because of unnecessary litigation.

Communications Workers of America (CWA) President Larry Cohen:

Workers at T-Mobile USA and nearly every other company know firsthand how U.S. corporations use delay to keep workers from making a fair choice about union representation. The changes proposed by the National Labor Relations Board are a first and modest step toward ending some of that delay.

AFT President Randi Weingarten:

By cleaning up and modernizing the system, these proposals will help level the playing field for workers, ensuring they have a fair chance to vote….The board’s proposed changes won’t fix all of those problems, but they are a step in the right direction.

United Steelworkers (USW):

The proposal would remove unfair obstacles so that workers who petition for a vote on whether to form a union can have a vote. (more…)

By David Sirota
Political journalist, best-selling author and syndicated newspaper columnist

Based on John Kerry’s 2004 declaration that “I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it,” you could credibly argue that the Massachusetts Democrat is the founder of modern political flip-flopping — the James Naismith of the political world’s most dazzling sport. By that metric, though, you would also have to acknowledge that Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell is the game’s Michael Jordan.

As the upper chamber’s GOP leader, McConnell backed the Wall Street bailout in 2008, calling it “one of the finest moments in the history of the Senate.” A year and a half later, he was telling reporters that he vehemently opposes bailouts of big business.
Now, just weeks after that textbook “for-it-before-against-it” feat, McConnell and his Republican cohorts are leaping past the Kerry-inspired fundamentals. Determined to pull off an all-star caliber act of “for-it-against-it-for-it” acrobatics, the GOP is pushing a bailout for yet another big business: the Oil Industry.

True, we haven’t heard that word — “bailout” — during the Gulf disaster, which the government calls the worst petroleum spill in U.S. history. But we have heard a lot about the oil industry’s “liability cap” — a term that is just another synonym for “bailout.”

See, someone is going to bear the massive cost of damage to the Gulf Coast economy. The lost wages, sales and revenues will be borne by either A) fishermen, motel owners and other small businesses whose livelihoods are being choked in oil plumes, B) taxpayers whose cash would finance disaster aid and victims’ benefits or C) oil firms whose rig caused the catastrophe in the first place. In this particular calamity, a bailout would permit C to pass off major portions of the economic cost to A and B. 

Which, of course, is precisely what existing liability caps are designed to do. 

That’s right, under current law, “Oil companies face unlimited liability for the cleanup costs of an offshore spill, but their liability for economic damages to affected communities is capped at $75 million,” reports Congressional Quarterly.

Considering the fact that oil-spill costs can far surpass $75 million, this is the old “too big to fail” idea propping up the oil companies. Applied specifically to the Gulf cataclysm, the statute suggests that the national interest is best served by having taxpayers and communities foot the bill for the destruction rather than having companies like British Petroleum suffer the balance-sheet pain of paying the full damages. 
In response, Democrats are proposing sensible new legislation to eliminate the cap and reaffirm the “polluter pays” principle. As President Obama’s associate attorney general told Congress this week, “We don’t think there should be an arbitrary cap on financial liability.”

Yet, McConnell apparently does. Appearing on “Meet the Press,” the Republican leader, who weeks ago railed on “guaranteed perpetual taxpayer bailouts,” not only refused to support eliminating the liability cap, but warned of “the danger of taking the cap too high” — in effect, opposing even moderately reducing the size of the bailouts that the cap inevitably creates.

Obviously, the GOP is trying to help its oil industry benefactors stall for time. As Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in chastising the obstructionism, “A year from now, the television cameras will be gone, and it will be a fisherman who’s trying to file a claim and he’s going to be by himself” with no means of redress.

That’s the Republicans’ unfortunate goal, and because of the GOP’s intransigence, prospects for the Democrats’ legislation remain cloudy. What’s clear, however, is McConnell’s place in the Flip-Flopping Hall of Fame. His spectacular contortions have earned him a hallowed spot in the building’s brand new Bailout Wing. 

***

David Sirota is the bestselling author of the books “Hostile Takeover” (2006) and “The Uprising” (2008). E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com or follow him on Twitter @davidsirota. This is his latest column for Creators Syndicate.

By Mike Hall
AFL-CIO Senior Writer

With the oil platform explosion that killed 11 workers now is spilling millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico as a sobering background, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka told delegates to the 2010 Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference:

“Never before has the need been so urgent to produce clean energy, to use energy more efficiently, to prevent climate change and to protect our natural environment.

And not since the Great Depression have so many Americans needed new and better jobs with secure benefits and promising futures–jobs that can’t be off-shored, downsized or downgraded into temporary or part-time positions.”

In its second day, the conference brings together union members, environmentalists, business leaders, lawmakers and administration officials to map out a path to a green economy that creates good jobs, reduces global warming and preserves America’s economic and environmental security. It concludes tomorrow with a Green Jobs Advocacy Day Capitol Hill.

It is coordinated by the Blue Green Alliance, the partnership of the labor and environmental organizations, which includes the USW, CWA, AFT, Utility Workers (UWUA), ATU, the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

Trumka said it’s time to “put to rest, once and for all the false choice between good jobs and clean air and water.” He outlined four vital areas that must be included in any formula to create secure, good green energy jobs that boost the economy and planet.

First, we need more clean energy-we need it now.  We can’t afford the false choice between different forms of clean energy: Clean coal. Natural gas. Hydroelectric power. Nuclear power. Solar energy.  Wind power. Geothermal energy. Biofuels. We need to put them all to use.

He said clean energy is a “job creator” and that environmentally-friendly policies and public/private partnerships can create hundreds of thousands of jobs producing solar energy, wind power, geothermal power and biofuels.

He also called for the construction and retro-fitting of buildings–which produce 40 percent of the nation’s carbon emissions–so they are energy efficient, creating a twofold benefit of combating climate change and creating tens of thousands of construction jobs.

“We have to use electricity more intelligently,” Trumka said. Tens of thousands of miles of new high-voltage transmission are needed to bring solar, wind and geothermal energy online.

To use these interruptible power sources and make more intelligent use of all our electrical power, we need a new and smarter electrical grid. All this requires major public and private investments–and it will produce jobs.

The fourth key element, green jobs/energy saving, centers on mass transit and high speed rail.

Our nation’s subways, light rail and commuter rail lines are in urgent need of repair and expansion. It’s great news that the Obama Administration is providing $8 billion in high-speed rail grail that will save or create tens of thousands of jobs in areas like track-laying, manufacturing, planning and engineering.

And let me make this clear:  These jobs need to be American jobs. They need to be high-skill, high wage jobs, with safe conditions bright futures and the rights to be free from discrimination, and free to form and join unions.

USW President Leo W. Gerard told delegates that recent work-related accidents like those at the Tesoro refinery in Washington State and the oil spill off the coast of Louisiana shows that labor and environmental issues are connected in many ways and that it’s everyone’s responsibility to work for progress on both fronts.

Our generation has a responsibility to the next, our generation is going to be the one to leave the worst mess in history, or our generation is going to be the one to leave the most opportunity in history. I want to be the second one.

In a video interview for the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM), Gerard said:

We have the opportunity this week to show that the Blue Green Alliance is a growing movement, not just an organization. It actually has mission, a mission to have a positive impact on the environment but at the same time create millions of new jobs…There’s a whole opportunity to create the next generation of industrial manufacturing so our kids and grand kids can have good jobs and live in a healthy planet.

Among the many workshops offered during the conference, AFT is conducting two on preparing students and adults for good jobs in the green economy. The union‘s exhibit “Building Futures Together,” highlights work by AFT members including:

• Anne Cohen and Simon Hauger of the West Philadelphia High School’s Automotive Academy, which is currently designing two affordable cars that get more than 100 miles per gallon.
• David Tillman, a teacher of automotive mechanics at Henry Ford Community College in Michigan, which offers cutting-edge courses to prepare students for emerging careers such as green building certification, biotechnology and alternative energy.
• George Stone, co-chair of the sustainability core committee and provost of Milwaukee Area Technical College, a regional leader in green and sustainable programs. He will be joined by David Stinnet, who teaches wind turbine energy.

Also today, the conference attendees heard from Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) who said that like the Internet boom of the 1990s, a clean energy boom can be ” a jobs revolution. It will create millions of jobs.”

Sen. Jeff. Merkley (D-Ore.) said the drive for new high-tech, efficient clean energy gives the nation a chance “to seize this moment to build things in America….We want to see America building turbines and shipping them to the world.”

Click here for more information on the conference.

***

Re-Posted from the AFL-CIO Now Blog