Daily Topics - Tuesday March 1st, 2011

Hour One: Latest from the trenches...War on Labor - John Nichols, The Nation
Hour Two: What's next for Wisconsin labor? Lisa Graves, Center for Media and Democracy / Plus, Wisconsin Democrats fight back - Mike Tate, Democractic Party of Wisconsin / Boots on the ground-Columbus, OH Rally for the Middle Class - James Hoffa, International Brotherhood of Teamsters / Et Tu, Ohio...Buckeyes fight back! Congressman Dennis Kucinich
Hour Three: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail? Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone Magazine / Plus, Healthcare...how do we go from "nope" to "hope?" Ron Pollock, Families USA
Comments

Last night on the Lawerence Odonnel show the Wisconsin State Republican leader admitted that the reason for putting no-bid sale of Wisconsin public power assets was due to the fact that they are in such dis-repair that they would be lucky to get someone to buy them. The question then becomes why are they in such dis-repair? Obviously the politicians didn't fund those projects to properly maintain them, thus neglecting the public's investment, running them into the ground. Then they want to sell them off cheap, let the private company take them over where they can invest money, get the tax breaks from the tax payers (who ultimately pay for the plants again!), then take to profits. They need to be called out on this.

Analysis of Anti-union adjenda
It is very strange to think about the unlying message to the systematic distruction of collective bargaining. I keep thinking about the reason why there would be such a movement. It makes logical sense to conclude that after Citizens United made it reasonable for a corporation to contribute money to political campaigns, the labor force behind that corporation's income would want to have shared interest in any such political campaign. I will illustrate with an example;
Suppose I have a company with 100 employees. As the voting majority share-holder, I decide to allocate a fixed amount of money for political campaigning in an upcoming election. But my employees are all tall people (nothing wrong with that right?), but I decide to run ads that promote an adjenda that would lower every door knob 1 foot (I am a short guy). Now, everyone in my company has built the very capitol that I intend to use for this ad. But the very idea I am promoting has no positive effect (if leaglized) on my labor force. But if I had a union representing that labor force, they would want to have a voice in how my political contributions are made.
This is the real reason the GOP is targeting unions. If the Unions in this country WAKE UP and say "What The F!?! A shaving off the profits accumlated by our labor force goes to campaigns that have un-truthful, propoganda? We need to have every member of the union in the company donate to whom they see fit on a PER PERSON basis not a SHARE HOLDER basis."
A highly liberal, female, member of any Koch company work force should have as loud a voice and as much influence over the political contributions in the current political chess game. Such a woman needs representation in words AND MONEY to defend women's rights from GOP house members today as well as defend true democracy and fair elections to come.
-Adam.

While Wisconsin gets the majority of coverage in the War on Labor, Ohio's Republican controlled Senate is playing games with committee oppointments to secure enough votes to pass SB5 (John Kasich's union-busting budget solution). When the President of the Senate discovered he did not have enough support within his own party to pass SB5 out of the committee, he replaced a no-voting Republican with a yes-voting Republican. Talk about playground rules.

And the parlour games continue. A confirmed "hell no" vote from Republican Senator Karen Gilmour was flipped to a hell yes today when she replaced the chairman of the committee. That's two additional "Yes" votes, giving a 7-5 majority to pass the bill out of committee. The kicker is committee chairs receive additional compensation beyond their normal pay.



After every election, I go to house.gov and senate.gov to see who's in charge of the various committees (and put the information in a spreadsheet, because I'm a nerd). I had never before seen partisan messages on these websites, but now that the Republicans are back in control of the House, they've decided to put this unseemly language on the home pages of websites that are supposed to serve a bi-partisan purpose.