March 2009

Let’s be clear. Barack Obama has an agenda. He wants to tax our energy and put the government in control of our health care. Given all the damage that Obama wants to do to our economy through these, card check just isn’t that high on his priority list. MSNBC has it:

*** Card check’s death? Did the legislative battle over the Employee Free Choice Act (a.k.a. “card check”) end before it truly began? GOP Sen. Arlen Specter’s decision yesterday to oppose the bill, even though he voted for cloture on the measure in ’07, dealt a blow to organized labor, denying them the 60 votes they need to end debate — even if Al Franken ends up joining the Senate. We can tell you this: The White House appears to be happy (but very quietly so) to have this debate out of the way. No doubt they were for it. But it was always more of a Biden cause than a Barack cause. At this point in time, with everything else on their plate, sticking a finger in business’ eye wasn’t something the White House was looking forward to. Would Obama have signed it? Yes. But he doesn’t have to worry about it now, at least maybe not until 2011.

I was listening to a podcast over the weekend about the dangers of to the international trade system from the global economic downturn. These concerns are becoming common. One academic thinks that many of these bailouts that we are talking out are in violation of international treaties and could spark a trade war:

I think [Obama] has to really use his rhetorical powers at some stage to try and say that openness is at stake, and openness which is really — it’s not just trade, which Carla was correctly focusing on — trade — we have Buy America; bailouts which are — you know, if they are sectoral subsidies, which there are, and they are even more sectoral in the sense that they are Detroit and within that probably just two firms — those are clearly actionable under the SCM agreement, so I don’t see how it’s going to be proven to be the ability of — (inaudible).

Two stories emerged this week that demonstrate the absolute intellectual bankruptcy of the media reform agenda. It is just another attempt to gain power for the left.

A Huffington Post writer argued that Clear Channel and Rupert Murdoch’s media empire should be broken up by the FCC and the DOJ’s anti-trust division:

The Obama Administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a revivified Anti-Trust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice could pursue all sorts of reforms that would open up the nation’s political discourse. A few minor changes in the rules and regulations governing the public airwaves and corporate media consolidation could transform the political economy of the media sector. Such reforms would make it more difficult for networks to shove people like Cheney, Rove, and Fleischer down our throats because enhanced competition would mean that rivals might be broadcasting more attractive fare. Breaking up Rupert Murdoch’s empire (starting with revoking the waiver that allows him to own the New York Post), and busting up Clear Channel’s monopoly of radio would be a good place to start. Congress, working with the Obama Administration, could then revisit the odious Telecommunications Act of 1996 and remove or rework its worst provisions. Look at what the media monopolies did during the Bush years. The Bush Administration never could have lied us into going to war in Iraq if it were not for the duplicity of the corporate media.

But … Nancy Pelosi argues that the New York Times should be exempted from anti-trust laws.

Two stories emerged this week that demonstrate the absolute intellectual bankruptcy of the media reform agenda. It is just another attempt to gain power for the left.

A Huffington Post writer argued that Clear Channel and Rupert Murdoch’s media empire should be broken up by the FCC and the DOJ’s anti-trust division:

The Obama Administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a revivified Anti-Trust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice could pursue all sorts of reforms that would open up the nation’s political discourse. A few minor changes in the rules and regulations governing the public airwaves and corporate media consolidation could transform the political economy of the media sector. Such reforms would make it more difficult for networks to shove people like Cheney, Rove, and Fleischer down our throats because enhanced competition would mean that rivals might be broadcasting more attractive fare. Breaking up Rupert Murdoch’s empire (starting with revoking the waiver that allows him to own the New York Post), and busting up Clear Channel’s monopoly of radio would be a good place to start. Congress, working with the Obama Administration, could then revisit the odious Telecommunications Act of 1996 and remove or rework its worst provisions. Look at what the media monopolies did during the Bush years. The Bush Administration never could have lied us into going to war in Iraq if it were not for the duplicity of the corporate media.

But … Nancy Pelosi argues that the New York Times should be exempted from anti-trust laws.

Many of you may know Chad Barth, Deputy Strategy Director for the Republican National Committee.

When he’s not working tirelessly for the Republican Party, Chad takes to concert promoting, for charity.

Chad started raising money three years ago in conjunction with the, then first annual, National Walk for Epilepsy.  The Chad Barth Concert for Epilepsy was inspired in honor of his 21-year old sister Christina Ann Sauer of Rochester, MN, and his 5 year old cousin Ryan Blaess of rural Decorah, Iowa, as well as countless friends he has met along the way that have shared their stories about friends & family members with epilepsy.

Both Christina and Ryan have suffered from various, severe, intractable seizure disorders for all of their lives.  Christina who has undergone three neurosurgeries, countless medication trials and combinations – all of which have unfortunately not really helped out to the extent that we have ever hoped.  Ryan who has been diagnosed with Dravet Syndrome and has accumulated more Life Flight miles, than Chad has frequent flier miles.

This year’s concert is this Friday, March 20th. For those of you unable to make the trip to DC, we urge you to purchase a ticket for a Walter Reed Veteran. That’s right, if you’re unable to attend but would like to contribute, your ticket will be donated to a veteran at Walter Reed Hospital.

In his first year, Chad raised $2000 for the National Walk for Epilepsy. Last year he raised $15,000.  What can we do to help him break more than $15,000?

Donate or buy tickets here. And check out this corny promo video by my buddy Jim Conroy:

I love this. According to the WaPo, SEIU is getting rid of union organizers, who are filing a complaint with the NLRB over the issue:

The Service Employees International Union, considered the most influential union in the nation, has notified the union that represents about 220 of its national field staff and organizers that 75 of them are being laid off. In return, the workers’ union, which goes by the somewhat postmodern name of the Union of Union Representatives, has filed unfair labor practices charges against SEIU with the National Labor Relations Board. The staff union’s leaders say that SEIU is engaging in the same kind of practices that some businesses use — laying off workers without proper notice, contracting out work to temp firms, banning union activities and reclassifying workers to reduce union numbers.

This reminds me of ACORN’s 1995 lawsuit to exempt them from paying minimum wage, while working on a ballot initiative to raise the minimum wage. EPI has the story, wtih the full report after the jump:

In 1995, ACORN sued the state of California, claiming that it should be exempted from the state minimum wage. The group realized the simple economic fact facing all employers: being forced to pay higher wages means that you must employ fewer workers. A legal brief filed by ACORN during the appeal of its lawsuit admits:

As acknowledged both by the trial court and California, the more that ACORN must pay each individual outreach worker—either because of minimum or overtime requirements—the fewer outreach workers it will be able to hire.

This argument is particularly ironic. In 1996, when New Orleans business targets of Rathke’s minimum wage increase campaign acknowledged the economic reality that increasing the cost of labor would lead them to reduce employment or cut hours, Wade Rathke snapped, “If their business is that marginal, they probably shouldn’t be in business.”

(Crossposted from The Next Right)

Rotten ACORN – America’s Bad Seed – By The Employment Policies Institute – Free Legal Forms

I love this. According to the WaPo, SEIU is getting rid of union organizers, who are filing a complaint with the NLRB over the issue:

The Service Employees International Union, considered the most influential union in the nation, has notified the union that represents about 220 of its national field staff and organizers that 75 of them are being laid off. In return, the workers’ union, which goes by the somewhat postmodern name of the Union of Union Representatives, has filed unfair labor practices charges against SEIU with the National Labor Relations Board. The staff union’s leaders say that SEIU is engaging in the same kind of practices that some businesses use — laying off workers without proper notice, contracting out work to temp firms, banning union activities and reclassifying workers to reduce union numbers.

This reminds me of ACORN’s 1995 lawsuit to exempt them from paying minimum wage, while working on a ballot initiative to raise the minimum wage. EPI has the story, wtih the full report after the jump:

In 1995, ACORN sued the state of California, claiming that it should be exempted from the state minimum wage. The group realized the simple economic fact facing all employers: being forced to pay higher wages means that you must employ fewer workers. A legal brief filed by ACORN during the appeal of its lawsuit admits:

As acknowledged both by the trial court and California, the more that ACORN must pay each individual outreach worker—either because of minimum or overtime requirements—the fewer outreach workers it will be able to hire.

This argument is particularly ironic. In 1996, when New Orleans business targets of Rathke’s minimum wage increase campaign acknowledged the economic reality that increasing the cost of labor would lead them to reduce employment or cut hours, Wade Rathke snapped, “If their business is that marginal, they probably shouldn’t be in business.”

Rotten ACORN – America’s Bad Seed – By The Employment Policies Institute – Free Legal Forms

Two weeks ago, a friend from Austin noted that he drives to work listening to his favorite Dallas radio station growing up. He listens to it over internet radio over his iPhone, which is them plugged into the auxillary jack on his car radio.

Yet the left is pushing a media localism agenda. Weird. I mean, I am not sure that I have particular problems with this particular bill. But there seems something kind of retro about it.

Rasmussen finds (or whatever they call their somewhat sketchy polling) that the GOP is now ahead on the generic Congressional ballot.

Support for the Democratic Congressional candidates fell to a new low over the past week, allowing the GOP to move slightly head for the first time in recent years in the Generic Congressional Ballot.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 41% said they would vote for their district’s Republican candidate while 39% would choose the Democrat.

It is well known that Jon Corzine’s numbers are collapsing in New Jersey. But that’s not the only state.

For example, look Governor Deval Patrick in Massachussets, as tested by SurveyUSA. He has 28% approve and 68% disapprove. This is flat across region. Even Dems net out at -11, with 42%-53%.

Now look at this poll out of Michigan, H/T Race42008’s Kavon Nikrad. Any credible Republican beats the sitting Lt. Gov.

I haven’t surveyed all the states, but it feels like someting is happening.