Obama: Bush Tax Cuts For The Rich Won’t Create ‘One Single Job’
This week, the White House has been aggressively selling its tax deal with congressional Republicans, lobbying lawmakers, and blasting out press releases touting endorsements of the plan, even those from obscure mayors. Progressive activist and lawmakers have been upset by the deal to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy for two years in exchange for extending unemployment benefits, correctly arguing that the cuts for the rich will do little to stimulate the economy while adding billions to the deficit.
And in an interview on NPR this morning with Morning Edition host Steve Inkseep, President Obama reflected this point of view, agreeing that the tax cuts for the wealthy will not create “one single job“:
INSKEEP: Let me ask you about something that we heard from one of our listeners. … The question that we got was: “Please ask him how keeping the tax rate for the richest the same as it has been for a decade creates one single job.”
OBAMA: It doesn’t, which is why I was opposed to it — and I’m still opposed to it.
The issue here is not whether I think that the tax cuts for the wealthy are a good or smart thing to do. I’ve said repeatedly that I think they’re not a smart thing to do, particularly because we’ve got to borrow money, essentially, to pay for them.
The problem is, is that this is the single issue that the Republicans are willing to scotch the entire deal for. And in that circumstances — in that circumstance, we’ve got, basically, a very simple choice: Either I allow 2 million people who are currently getting unemployment insurance not to get it, either I allow the recovery that we’re on to be endangered or we make a compromise now.
Listen here:
Of course, Obama is correct. As the Center for American Progress’ Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger noted, “The economy did not add a single new job” in the first three years after the Bush tax cuts were enacted. And as the Washington Post noted early this year, despite 9 years of Bush tax cuts, “There has been zero net job creation” over the past decade. “[O]n jobs, on growth, on middle-class income, on investment,” the Bush tax cuts “simply did not work,” Linden and Ettlinger conclude.
But Obama’s comments seems to be at odds with the message that the White House has been pushing in trying to sell its tax deal, touting that it will create millions of jobs. On Wednesday, White House economic advisor Larry Summers even warned that not passing the tax deal, “would materially increase the risk the economy would stall out and we would have a double dip [recession].” Cribbing a talking point from conservatives while appearing on MSNBC yesterday afternoon, White House economic advisor Austan Goolsbee explained, “I think the president’s judgment on why extend the Bush tax cuts was ordinary people need to have some certainty that when they wake up January 1st, we haven’t fumbled around and now their taxes are going to go up by several thousand dollars.”
CAP: Tax cut deal could create 2.2 million jobs
CAP’s Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger have taken the stimulus estimates used by economist Mark Zandi and the Congressional Budget Office and tried to come up with a ballpark figure for the jobs the tax-cut deal will create. They’ve also come up with a ballpark figure for the jobs a better deal — one in which the tax cuts for income over $ 250,000 expired and that money was spent on a big payroll tax cut — could create. Here’s their breakdown:
So, the deal Obama got might net the economy 2.2 million jobs — but a better deal could’ve gotten us 2.7 million jobs at the same price. That second deal wasn’t on the table, of course.
Job Creators Don’t Need Money to Create Jobs, They Need Customers
To add a little bit to what Jon Chait has to say about Rep John Shadegg the whole notion that you drive the economy forward by directing more money into the hands of “job creators” (i.e., rich people) makes basically no sense. A job creator is basically a businessman with an idea. If it’s a good idea, a business based around his idea will attract customers. And if it attracts customers, he’ll hire employees to serve those customers’ needs. This is where growth comes from.
But a businessman with a good idea who needs capital doesn’t need a tax cut to get that capital, he needs a loan or an equity investment. This is what we have a financial system for. Sergey Brin doesn’t need to first get rich, then finance Google out of his own pocket. He just needs to start Google and that’s how he gets rich.
The thing of it is, though, that your idea really only works if you have some customers. If everyone in Yuma, Arizona is unemployed then even a very competent proprietor of a dry cleaning establishment is going to have a hard time expanding his business. He won’t take out a loan to expand, he won’t get an equity investment to expand, and he won’t invest his own money in an expansion. You can give the guy all the money you want, and he won’t invest in expanding his business. That’s because unemployed people don’t need much dry cleaning and also don’t have much money to spend on dry cleaning. A guy with $ 0 and a good idea and a lot of potential customers will find a way to start his business. A guy with $ 1 billion and a good idea and no potential customers is just a guy sitting on a huge stockpile of cash. Things like the availability of credit matter, but credit is currently available. What’s not available is customers with money and an inclination to spend it. More government spending and more money-creation will lead to more purchases, more customers, more business expansion, and more hiring. Then people with good ideas will make a lot of money and complain about their high taxes.
Obama’s Labor Dept. To Create Gov’t Sponsored ‘Labor News’ Agency?
-By Warner Todd Huston
What is it called when a government creates a state-sponsored “news” agency, again? Ah yes, it’s called government propaganda. And that is what the Obama administration seems interested in creating if the words of Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis’s senior advisor Carl Fillichio can be believed.
On Nov. 19 Fillichio attended the annual meeting of the International Labor Communications Association and in his address to the room he laid out a few “revolutionary” plans and policy ideas one of which was to create a new media agency that would act as a sort of ministry of Big Labor information all run out of the Secretary of Labor’s office in Washington D.C.
The advisor to the Secretary of Labor told the audience that one of the things that vexed his department is that it was so hard to get their “news” reported by the media. “We battle every single day when we try to put something out,” Fillichio told the audience.
Fillichio reported to the conference that he’d hired a person for his office solely to deal with labor media propaganda efforts. He also gave out the person’s email address and phone number so the union members in attendance at the meeting could have easy access to this government sponsored media director.
“We cannot depend on those other people – the traditional media – to get that message out,” Fillichio said.
Imagine what is being said here. A person of high position in the Department of Labor is proposing that he be the one to “report” labor news. He is proposing that the government itself become a media agency in an effort to get around “the traditional media.”
Every totalitarian government has such government-controlled agencies, of course. Who can forget the U.S.S.R.’s famed Pravda and Izvestia news agencies?
Of course, there was an old Soviet joke about those two largest Soviet “news” agencies. It goes like this: “there’s no pravda in Izvestia and no izvestia in Pravda.” You see, in Russian the word pravda can be defined as “truth” and izvestia translated as “news.” Hence there was no truth or news in the Soviet’s daily newspapers. This is essentially what we’d get with the Obama administration’s idea of a new ministry of labor information sponsored by none other than Obama and his hand-picked, big labor-friendly, minions.
Government officials that tend toward an authoritarian view of their job often dream of fully controlling what the media reports about their office. They also closely guard what information goes out to the media. But it is one thing to closely guard what information is released and a whole other thing to create an agency to “report” the news.
Lastly, think of this for just a minute. If Fillichio and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis don’t think that the left-wing, Old Media is fair enough to them, just imagine how biased and left-wing the “news” that this new ministry of Big Labor information would be disgorging! I mean if the leftists in the Old Media aren’t leftist enough to suit Obama’s Dept. of Labor, I shudder to think how far left these guys really are.
Chalk this up as yet one more step toward authoritarianism evinced by this president and his administration.
Obama’s Labor Dept. To Create Gov’t Sponsored ‘Labor News’ Agency?
What is it called when a government creates a state-sponsored “news” agency, again? Ah yes, it’s called government propaganda. And that is what the Obama administration seems interested in creating if the words of Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis’s senior advisor Carl Fillichio can be believed.
On Nov. 19 Fillichio attended the annual meeting of the International Labor Communications Association and in his address to the room he laid out a few “revolutionary” plans and policy ideas one of which was to create a new media agency that would act as a sort of ministry of Big Labor information all run out of the Secretary of Labor’s office in Washington D.C.
The advisor to the Secretary of Labor told the audience that one of the things that vexed his department is that it was so hard to get their “news” reported by the media. “We battle every single day when we try to put something out,” Fillichio told the audience.
Fillichio reported to the conference that he’d hired a person for his office solely to deal with labor media propaganda efforts. He also gave out the person’s email address and phone number so the union members in attendance at the meeting could have easy access to this government sponsored media director.
“We cannot depend on those other people – the traditional media – to get that message out,” Fillichio said.
Imagine what is being said here. A person of high position in the Department of Labor is proposing that he be the one to “report” labor news. He is proposing that the government itself become a media agency in an effort to get around “the traditional media.”
Every totalitarian government has such government-controlled agencies, of course. Who can forget the U.S.S.R.’s famed Pravda and Izvestia news agencies?
Of course, there was an old Soviet joke about those two largest Soviet “news” agencies. It goes like this: “there’s no pravda in Izvestia and no izvestia in Pravda.” You see, in Russian the word pravda can be defined as “truth” and izvestia translated as “news.” Hence there was no truth or news in the Soviet’s daily newspapers. This is essentially what we’d get with the Obama administration’s idea of a new ministry of labor information sponsored by none other than Obama and his hand-picked, big labor-friendly, minions.
Government officials that tend toward an authoritarian view of their job often dream of fully controlling what the media reports about their office. They also closely guard what information goes out to the media. But it is one thing to closely guard what information is released and a whole other thing to create an agency to “report” the news.
Lastly, think of this for just a minute. If Fillichio and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis don’t think that the left-wing, Old Media is fair enough to them, just imagine how biased and left-wing the “news” that this new ministry of Big Labor information would be disgorging! I mean if the leftists in the Old Media aren’t leftist enough to suit Obama’s Dept. of Labor, I shudder to think how far left these guys really are.
Chalk this up as yet one more step toward authoritarianism evinced by this president and his administration.
Obama in Japan: Asian Markets Critical to Economic Growth — Increasing Exports Will Create Americans Jobs
ABC News’ Karen Travers reports: On his last stop of his 10-day Asian tour, President Obama said that that America’s security and prosperity is “inextricably linked” to that of Asia and increasing U.S. exports will create American jobs. “In today’s…
Political Punch
Team Obama Looks To Create Internet Privacy Watchdog
Good idea? Bad idea?
The Obama administration is preparing a stepped-up approach to policing Internet privacy that calls for new laws and the creation of a new position to oversee the effort, according to people familiar with the situation.
The strategy is expected to be unveiled in a report being issued by the U.S. Commerce Department in coming weeks, these people said. The report isn’t yet final and could change, these people said.
The initiatives would mark a turning point in Internet policy. Recent administrations typically steered away from Internet regulations out of concern for stifling innovation. But the increasingly central role of personal information in the Internet economy helped spark government action, according to people familiar with the situation.
Joe Barton (R-Tx) is quoted in the article as being for this, due to all the privacy concerns, and actual incidents, that keep popping their ugly heads up. And, yes, this would be something that the federal government should oversee, rather than the State governments (though, they can implement their own laws, too), as this is national and international “commerce.” Yet, should there be a concern about government becoming overly involved?
Obviously, I would be concerned with giving any liberal/progressive oversight power, as they so often have ulterior motives, much like with Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. They’ll say all the right things, and sound so agreeable, but, behind the scenes, they open up destructive cans of worms.
Yet, regardless of which party controls the presidency and/or Congress, there is a large chance of mission creep, with more and more restriction being added as time goes on. Like with so much regulation, one tiny thing happens, and now lawmakers want a big law to stop it from ever happening again.
Do people need better privacy protection? Yes. Should the federal government make the rules? That’s a tough one, because we all know that it wouldn’t stop there. If you want to protect your privacy on-line, your best defense is……you! The Electronic Frontier Foundation has 12 ways to protect yourself. These are mostly easy to understand methods, because, face it, not everyone is super duper computer/Internet savvy.
You can certainly find other lists and ideas, here are a few from me, more along the lines of software
- Make sure you have a good firewall, and keep it updated. I actually have 3. I use the built in Microsoft one, there is one in the modem (which I have zero control of, Time Warner administers for all customers), and with my Symantic program (which is actually military grade). I would highly suggest Zone Alarm, which is free, for those who aren’t sure if they are protected. It’s one of the best you can get
- Get an anti-virus program. A good one. That you pay for. That has auto-update and install capability. Better yet, get a suite, which would include anti-virus, spyware, online protection, and firewall. Like Norton Internet Security or McAfee Total Protection
- Install a spyware removal program, keep it up to date, and use it at least every other week. Ad Aware is a great one, as is Spyware Terminator, and Spyware Doctor. I prefer Spyware Terminator, as it is free and gives real time protection. None are perfect, though, so run a check now and then!
- Encrypt your files and folders which contain private/personal/sensitive data! I use two programs. The first is Kruptos 2 Professional, which would cost you $ 12.99. The great thing about Kruptos is that you encrypt the program, open the file with a password, and, here’s the kicker, when you close it it re-encrypts automatically! No playing around, no manual encrypts, creating fake “disks”, etc. The other is My Lockbox. You can only hide one folder, but, I put several files and folders underneath the top folder. Like all my tax returns and two files with all my codes. You can also use Iron Privacy Folder. This is a very basic measure, designed to simply hide folders, and won’t defeat serious, let’s call them….. a**holes who know what they are doing. Most won’t take the time. Yes, hackers and such do want in to those files and folders. Note: Iron Privacy is not for Windows 7, which is why I use My Lockbox.
- Secure your home (and business, if it is in your control) WiFi with a password.
A great place to check software and reviews, and download both free and paid, is CNET.
TARP 2: No Way To Create Jobs And Help Our Nation’s Economy Grow And Prosper
Our guest blogger is John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Center for American Progress Action Fund CEO John Podesta and Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA)
As President Obama heads back from Asia, he faces another important week with Congress set to rejoin the debate over whether to extend expiring tax cuts.
Republicans are holding needed middle-class tax cuts hostage in order to give the richest two percent of Americans bonus tax relief in 2011. Republican leaders like to trot out the argument that extension of cuts for the wealthiest is an important tool that will help create jobs.
It’s not. It’s TARP 2, or more Tax Assistance for Rich People. And their rote rhetoric does not obscure the fact that CBO’s analysis of tax policies ranked tax cuts for the wealthiest dead last in terms of its potential to stimulate job growth. It is a highly inefficient, and devastatingly expensive, way to attempt to spur job growth and help our economy’s nascent recovery.
As the White House staff settles on a strategy for the tax cut debate, they should consider an idea put forward by Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA). He has suggested that rather than extending the tax cuts for the top two percent, Congress consider a number of business tax cuts that would be far more likely to spur job creation and more sustained economic growth. He proposed a range of possible business tax cuts to create jobs, but my favorite is a temporary tax credit against payroll taxes. That is a direct way to reduce the costs of businesses hiring new workers, and I hope the White House includes this idea in whatever proposal it puts forward for consideration at next week’s bipartisan Congressional meeting.
The kinds of ideas put forward by Sen. Warner combined with middle class tax cuts and extending unemployment insurance are far sounder as temporary measures to aid economic recovery compared to Republicans’ push to make all the Bush tax cuts permanent. We obviously cannot afford to do that, but as a temporary measure to help American workers and our economy there are better measures than TARP 2 bonuses for millionaires.
Filming Of “Thunder In The Deep,” Submarine Thriller, Would Create Hundreds Of Jobs In Connecticut Next Year
The filming of “Thunder In The Deep,” a submarine thriller, would create hundreds of jobs in Connecticut next year, officials said Tuesday.
The production, believed to be one of the largest in state history, would cost an estimated $ 100 million and could create 200 jobs. The precise locations for the filming, which would take about five months, have not yet been announced.
The film will begin production next spring, and the official announcement will be made Wednesday by former House Speaker James Amann and state Sen. Gary LeBeau, the co-chairman of the legislature’s commerce committee. Amann, who dropped out of the race for governor this year, was the chief architect of changing the state law to allow lucrative tax credits to attract production companies to Connecticut.
Since the tax credits were enacted, film crews have produced movies all over the state. An “Indiana Jones” movie brought large crowds to the New Haven Green, while famed actor Robert DeNiro filmed a movie at Curley’s Diner in downtown Stamford. Overall, more than 100 movies and other productions have been filmed in Connecticut since 2006.
“Connecticut was a natural choice for this movie, given its deep history with the submarine industry,” author Joe Buff said in a statement. “Add to that the generous tax credits and the top-notch, local facilities, the production team is thrilled to working in the state.”
Deliberate Distortions Create False Sense of Urgency for Social Security Cuts
There is so much inaccurate information—much of it deliberately cultivated—about the solvency of Social Security, that it’ss leading policymakers, analysts and lawmakers to believe there is an urgent need to make major changes to Social Security.
Add to that a cadre of newly elected representatives and senators who back raising the retirement age, privatizing Social Security or making other cuts to the nation’s most successful social safety net program, and it becomes even more important to make sure the real picture of Social Security’s future is not distorted.
A new issue brief from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) calls attention to the fact that Social Security will be fully solvent for the next 27 years and any premature action to make changes to the program will have a severe impact on millions of near retirees. Says CEPR Co-Director Dean Baker:
Misinformation about Social Security has led many to believe that Social Security is in immediate danger of insolvency but the program will be fully solvent for almost three more decades. Furthermore, even if no changes are ever made, a child born in 2010 can expect to see a benefit that is more than 50 percent larger in real terms than what current retirees receive today.
The issue brief, “Action on Social Security: The Urgent Need for Delay,” argues that proponents of strengthening Social Security should fight to delay any action on changes because:
- There is good reason for believing the public will be better informed about the financial state of Social Security in the future, in part because of the weakening of some of the main sources of misinformation.
- Many more people will be directly dependent on Social Security in the near future. These people and their families will likely be strong defenders of the program.
- The group of near-retirees, who may be the victims of early action, will desperately need their Social Security since they have seen much of their wealth eliminated with the collapse of the housing bubble.
- The concern over “maintaining the confidence of financial markets” is an empty claim that can be used to justify almost any policy.
Click here for the full report. For more information, be sure to visit Our Fiscal Security here, Retirement USA here, Strengthen Social Security…Don’t Cut It here and the Alliance for Retired Americans here.
GOP To Create Leadership Position For House Freshman
An interesting item from MSNBC:
NBC’s Luke Russert reports that the new GOP Leadership Team will include a position for a member of the freshman class, according to a GOP aide. Only freshmen will vote on the position, and it was created with the idea of making sure the new diverse and dynamic class of Republican members had a seat at the leadership table.
Sources tell NBC News that Rep.-Elect Kristi Noem (R-SD) has indicated that she has a strong interest in running. Noem, a Tea Party favorite, is seen by party insiders as a rising star.
Noem has served in the South Dakota House of Representative since 2006.
The idea isn’t entirely new. Virginia’s Gerry Connolly was elected the “President” of the Democratic Freshman class in 2009, although that position isn’t formally part of the Democratic leadership in the House.
When Asked What Bills She Would Sponsor To Create Jobs, Ayotte Says The Bush Tax Cuts
New Hampshire Republican Senate nominee Kelly Ayotte has based her campaign on an anti-government zeal and a promise to “take a hatchet to spending” (despite her embrace of budget-busting policies). But when it comes to constructive ideas about the nation’s high unemployment, Ayotte made it clear during a debate last week that she has no solutions.
When asked what specific bills she would sponsor in order to reduce unemployment, Ayotte simply reiterated her support for extending all of the Bush tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of the year:
The last thing we should be doing right now is raising taxes, but that’s what Congressman Hodes wants to do. When he talks about letting those tax cuts expire, let’s call it for what it is: it’s keeping tax rates stable at a time when we are facing a very difficult challenge nationally. And those taxes impact 750,000 small businesses in this country, half the business income in this country, and employ 25 percent of the workers in this country. So I’ll tell you how we create a positive climate: lower taxes on our small businesses.
Watch it:
First, Ayotte’s stat regarding half of small business income is flat-out wrong, and the 750,000 number she cited is only valid if you consider Bechtel and the Tribune Company to be small businesses. Second, Ayotte fails to mention that her desired job creation plan will cost nearly $ 4 trillion over the next decade, including $ 830 billion to pay for the tax cuts for the richest two percent of Americans alone.
But most importantly, Ayotte’s proposal is obviously nothing new, and we already know that it falls flat as a job creation step. According to the Congressional Budget Office, extending the Bush tax cuts provides just 10 to 40 cents in economic activity for every dollar spent. “A permanent extension [of the Bush tax cuts] would entail large revenue losses after the recovery is over, so its effects on output and employment in the next few years per dollar of total budgetary cost would be much lower” than other tax and spending policies, CBO said.
In fact, as Josh Picker found, following the Bush tax cuts, the country “registered the weakest jobs and income growth in the post-war period”:
Overall monthly job growth was the worst of any cycle since at least February 1945, and household income growth was negative for the first cycle since tracking began in 1967. Women reversed employment gains of previous cycles. And for African Americans, the worst job growth on record was matched by an unprecedented increase in poverty.
Extending the Bush tax cuts will definitely further the Republican goal of having marginal tax rates for the rich be as low as possible, but the only thing such a move will create from a federal policy perspective is a bigger deficit.
Is It Hard to Create Inflation Expectations?
Paul Krugman says he “very much agree[s] with the notion that central banks can gain traction, even in a liquidity trap, if they can credibly promise future inflation — that was the whole moral of my 1998 paper.”
That paper is the lynchpin of my understanding of this issue as well, but Krugman seems very skeptical in practice that monetary action will deliver the goods:
But in the 30s, we were mainly talking about ending expectations of deflation, or at most creating expectations of a rise in the price level to where it was before the Depression; remember that even in 1938, prices were well below 1929 levels:
That’s very different from trying to create expectations of inflation looking forward with no actual deflation in our past.
It’s certainly different. But is it “very” different? It doesn’t seem all that different to me. Suppose the official Fed statement after the next meeting involves some QE and gives as the reason for it “the inflation rate is too low, we believe this round of QE will produce extra inflation and if it doesn’t we’re going to do more QE.” That would certainly lead me to expect more inflation.
It seems to me that the problem we face is much more that the median member of the FOMC is unlikely to agree to such a strong statement than that a strong statement wouldn’t work.
How The ‘US’ Chamber Uses Its Money To Pay Pundits, Manipulate Google, And Create Fake News Outlets
Earlier this month, ThinkProgress published an exclusive series of investigative pieces into the fundraising program of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the far right corporate lobbying juggernaut. We uncovered millions from corporations like Procter and Gamble, outsourcing giant CSC, and Microsoft, but also discovered that the Chamber has been actively fundraising from foreign corporations like the Bahrain Petroleum Company and the State Bank of India. We provided documentation for over 80 foreign corporations donating at least $ 885,000 to the same Chamber 501(c)(6) general account the Chamber is now using to run an unprecedented $ 75 million attack campaign against Democrats.
Responding to our posts, the Chamber launched a massive smear campaign using its large in-house communications staff and a network of well funded public relations firms:
– Manipulating Google And Blogs: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce retains public relations giant Fleishman-Hillard for much of their online communications work. Fleishman-Hillard VP Pat Cleary posts on the Chamber’s blog, and says he works closely with conservative bloggers through RedState. Other Chamber lobbyists collaborate routinely with conservative bloggers through the Heritage Foundation’s Bloggers Briefing to help get the message out for business lobbyists. As Cleary has told conferences of business lobbyists, he helps trade associations like the Chamber buy AdWords to promote the business lobby’s message. For example, when anyone Googles the words “US Chamber” and “foreign,” they see a link to the Chamber’s false response that it receives only $ 100,000 from foreign affiliates.
– Paying For Television Pundits: GOP lobbyist John Feehery has appeared on cable television to attack ThinkProgress’ reporting, taken to Twitter call President Obama a “business-hating socialist” for calling attention to this story, and even penned an article in The Hill newspaper to defend the Chamber and lie about our investigation. Feehery never mentioned the foreign corporate direct donations to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6). But more importantly, neither The Hill nor any of television outlets Feehery appears on disclosed the fact that Feehery’s public relations firm, The Feehery Group, counts the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as one of its clients. Shortly after our story broke, Feehery was hired by another public relations/lobbying firm, Quinn Gillespie, which is also a client of the Chamber. Moreover, Fox News’ parent company is an active member of the Chamber, and hate-talker Glenn Beck met with the Chamber’s second in command earlier this year to plot the 2010 election. While Fox hosts and Beck have endlessly defended the Chamber’s secret money, there has been no disclosure of the network’s financial ties to Chamber lobbyists.
– The Chamber Owns Fake News Sites: As the Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard reported, the Chamber owns a variety of news websites in West Virginia, Illinois, and elsewhere, while also maintaining a wire service called Legal Newsline. All of these websites posture as independently owned and objective journalism outfits, and do not disclose that they are fully owned subsidiaries of Chamber lobbyists.
Unfortunately, the Chamber’s sophisticated smear campaign deceived many reputable media organizations into distorting our reporting. Reporters from the New York Times (Eric Lichtblau), the Associated Press (Alan Fram, Jim Kuhnhenn), McClatchy (David Lightman), Time (Mark Halperin), and other outlets misrepresented ThinkProgress’ reporting by refusing to acknowledge any of our key revelations about the Chamber’s foreign fundraising (the fundraising documents we published, the Bahrainian or Indianian corporate donations). None of these reporters directly contacted ThinkProgress, and instead opted to only interview Chamber lobbyists.
In many cases, these traditional reporters reprinted the Chamber’s lie that it only fundraises from foreign affiliates called AmChams, and that AmChams are composed of only American companies (this has been thoroughly debunked). Ignoring ThinkProgess’ reporting, these journalists reprinted the Chamber’s unproven assertion that it only accepts $ 100,000 from foreign affiliates. In other cases, these reporters reprinted the Chamber’s false claim that it’s political operation is equivalent to labor unions. In fact, labor unions face double disclosure because they must reveal their donors to the public through both the Department of Labor and the Federal Election Commission. The Chamber, on the other hand, refuses to disclose both its American and foreign donors to anyone. Although ThinkProgress has demonstrated that the Chamber receives at a minimum of $ 885,000 in foreign cash every year to its primary 501(c)(6) campaign account, few journalists have bothered to cover the thrust of our story.
Early Voting Irregularities Create Suspicion of Fraud
There are reports of troubling incidents in early voting in Nevada, where Harry Reid is in the fight for his life against Sharron Angle.
Some voters in Boulder City complained on Monday that their ballot had been cast before they went to the polls, raising questions about Clark County’s electronic voting machines.
Voter Joyce Ferrara said when they went to vote for Republican Sharron Angle, her Democratic opponent, Sen. Harry Reid’s name was already checked.
Ferrara said she wasn’t alone in her voting experience. She said her husband and several others voting at the same time all had the same thing happen. “Something’s not right,” Ferrara said. “One person that’s a fluke. Two, that’s strange. But several within a five minute period of time — that’s wrong.”
Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said there is no voter fraud, although the issues do come up because the touch-screens are sensitive. For that reason, a person may not want to have their fingers linger too long on the screen after they make a selection at any time. “Especially in a community with elderly citizens (they have) difficulty in (casting their) ballot,” Lomax said. “Team leaders said there were complaints (and the) race filled in.”
Donald Sensing rightly finds blaming the victims here odd and muses, “Funny, though, that all the shaky, lingering fingers would up accidentally casting a ballot for Democrat Reid and not the Republican Angle.”
Stephen Green notes an unrelated incident in North Carolina:
A Craven County voter says he had a near miss at the polls on Thursday when an electronic voting machine completed his straight-party ticket for the opposite of what he intended.
Sam Laughinghouse of New Bern said he pushed the button to vote Republican in all races, but the voting machine screen displayed a ballot with all Democrats checked. He cleared the screen and tried again with the same result, he said. Then he asked for and received help from election staff.
“They pushed it twice and the same thing happened,” Laughinghouse said. “That was four times in a row. The fifth time they pushed it and the Republicans came up and I voted.”
M. Ray Wood, Craven County Board of elections chairman, issued a written statement saying that the elections board is aware of isolated issues and that in each case the voter was able to cast his or her ballot as desired.
DaTechGuy rounds up other problems in Arizona, Colorado, and Pennsylvania. And Glenn Reynolds notes some in Texas.
Do I think the Democrats are orchestrating a diabolical plot to steal the election? No. But this kind of thing is maddening and undermines voter confidence in the legitimacy of election outcomes — something that’s already fragile in the wake of 2000 and the legacy of recounts and legal wrangling to overturn the original outcome that it spawned.
Reynolds is right that the first step is to do away with electronic voting entirely, going back to paper ballots. Preferably, the kind where voters are given a marker to fill in a box or oval next to the name of their preferred candidate. All systems are subject to fraud, of course, but simple, hand-marked ballots provide a paper trail and eliminate the need to guess voter intent.
