“‘The Kerry plan is a step toward isolationism and protectionism that will lead inevitably to a lower standard of living in the United States,’ said Margo Thorning, chief economist at the American Council for Capital Formation, a business-backed public policy group.” (Sam Zuckerman, “Kerry's solution to offshoring,” San Francisco Chronicle, 3/27/04)
"Pitting U.S. companies against each other is not wise economic policy," said Bruce Josten, US Chamber of Commerce. "And raising the top individual tax bracket across the board - which will hurt millions of small businesses that create most of the new jobs in America - to pay for a targeted tax cut will interrupt our economic recovery." (Dow Jones Newswires, 3/26/04)
“‘All it's going to do is force U.S. companies to move their headquarters and re-base their companies in other countries where they don't have this kind of tax system,’ said Bruce Bartlett, an economist at the National Center for Policy Analysis.” (Chicago Tribune, 3/27/04)
“‘What he gives on the one hand with corporate rate reductions, he may more than take away with the end of foreign deferral,’ said National Association of Manufacturers executive vice president Michael Baroody.” (Sam Zuckerman, "Kerry's solution to offshoring; Democrat seeks to curb tax breaks for firms that set up abroad," The San Francisco Chronicle, 3/27/04)
“Gary Hufbauer, an analyst at the Institute for International Economics, a Washington D.C., think tank specializing in trade, said the plan would become an invitation for corporations to shift assets into foreign-owned entities to avoid losing tax breaks for work done overseas. … ‘It would stimulate a K Street boom in creating joint ventures and spin-offs for operations that sell into the U.S. market,’ said Mr. Hufbauer, referring to the Washington street that's home to the capital's lobbying and legal industry.” (The Wall Street Journal, 3/26/04)
“‘What you could have is a situation where the corporation gets double-taxed, paying the taxes in the country where the product is made and then taxed again in the United States. You could have a 60-percent tax rate, which would be destructive,’ said Alan Whitman, an accountant and international-tax expert for the Bingham Farms accounting firm of Virchow, Krause & Co.” (Detroit Free Press, 3/27/04)
- posted by Mark @ 8:19 PM |
You know you want it!!
Pennsylvania is Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between was first coined by James Carville who used to work for the late and great Democratic Governor Bob Casey. They don't make Dems like him any more.
The Bush administration has been very slow to recognize the political threat from the outsourcing issue. Indeed, it played right into it with an ill-timed proposal to allow illegal Mexican workers in the U.S. to have "guest worker" status allowing them to remain here legally. While I think this is a defensible policy, it suffers from appearing to be motivated more by politics than a serious concern for illegal immigration. It looks as if its sole purpose is to win Hispanic votes.
President Bush also shot himself in the foot when he promised to create a high-level post to promote manufacturing, the area where the greatest job losses have occurred. It turned out that this "manufacturing czar" position involved nothing more than renaming an existing assistant-secretary position at the Commerce Department. And the vetting process for the position was bungled: Tony Raimondo, who has outsourced jobs to China from his own business, was named to the post. The appointment was quickly rescinded when John Kerry's campaign brought this fact to the media's attention.
The Bush administration has done little to address the outsourcing issue other than muzzle Greg Mankiw, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, for daring to suggest that it is an inevitable process. But others are starting to pick up the slack. A new study by the American Electronics Association offers a balanced perspective.
While acknowledging that outsourcing has hurt some Americans, the AEA study places most of the blame for job loss on slow growth and rising productivity. It also notes that other countries have caught up with the U.S. in terms of education and technology, making them stronger competitors for IT business. They are competing not just on the basis of wages, but quality as well.
The AEA study says that today's concern for outsourcing echoes warnings in the 1980s that Japan was going to take over the world. A recent Forbes article points to parallels with the automation scare of the 1960s. As a presidential candidate in 1960, John F. Kennedy warned that automation "carries the dark menace of industrial dislocation, increased unemployment and deepens poverty." Robots, Japan, NAFTA, and other threats to our prosperity have never sustained themselves, and the doom-and-gloom crowd has always slunk away without ever explaining why they were so wrong. Ross Perot, for example, has never told us why NAFTA didn't cause the "giant sucking sound of jobs being pulled out of this country" that he predicted in 1992.
- posted by Mark @ 8:00 PM |
If any of you belong to a union you have no doubt heard of the so called Bush attempt to strip workers of their overtime. Well here's the truth of the matter Courtesy of this fantastic website Union republican
What Conservatives Think:
The President is doing no such thing. Under a Labor Department proposal
to update and reform the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, the 40 hour
workweek would remain in place, and so would overtime pay.
Here's how the Department of Labor describes what its proposal would do:
"For the first time since 1975, the Department's proposed regulations
would raise the salary threshold -- below which workers would
automatically qualify for overtime -- from $155 a week to $425 a week,
or $8,060 per year, to $22,100 per year The impact of this revision will
be to increase the wages of 1.3 million lower-income workers and reduce
the number of low-wage salaried workers currently being denied overtime
pay. Other proposed changes include revising job duties required to
qualify for the exemption to better correspond to 21st century workplace
realities. The old regulations, written in 1949, mention job
classifications that no longer exist, such as key punch operators, straw
bosses, leg men and gang leaders. Clarifying which job duties qualify
for overtime pay will help workers and employers easily determine
overtime entitlement for millions of workers whose status is currently
Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao is adamant that organized labor's scare
campaign represents what the DOL calls "myths, distortions and
inaccuracies": "The Department's overtime reform proposal will not
eliminate overtime protections for 8 million workers, will not eliminate
overtime protections for police officers, firefighters, paramedics and
other first responders, will not eliminate overtime protections for
nurses, will not eliminate overtime protections for carpenters,
electricians, mechanics, plumbers, laborers, teamsters, construction
workers, production line workers and other blue-collar employees; and
will not affect union workers covered by collective bargaining
agreements. The Department's reform will strengthen overtime protections
for millions of low-wage and middle-class workers, will empower workers
to understand and insist on their overtime rights, will enable the
Department of Labor to vigorously enforce the law, will prevent
unscrupulous employers from playing games with workers' overtime pay,
and will put an end to the lawsuit lottery that is delaying justice for
workers and stifling our economy with billions of dollars in needless
Analyst Paul Kersey of the Heritage Foundation agrees: "by raising the
minimum salary level needed for 'white collar' status, the Labor
Department is returning to the original intent of the Fair Labor
Standards Act - to protect unskilled manual laborers from the dangers of
overwork. By limiting work hours, Congress meant to reduce the dangers
of fatigue and workplace accidents and allow workers more time for
recreation, family and education. Executives, administrators and
professionals were excluded because they were seen as having both higher
compensation and greater job security, giving them better control over
their own work hours."
Kersey adds: "The drafters of the original Fair Labor Standards Act
probably would be shocked to learn that, under today's rules, a cook
earning $13,000 a year can be considered an executive because he
supervises two kitchen workers, while a technician with a $70,000 salary
can receive mandatory overtime pay. More straightforward regulations
will make enforcement of the wage-and-hour laws easier. Thus unskilled
workers, the employees who have the least control over their working
hours and conditions, will receive the maximum level of protection.
Under the new rule, any worker receiving a salary of less than $20,000
will be eligible for overtime, regardless of his or her job duties."(3)
Heritage Foundation President Ed Feulner says "Chao [is] trying to make
life better for low-income laborers... Today, companies can classify
employees who make just $8,061 per year as 'exempt' meaning they would
be ineligible for overtime. Chao has proposed raising that threshold to
$22,000, a step that would immediately make an additional 1.2 million
workers eligible for time-and-a-half. While that change would help the
poorest laborers, it wouldn't hurt most blue-collar workers. Union
members who work under collective bargaining agreements would make at
least as much under the new proposal as they do today. This includes
most firefighters, nurses and police officers."
So why the fuss over a proposal designed to help low-income workers?
Feulner pins responsibility on a group that benefits financially from
the current outdated system: Trial lawyers.
Feulner writes: "Because current law is so confusing, many companies
struggle to determine which jobs are eligible for overtime, and which
are not. Trial lawyers exploit this confusion: They pore over work roles
until they find groups that seem mislabeled, and then file class-action
lawsuits. It's a booming business. In 2001 there were more suits filed
over overtime pay than suits alleging discrimination in the workplace.
And why not? If a lawyer can convince a court to agree that a company
has made a mistake, he can force that company to shell out millions of
dollars in back pay. For example, two years ago, the Farmers Insurance
Exchange of California was slapped with a $90 million judgment because
it hadn't been paying overtime to its claims adjusters. More recently,
Radio Shack and Starbucks surrendered without a fight. Those companies
coughed up $30 million and $18 million, respectively, to settle out of
court with store managers."
Concludes Feulner: "Under Chao's changes, those white-collar workers who
make more than $65,000 would lose their right to overtime under the new
laws. But keep in mind the original reason for such laws: To benefit
poor laborers. Middle-class managers and professionals were never
supposed to be covered."(4)
- posted by Mark @ 7:55 PM |
Nice work BC 04- New radio ad
This is what we need..not just stats but real people. That is what will resonate in the rust belt
ARLINGTON, VA – Today, Bush-Cheney ’04 announced the release of a new radio ad entitled “Man from Massachusetts.” The ad highlights John Kerry’s history of supporting higher taxes and his plan for $900 billion in higher taxes in the first 100 days. Jay Moccia, a Boston area law enforcement officer and Kerry constituent, describes John Kerry’s support of tax increases. “Man from Massachusetts,” which will air throughout the country beginning Monday, is the second radio ad Bush-Cheney ’04 has released.
Script for “Man from Massachusetts”
Paid for by Bush-Cheney ‘04 Inc.
I’m George W. Bush. And I approve this message.
My name is Jay Moccia. I’m a law enforcement officer in the greater Boston area.
And for the record, I think you guys have a funny accent, too.
John Kerry has been my Senator for 20 years.
Now he’s running for President. You might want to know him the way some of us in Massachusetts do.
Take his record on taxes.
John Kerry likes to raise taxes. So much so he’s voted for higher taxes 350 times…
I’m a working guy with six kids. The last thing I need is another Kerry tax increase. Senator Kerry also voted to increase taxes on seniors’ Social Security benefits.
No, it’s not fair at all… these people have worked their whole lives and to put a tax on them is just wrong.
And sad to say, John Kerry even voted against giving small businesses tax breaks so they could provide health care for their employees.
It looks like Kerry’s gonna raise taxes about 900 billion dollars within his first hundred days in office.
I’d say look it, trust me, John Kerry likes to raise taxes. It’s what he’s done before and you know he’ll do it again.
That’s just…just wrong.
My computer has been dead for a few days now and until the new one arrives things will be quiet. But when it arrives, we'll have some fun with John Kerry. Stay tuned!!
- posted by Mark @ 5:30 PM |
Thursday, March 11, 2004
The backlash against the union bosses who exploit their members continues. Powerful
- posted by Mark @ 5:12 PM |
AS KERRY SAID
It's not really a war
- posted by Mark @ 4:58 PM |
IT'S ABOUT TIME
From National Review Online
President Bush: Over the past three years, Americans have faced many serious challenges.
Now, we face a choice:
We can go forward with confidence, resolve and hope.
Or we can turn back to the dangerous illusion that terrorists are not plotting and outlaw regimes are no threat.
We can continue to work to create jobs, reform education and lower the cost of health care.
Together, we’re moving America forward.
I’m George W. Bush and I approve this message.
President Bush:I’m George W. Bush and I approve this message.
VO:A President sets his agenda for America in the first 100 days.
John Kerry’s plan:
To pay for new government spending.
Raise taxes by at least $900 billion.
On the War on Terror:
Weaken the Patriot Act used to arrest terrorists and protect America.
And he wanted to delay defending America until the United Nations approved.
John Kerry: Wrong on taxes. Wrong on defense.
- posted by Mark @ 4:56 PM |
Article on Pro-life *gasp* Democrats here
- posted by Mark @ 2:08 PM |
UNION BOSSES PLAN TO TAX MEMBERS TO OUST BUSH
That sacred text from Mannhattan the NY Times has this story on the AFL-CIO plans to defeat President Bush.
At a news conference at an oceanfront hotel, Mr. Sweeney announced that labor leaders had approved a 4-cent-a-month assessment on the federation's members, which would increase its political war chest to $44 million, an amount Mr. Sweeney said would be dwarfed by corporate political spending. The federation will mostly spend the money on political education for union members and getting out the vote.
- posted by Mark @ 1:22 PM |
Wednesday, March 10, 2004
MANUFACTURING CZAR Small but needed step
BUSH TO NAME MANUFACTURING `CZAR'
President Bush is planning to tap Nebraska manufacturer Anthony F. Raimondo as Commerce assistant secretary of manufacturing and services, a new position created to address the problems of American manufacturers, where job losses have been most severe. The announcement will be made Thursday by Commerce Secretary Evans, who promised earlier this month that an announcement was close at hand. "Manufacturers need a single advocate to fight for manufacturing competitiveness across the federal government," Evans said at the time. Raimondo is chairman and CEO of Behlen Manufacturing Co. of Columbus, Neb.
- posted by Mark @ 5:39 PM |
BACK FROM A BRIEF HIATUS
President in Ohio From the Hotline
BUSH: One Job At A Time
Pres. Bush will use an appearance in Cleveland today to "promote an economic agenda that includes tax cuts and worker retraining, while decrying the 'old ways' of taxing, spending and protectionism." In a speech to women at a small business seminar, Bush will "acknowledge" that OH and the nation "have faced tough economic times," but will "convey a message of optimism as well," according to a WH official. Bush will cite the "successes of Ohioans who build products exported around the world" and will "mention a Toledo man who lost his job, got retraining, and is employed again." In advanced excerpts of the speech, Bush: "We will continue making the finest products and selling those products across America and across the earth. ... We will make sure that American workers have the education and skills to succeed in the jobs of the future, and we will remain the leading economy of the world because America will remain the best place to do business in the world." The trip is "not a campaign event" and Bush "is not expected to mention" John Kerry by name. But he will talk of "some politicians in Washington" who "see this new challenge and want to respond in old ways. Their agenda is to increase federal taxes, build a wall around our economy, and isolate America from the rest of the world" (Koff, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 3/10).
Bush "is expected to confront critics by accusing them of wanting to employ 'obsolete' economic policies of increasing taxes and government spending and enacting international trade barriers." Bush will also "cite Ohio as an example of an economy that has benefited both from experience products abroad and by providing the type of business climate and educated work force that attracted a foreign company such as Honda" (Riskind, Columbus Dispatch, 3/10).
For the 15th time as pres., Bush is visiting OH, a state "unemployment is stuck at 6.2 percent and where nearly 200,000 jobs were lost during the recession from 2001 though last March -- nearly two-thirds is manufacturing." Bush's trip to OH "suggested he was not entirely confident about keeping the state in his column" this year (Lindlaw, AP, 3/10).
The Dem members of the OH delegation, in a letter to Bush, urge Bush to support the Job Protection Act: "When we wrote you last fall, Ohio had lost 152,000 manufacturing jobs since January 2001. Since that letter, our state has lost 10,000 additional manufacturing jobs. ... The latest state figures show that 367,000 Ohioans are unemployed. Our constituents are anxious about the economy. They fear learning their plant will close or their job will be shipped overseas. We must reduce this anxiety
- posted by Mark @ 5:36 PM |
Friday, March 05, 2004
BITTERLY ANTI-BUSH ARTICLE: COULD IT BE LINKED TO KERRY/HEINZ MONEY
The Independent of London a leading anti-war and left leaning paper ran a bitterly anti-Bush "news article" Stating among other nasty comments that "If the human race as a whole, rather than 50 states plus the District of Colombia, could cast a ballot this coming November, John Kerry would surely win the presidency by a landslide." I doubt if the author polled Iraq or Afghanistan but 'world opinion' for the Independent largely consists of the intelligentsia of France and Germany.
What is intriguing about this is the fact that The Independent is owned by one Mr. Anthony O'Reilly, Irish businessman and millionaire who made his fortune working for...that's right HEINZ as in Senator John Kerry-Heinz fame. See here
Mr. O' Reilly stepped down a few years ago as CEO of Heinz but is still in charge of the Independent Group. Expect more of the same from The Independent in the future. All the while John Kerry-Heinz rails against "corporate influence" and "cronyism." He should know!
DESPERATE NEED IN HAITI
As our Marines head in let's not forget the crucial work done for the children of Haiti who are truly living in unbelievable horror. If you can spare any money or even a prayer visit Susie Krabecher's site here. Read Susie's story of true grace here.
Where the money goes..how the BC 04 campaign used its money
Headed to the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for a short spell. Should be back this weekend, with a report!
- posted by Mark @ 6:35 PM |
You know you want it!!
Among all the talk of which person will be selected for the Vice Presidential slot is something that has been ignored. The Partial Birth litmus test. As readers know NASCAR DAD is convinced that the industrial Midwest will be key to winning in November so someone like Gephardt or Evan Bayh of Indiana would be a prudent selection. However they both fail the femi-nazi "I LOVE PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION TEST." As long as the Dems remain in the grip of the femi-nazis it will be tough to make a good selection that will appeal to the NASCAR dads in the industrial midwest. If the Dems can break that stranglehold it will be a good step for Kerry, the Democratic Party, and America.
The truth is "the economy" is whatever people want it to be. You can find indicators saying it is up, down, static, booming, or dead. I mean besides a handful of Ivy league pointy heads who have never had a real job who really cares about "the economy." What matters is JOBS and WEALTH! Whether you are employed or not is key to your life as is the various factors that go into determining one's wealth. As Michael Barone has ably pointed out, in today's world people simply don't live on paychecks alone but also by stock portfolios and various investments. This used to be the purview of the few elites but is now within the domain of every American. This is the OWNERSHIP SOCIETY that President Bush is begining to emphasize on the stump.
The Democrats will try their best to focus on jobs to the exclusion of wealth, that presents a clear opportunity for the president to talk not only about creating new and better paying jobs (which is key) but also about WEALTH MAXIMIZATION. If President Bush can do this effectively he will succeed wildly across the board in Bucks County, PA and Beaver County, PA.
- posted by Mark @ 5:45 PM |
Interesting look on the war here
- posted by Mark @ 5:28 PM |
Never Forget See here
- posted by Mark @ 5:25 PM |
From THE HOTLINE
OHIO (20 EVs): Must Win TV
The voting may be done for now, but the pres. candidates are "not going" to leave OH voters "alone." With OHat the "top" of both political parties' "To-Win lists," the Dems and GOPers are "gearing up for the battle ahead." And because they want OH's votes "so badly," the candidates will be "making more visits, airing more TV ads and sending out lots more e-mail pitches."
The OH Dem Party has been getting ready since '03 with a voter registration drive and "better" technology to help "indentify" potential Dem voters. The party, "riding the wave" of attention from the Dem candidates, is "compiling lists" of new Dems who turned out in "record" numbers at its 1/04 caucuses and at recent pres. rallies.
And John Kerry's campaign, which had "few organizers" in OH at the start of primary season in 1/04, has now opened "nine" OH offices. From that base, the Dems plan to use OH, with its "higher-than-average" unemployement and manufacturing-job loss rates, as a stage from which to "blame" Pres. Bush for the "sluggish" economy.
On the GOP side, efforts are underway to turn out the vote as well. The party hopes to train 50K volunteers in OH to help register voters, recruit "more" voters, and "promote" Bush's political message (Naymik/Ohlemacher, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 3/4).
According to OH GOP Chair Bob Bennett, GOPers are "eager" for the campaign to start. Bennett: "We're tired of the nine months of endless hate speech that we've heard from the Democrats. ... The Democrats have had their moment, and I think it's time to respond."
In terms of the 3/2 primary, Bennett said the "influx" of indy's voting in the Dem primary "probably" will cause Dem registration in the state to "top" his. However, he doubted that "those are true independents," saying they are probably Dems who "had no reason to vote" in their party's past three pres. elections (Hallett/Rowland, Columbus Dispatch, 3/4).
- posted by Mark @ 4:36 PM |
GOP AND NASCAR
Mark Martin reveals *gasp* he thinks Clinton did some good stuff...well he is sponsored by Viagra!
- posted by Mark @ 1:52 PM |
BARONE EXPLAINS ITS ALL
The guru of political analysis and demograpic trends explains the Bush re-election campaign here.
The money passage is this:
But Bush made it clear Monday night that the main brunt of his attack will not be that Kerry is a dove but that he is a politician who tries to get on all sides of too many issues. This is how he framed the choice:
"Come November, the voters are going to have a very clear choice. It's a choice between keeping the tax relief that is moving the economy forward, or putting the burden of higher taxes back on the American people. It is a choice between an America that leads the world with strength and confidence, or an America that is uncertain in the face of danger. The American people will decide between two visions of government: a government that encourages ownership and opportunity and responsibility, or a government that takes your money and makes your choices."
That last sentence will strike many readers as unfamiliar. Bush aides have been saying that he was going to present a vision of an ownership society, to differentiate between his programs that provide choice and accountability and the Democrats' programs, which, in their view, do not. But Bush did not take the opportunity to make this case in his State of the Union address. Nor did he talk about the ownership society in a February 19 speech as aides said he would; he made the by now familiar case for his tax cuts instead. But on Monday night he came out for the ownership society loud and clear. It's worth quoting several lines to show what he is talking about.
"My administration understands the importance of ownership in our society. We've set a great goal: We want every worker in America to become a saver and an owner. And we have an agenda to meet this goal. We will help more people of every background to own their own homes and build their own savings. We will encourage more people to own their own small businesses. We'll help more people to own their own health care plans. We want younger workers to own and manage their own retirement under Social Security so that one day every worker can have the security of a personal account. When people have solid assets to call their own, they gain independence and security and dignity and more control over their future. I believe in property so much, I want everyone in America to have some."
This vision is in line with changes that have been coursing through the private sector. Defined benefit pension plans (in which a big company promises you a fixed pension) have been replaced by defined contribution pension plans (in which you invest tax-free money as you wish). Section 401(k) plans and other retirement plans have enabled people, over the course of a lifetime, to accumulate wealth to the point that the average American in the peak wealth years (ages 55 to 65) has a solid six-figure net worth. In 1992, less than a quarter of voters owned stocks and other financial assets. In 2002, some 60 percent of voters had financial assets: The electorate now has an investor majority. Bush’s proposals are designed to enable more Americans to accumulate more wealth more rapidly and to gain control over healthcare decisions as well.
The Democratic candidates have a different vision. They want to expand government provision of healthcare, and they oppose personal retirement accounts in Social Security (though Bill Clinton flirted with the idea). They want America to move somewhat closer to the western European-style welfare states. They want to reduce choice and accountability in education.
This will be a huge issue in the campaign, IF it can be framed correctly. The faux-populism of Kerry and ilk is by design to divide people into haves and have-nots and then convince people that they are have nots and must punish the haves. But in America today most people are employed, most people own some stock, most people do have health care that they like. This is not to over look the flaws and problems America is facing BUT the answer is not divide and conquer. Who will get employed or better health care if we punish those that achieve? Especially when those that achieve are US!!! If the president can effectively communicate that we are all in those together he can use the Dems faux populism against them to his benefit.
- posted by Mark @ 1:08 AM |