Pedantic Political Ponderings: 2012-05-20

26 May 2012

FollowUp 3: "FRAC! Baby FRAC!"

Wow! Great lyrics, popular style, and a nuanced take on a real problem. I'm impressed with the students of Studio 20 NYU and their follow-up to ProPublica's ongoing research.

Thanks to The Young Turks for the heads up.

13 November 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
10 December 2011, FollowUp 1.
2 January 2012, FollowUp 2.

24 May 2012

FollowUp 32: Wisconsin Republican Dirty Tricks

Governor Scott Walker sent me an e-mail today, 24 May 2012. Here we go again.

Patriot,

Well, that is how I view myself. I didn't expect Mr. Walker to be so astute.

This is it. The Wisconsin Recall election is less than three weeks away.

Um, no. Less than two weeks away, but it's okay by me if Mr. Walker's supporters turn out a week late.

The liberal special interests and Washington insiders have sworn to spend tens of millions of dollars to defeat me. I need your help right now to beat back this senseless Recall. Will you stand with me today?

No. Again, he claims that outside money is pouring in to his opponents. The truth is that Governor Walker has tens of millions more than do Wisconsin Democrats, much of his money coming from outside of Wisconsin.

For more than a generation in Wisconsin, the power of special interests and the liberal elite have gone largely unchecked. My Administration finally stood up to them, and we changed the way we do things in government in Wisconsin.

No. Mr. Walker wants to pretend that the last generation did not include Republican Tommy Thompson as Wisconsin's longest serving governor ever. Is he really calling Mr. Thompson a liberal? If you look at the recent history of governors of Wisconsin, it is fairly balanced between Democrats and Republicans. Neither side has "gone largely unchecked." Liar.

That’s why my opponents are so desperate to defeat me in this Recall. They want to roll back the clock and take us back to the days of skyrocketing taxes, bloated budgets, and unchecked and unaccountable spending. We cannot let that happen.

No. While Governor Walker has cut taxes on businesses, it is not true for the average Wisconsinite. He is spending money beyond Wisconsin's tax revenue, something that was not true of his immediate predecessor.

The moment I became Governor, I set about the work that the people of Wisconsin sent me to do. We eliminated the deficit left by my Democrat predecessor. We gave the freedom of choice to public employees. Our reforms have allowed public employees to decide if they would like to spend (in some cases more than a thousand dollars a year in dues) or keep their hard earned money. We finally put the control of state government back where it belongs, in the hands of the people.

No. This is a lie. Mr. Walker was not left a mess. His reforms took away collective bargaining from public employees; which is not an increase of choice. That was after lying during the 2010 campaign and stating that he was not going after unions. Mr. Walker is a proven liar on this.

I kept my promises to the voters here in Wisconsin. I didn’t raise taxes. We have not had massive lay offs of state workers. Our reforms have balanced the budget and lowered the unemployment rate to a level unseen since 2008.

No. Mr. Walker is using fake employment figures. The Bureau of Labor Statistics shows Wisconsin losing jobs in April. Mr. Walker is a liar.

Now I need you to help me tell the out-of-state special interests that we do not want another tax-and-spend liberal in charge here in Wisconsin.

No. Again, Mr. Walker is the one who has cornered the out-of-state special interests, CrossRoads GPS and the Koch brothers to name two of the biggest funders of his bid to keep his seat.

This Recall is not just about Wisconsin, it is about the cause of reform across this country. It is about deciding what kind of country we are going to be for generations to come. We must send a message that we can and will live within our means. We must not hand power back to a small group of special interests and let them run state governments into the ground across this great nation.

The recall is about deciding what kind of country we want. Do we want balance between labor and business? Do we want a viable middle class? Do we want women to have control of their healthcare and bodies? Do we want fully funded schools and strong education for our children? Do we want fair taxes for everyone including businesses? Or do we want Governor Walker's radical reform?

When we defeat this baseless Recall, it will send a powerful statement across our country about the kind of government we want to have and the bold reforms that will get us there.

The recall is not baseless. It is based on the actions of Mr. Walker; actions in contradiction to the promises that he made when he sought the office of governor.

We have less than a month to go. I need your help – not tomorrow, not next week, but right now.

Okay. Less than two weeks is also less than a month.

Today, I ask you to stand with me so I can continue to stand up for hard working taxpayers. Together, we can defeat this Recall and make history – in Wisconsin and across the country.

Keeping Governor Walker in office increases the burden on "hard working taxpayers" and relieves the burden on big business. Mr. Walker is a liar.

Sincerely,

Scott Walker
Governor

16 November 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
30 November 2011, FollowUp 1.
4 December 2011, FollowUp 2.
11 December 2011, FollowUp 3.
14 December 2011, FollowUp 4.
15 December 2011, FollowUp 5.
30 December 2011, FollowUp 6.
13 January 2012, FollowUp 7.
17 January 2012, FollowUp 8.
25 January 2012, FollowUp 9.
2 February 2012, FollowUp 10.
9 February 2012, FollowUp 11.
12 February 2012, FollowUp 12.
18 February 2012, FollowUp 13.
22 February 2012, FollowUp 14.
6 March 2012, FollowUp 15.
12 March 2012, FollowUp 16.
16 March 2012, FollowUp 17.
30 March 2012, FollowUp 18.
31 March 2012, FollowUp 19.
3 April 2012, FollowUp 20.
4 April 2012, FollowUp 21.
11 April 2012, FollowUp 22.
14 April 2012, FollowUp 23.
17 April 2012, FollowUp 24.
21 April 2012, FollowUp 25.
29 April 2012, FollowUp 26.
2 May 2012, FollowUp 27.
6 May 2012, FollowUp 28.
10 May 2012, FollowUp 29.
13 May 2012, FollowUp 30.
23 May 2012, FollowUp 31.

30 May 2012, FollowUp 33.
2 June 2012, FollowUp 34.
4 June 2012, FollowUp 35.
5 June 2012, FollowUp 36.

23 May 2012

FollowUp 31: Wisconsin Republican Dirty Tricks

Ed Shultz has a good analysis of the big lie about jobs. The lies go far beyond what is popular in the news and the recall election is going to be very close.

One of the things happening is a subtle campaign to discredit unions and teachers in particular. One of the more blatant efforts occurred recently in Janesville, Wisconsin, with an anonymous flyer listing the salaries of hundreds of the highest paid teachers in the Janesville district.

The flyer urges parents to mail the district a cutout form if they want their student removed from the class of a teacher who signed the recall petition.

Fox 11 has the story:

Fliers seeking "non-radical teachers" in Janesville creating controversy: fox11online.com

This is just the latest of a long series of events designed to break the public schools. While that may sound like hyperbole, consider that Wisconsin is losing teachers.

"In the end both sides will look at this and say, 'See, I told you so,' " said Dale J. Knapp, research director of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance.

Knapp said there were three major take-aways from the research.

"The decline in teachers particularly and staff overall isn't a one-year change," he said. "It is a continuation of a three-year decline that goes back to when revenue limits were tightened in 2009-'10."

He said, "declining enrollment districts are the ones cutting the most staff. They're the ones getting hit hardest by revenue limits overall. They're the ones that are really struggling."

Knapp added that "benefits did matter."

"Those districts that were able to do more with benefits were able to either add teachers or lay off fewer teachers than districts in similar situations," he said.

One more video regarding this flyer, this from Channel 3000:

So, as teachers remain under fire and big lies are circulated by the Governor, where are the Democrats? Speaking with friends in Wisconsin, they are wondering why the DNC and the Obama campaign are not visibly helping Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett in his campaign against Governor Scott Walker.

One friend opined that there may be moles from the Walker campaign within the Barrett campaign who are offering false assurances that things are going well. I don't have any evidence for or against this happening, but with several of my friends concerned, it is important to consider what is happening. Look back over the last thirty-one posts for a pattern of lies and harm to the State of Wisconsin. I hope that the Barrett campaign gets its act together.

16 November 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
30 November 2011, FollowUp 1.
4 December 2011, FollowUp 2.
11 December 2011, FollowUp 3.
14 December 2011, FollowUp 4.
15 December 2011, FollowUp 5.
30 December 2011, FollowUp 6.
13 January 2012, FollowUp 7.
17 January 2012, FollowUp 8.
25 January 2012, FollowUp 9.
2 February 2012, FollowUp 10.
9 February 2012, FollowUp 11.
12 February 2012, FollowUp 12.
18 February 2012, FollowUp 13.
22 February 2012, FollowUp 14.
6 March 2012, FollowUp 15.
12 March 2012, FollowUp 16.
16 March 2012, FollowUp 17.
30 March 2012, FollowUp 18.
31 March 2012, FollowUp 19.
3 April 2012, FollowUp 20.
4 April 2012, FollowUp 21.
11 April 2012, FollowUp 22.
14 April 2012, FollowUp 23.
17 April 2012, FollowUp 24.
21 April 2012, FollowUp 25.
29 April 2012, FollowUp 26.
2 May 2012, FollowUp 27.
6 May 2012, FollowUp 28.
10 May 2012, FollowUp 29.
13 May 2012, FollowUp 30.

24 May 2012, FollowUp 32.
30 May 2012, FollowUp 33.
2 June 2012, FollowUp 34.
4 June 2012, FollowUp 35.
5 June 2012, FollowUp 36.

22 May 2012

Repudiation: Lawsuit to "Preserve Religious Freedom"


Preserve Religious Freedom -- The Roman Catholic Church

Generally speaking, I have a great deal of admiration for a number of Catholic educators, most of my undergraduate and graduate school professors. But, the lawsuit their church has filed does not make sense. Preserve Religious Freedom is the website that explains what the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) is doing.

This lawsuit is about an unprecedented attack by the federal government on one of America’s most cherished freedoms: the freedom to practice one’s religion without government interference. It is not about whether people have access to certain services; it is about whether the government may force religious institutions and individuals to facilitate and fund services which violate their religious beliefs.

The Quaker religion is opposed to wars, all wars. Yet all Quakers pay taxes that fund the Department of Defense. There is considerable precedent for funding things that violate religious beliefs. For the Quakers, there is the conscientious objection to serving. For members of the RCC, they do not have to participate in those services that they feel violate their beliefs. Same thing.

The HHS mandate that all employers provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilization includes only a narrow exemption for certain organizations that the government deems sufficiently “religious.” The exemption applies only if the government determines that all four of the following criteria are met: the inculcation of religious values is the purpose of the organization; the organization primarily employs persons who share the religious tenets of the organization; the organization primarily serves persons who share the religious tenets of the organization; and the organization falls within a certain tax code provision defining a narrow subset of religious non-profits.

The opening sentence of this paragraph is erroneous. The HHS mandate does not include employers providing any drugs or services. The mandate includes provision of insurance. Apparently the RCC does not feel that this separation is adequate. Even upon providing insurance, the decisions regarding whether to use any of these are between the individual and their doctor, not involving the RCC.

Perhaps that is why the RCC objects so strenuously. They cannot use their influence as an employer to prevent their employees, who may not be members of their faith, from using contraceptives. An employer, they don't get to dictate their employees' sex lives.

This exemption runs contrary to decades of federal laws that have consistently honored and respected the conscience rights of religious institutions and individuals (see, e.g., http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/conscience-protection/upload/Federal-Conscience-Laws.pdf). This radical and narrow definition of what constitutes a “religious employer” attacks religious freedom by defining it away: by extending religious freedom protection only to houses of worship, HHS’s exemption reduces religious freedom to the freedom of worship.

Not at all. Every individual is still free to follow her or his conscience. Religious freedom is based on the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. There is no United States official, established religion. And the question is whether as an employer the RCC can call dictating healthcare to its employees the free exercise of religion. To agree with the RCC on this strikes me as "radical".

Dropping down a bit on their Issue page, the argument becomes completely absurd.

Effectively, the mandate prohibits us from asking what we’ve asked for more than 200 years, “Are you hungry?” Now we also have to ask, “Are you Catholic?” To qualify for the exemption, and so to be permitted to follow their beliefs, Catholic institutions may have to stop providing educational opportunities to as many non-Catholics as they currently educate, stop serving as many non-Catholics in need as they currently serve, and stop employing some of the non-Catholic employees they currently employ. But this kind of withdrawal from the world violates our religious commitment to serve all in need without regard to religion.

No. If the RCC stops providing charity to the general community, that is entirely their choice. They are not being asked to stop hiring non-Catholics as they are not being asked to force contraception on anyone. This is a threat to take away their community service, nothing more. They may even follow through on this threat (they did so when they stopped providing adoption services in Massachusetts in protest of marriage equality, including non-discrimination laws on adoption, in that state). But the threat is entirely their choice. Their hand is not being forced by the government.

The exemption also involves an invasive federal government inquiry into an organization’s religious beliefs and practices, conferring powers on government forbidden by the Constitution. Specifically, for an institution to know whether it meets the government’s definition, it must submit to a governmental investigation whereby federal employees determine the religion of those employed and served by the entity, whether their beliefs are the same as the institution, and whether the institution hires and serves “primarily” those of in agreement.

This is the single point where I think that the RCC has valid concerns. There is a loss of privacy. I still believe that they, like every business, should be required to open their books to the government. Determining the employees' religions is not an invasion into the frequency or ardor with which they practice those religions. It is purely to make a determination of granting an exemption to a standard of care for employees.

Businesses have claimed invasion of privacy when OSHA inspects to determine if working conditions are safe. I don't see this fear of invasion by the federal government as very different. Dropping to the end of their issue.

In sum, the HHS mandate jeopardizes religious freedom—a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution—and undermines access to a wide range of social services. Catholic schools, universities, hospitals, and social service agencies are in the business of educating and caring for Catholics and non-Catholics alike. As the President acknowledged, these organizations do “more good for a community than a government program ever could.” The mandate jeopardizes all of these good works by forcing Catholic institutions to violate their religious beliefs.

The RCC is what "jeopardizes all of these good works". There is no violation of religious beliefs in providing comprehensive insurance to employees. The lawsuit is a political distraction that will cost taxpayers when the government defends itself.

Thanks to Joe My God for the heads up.

21 May 2012

21 May 2012: Marriage News Watch

Various Direct Links