[Educationforall] spam con huevos labor news, views and concerns, 3.19.12‏‏‏‏‏

Carlos Pelayo cgpelayo at hotmail.com
Tue Mar 20 06:40:28 UTC 2012 







Press Conference-Convention Center‏ (San Diego, CA) Smack down deregulation by Tuesday‏ THE JOBS CRISIS URGENT - sign petition now - see Pacifica hires notorious union-buster‏Stop the JOBS-Killing Bill‏ The Biggest Engine of Economic Growth? 8 Ways Taxpayers and the Government Are Necessary to Capitalism  When 30% of Workers are Freelance, How Do They Build Power On the Job?  How Darrell Issa and the Right Are Planning to Kill the U.S. Post Office
"Rediscovering Poverty"
How Brown, Union Agreed On New Tax Hike Proposal‏Readers Respond and Debate- Re: How Brown, Union Agreed on New Tax Hike Proposal‏
  
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Dear Member,The Mayor and his rich downtown cronies are at it once again, pushing a new deal at the 11th hour to give rich hoteliers the keys to the Convention Center and let them loot it for their own profit.
If the Mayor and his allies pull this off, it's a direct threat to hundreds of union jobs at the Convention Center and will stifle the voices of all the workers who have a direct interest in the Convention Center. Join us tomorrow to stop this corporate giveaway: Tuesday, March 20th
1 p.m.
Outside City Council
202 C Street
The City Council has a chance to stop this brazen giveaway, and we're going to make sure they hear from the taxpayers who may be on the hook for the giant bill while the profits go to hoteliers. Add your voice!
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Did you see President Trumka’s message from this weekend warning about the so-called JOBS Act? We just learned that a Senate vote on this cynically-named deregulation bill has been scheduled for Tuesday. Please take action now.

The so-called “JOBS” Act would weaken the ability of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate our capital markets. It would let companies sell stock to the public without providing three years of audited financial statements, without having adequate internal controls and without complying with key corporate governance reforms in the recently passed Dodd-Frank Act. 

The legislation would also undo many parts of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law, which was passed in response to the Enron and WorldCom scandals.

Working people must smack down attempts by corporations and greedy CEOs to lobby for even small pieces of deregulation. The “JOBS” Act is a huge deregulation bill that’s being rushed through Congress with little public debate. 

Urge your senators to vote AGAINST the cynically named "JOBS Act" bill and FOR the "INVEST in America Act," which will amend the JOBS Act to make it less harmful to workers and consumers.Dear Carlos,

Urgent: Congress is rushing to deregulate Wall Street—pushing a cynically named “JOBS Act.” This bill could pass as early as Monday.

Senate Democrats, including Jack Reed, Carl Levin and Mary Landrieu, have offered the "INVEST in America Act" to amend the "JOBS Act" and make it less harmful. We need to support these amendments while making it clear that working families oppose the so-called JOBS Act bill.

Please urge your senators to vote FOR the "INVEST in America Act" to make the JOBS Act less harmful to workers and consumers—and AGAINST the cynically named "JOBS Act" bill.

America needs jobs. Yet Congress has not yet passed basic legislation like a measure to reauthorize surface transportation programs, which would create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Instead, next week Congress once again will look to deregulate Wall Street.

Workers’ retirement savings will be at greater risk of fraud and speculation if securities market deregulation once again is railroaded through Congress. Our economy will be at risk from the folly of policymakers promoting financial bubbles and ignoring the needs of the real economy. 

The AFL-CIO calls on Congress to set aside the politics of the 1%, the old game of special favors for Wall Street, and turn to the business of real job creation. 

Urge your senators to vote FOR the "INVEST in America Act," which will amend the JOBS Act to make it less harmful to workers and consumers—and AGAINST the cynically named "JOBS Act" bill.

Thank you for all the work you do.

In Solidarity,

Richard L. Trumka
President, AFL-CIOTo find out more about the AFL-CIO, please visit our website at www.aflcio.org.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
JOBS CRISIS? WHAT JOBS CRISIS?http://andthisourlife.com/2011/08/27/jobs-crisis-what-jobs-crisis/ FOR MANY AMERICANS, JOBS CRISIS WILL LAST MANY YEARShttp://wtaq.com/news/articles/2012/jan/07/for-many-americans-jobs-crisis-to-last-many-years/THE HIDDEN JOBS CRISIS FOR AMERICAN MENhttp://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_16/b4224007222337.htm THE REAL JOBS CRISIS IS THAT MOST JOBS SUCKhttp://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/2010/12/what-economists-dont-see-the-real-jobs-crisis.html THE JOBS CRISIS AND THE WALL ST OCCUPATIONhttp://www.zcommunications.org/the-jobs-crisis-and-the-wall-street-occupation-by-roger-bybee US JOBS CRISIS LEAVES PRESIDENT OBAMA ON THE ROPEShttp://en.paperblog.com/us-jobs-crisis-leaves-president-barack-obama-on-the-ropes-62835/ THE NUMBER ONE CHALLENGE RIGHT NOW IS THE JOBS CRISIShttp://www.nationofchange.org/senator-bernie-sanders-jobs-crisis-1315496752 52% OF UNEMPLOYED HAVE EXHAUSTED THEIR BENEFITShttp://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-06/news/30365894_1_unemployment-benefits-wayne-vroman-food-stamps MAJORITY UNEMPLOYED NO LONGER GET BENEFITShttp://www.theblaze.com/stories/majority-of-unemployed-have-now-been-out-of-work-so-long-they-no-longer-get-benefits CAN BIG BUSINESS SOLVE THE JOB CRISIS?http://www.politicalaffairs.net/can-big-business-solve-the-jobs-crisis/ WHEN HOPE AND CHANGE FALL FLAThttp://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-10-14/news/30294024_1_debit-card-fee-trade-war-corporate-jets TIME TO CALL OUT THE TEA PARTY POLITICIANShttp://www.opednews.com/articles/It-s-time-to-name-the-tea-by-Jim-Hightower-111005-132.html IT'S NOT A BUDGET CRISIS, IT'S A JOBS CRISIShttp://robertreich.org/post/8178875121 JOBS, NOT CUTS!!http://briefcasebrigades.org/slider/august-action-jobs-not-cutsTHE YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT CRISIShttp://briefcasebrigades.org/uncategorized/brigades-go-forth BANKS DON'T NEED A SLAP ON THE WRIST, THEY NEED A KICK IN THE ASShttp://www.workingamerica.org/blog/tag/housing/page/2/ A PICTURE OF THE JOBS CRISIS - IN BLACK, WHITE AND BROWNhttp://colorlines.com/archives/2011/09/workforce_statistics.html A GENERATION OF BLACK YOUTH LOSING ITS FUTUREhttp://colorlines.com/archives/2010/11/will_great_recession_widen_racial_wealth_gap.html MOST JOBLESS AFRICAN-AMERICANS NO LONGER RECEIVE BENEFITShttp://blacklikemoi.com/2011/11/news/most-unemployed-african-americans-are-no-longer-receiving-unemployment-benefits%C2%A0/ WHERE ARE THE JOBS FOR AMERICANS?http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/where-are-the-jobs-for-americans/ IT'S TIME TO ACT ON THE JOBS CRISIShttp://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/03/its_time_to_act_on_the_jobs_cr.html HOW CAN WE SOLVE THE JOBS CRISIShttp://labornotes.org/2011/09/how-can-we-solve-jobs-crisis VIDEO - THE TOP 1% THAT OWN 40% OF ALL WEALTHhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95iHcdbQz0o VIDEO - DANCING ON THE EDGE OF OBLIVIONhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfsiXc49xLY
__._,_.___
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
1 attachment (1.1 KB)message-f...txtDownload(1.1 KB)Download as zip
Friends - PLEASE sign the petition that was initiated by KPFA workers. I also suggest writing the Pacifica National Board members insisting that their decision be reversed:pnb at pacifica.org
And, worse case scenario, let them know that you will NOT pedge during the next fund drive unless they start acting in the spirit of the Pacifica Mission NOW.

Forward to all your lists, and especially to all union contacts who you have.





NO LISTENER DOLLARS TO UNION-BUSTING FIRMS!Pacifica must end its relationship with Jackson Lewis immediately.
 SIGN PETITION   KPFA BENEFITS 4/13: RACHEL MADDOW hosted by Max Pringle SOLD OUT     
    EVENT DETAILS HERE   NEWS CLIPS 
Labor's Edge and Talking Union on Pacifica's anti-union lawyer hire
 
Underlying Rights andCommon Dreams on Jackson Lewis 

KPFA News on listeners' complaint to Attorney General

SF Chronicle on KPFA's fine music programming   ABOUT US SaveKPFA seeks to rally progressive support for the station. We are committed to finding common ground with others who share our concerns about KPFA. We need to save this precious resource. More at www.SaveKPFA.org

Pacifica hires nation's #1 union-busting law firm, Jackson LewisA picket at KPFA last year. News broke this week that the Pacifica National Board majority voted to hire a notorious anti-union legal firm, Jackson Lewis, which the AFL-CIO has named "America's number one union-buster." Pacifica is the corporation that owns KPFA. The nonprofit American Rights at Work notesthat "under its polished veneer lies a for-profit union-buster...one of the oldest and largest" such firms in the nation. Jackson Lewis brags about helping employers maintain a "union free environment," as well as mastering "concerns" with the Americans with Disabilities Act, including targeting workers who take medical leave. That's according to sources cited by KPFAWorker.org, which published the story after union-represented workers at KPFA began receiving letters from the firm. SaveKPFA has heard from many KPFA listeners who are extremely troubled that their donations will go to pay more anti-union lawyers. Bay Area attorney Sheila Sexton told us that "Jackson Lewis really is evil -- there is no hyperbole here. I am a union lawyer and Jackson Lewis are true union busters. There are decent management firms out there who respect collective bargaining -- Jackson Lewis is not one of them." | READ MORE research into Jackson Lewis (PDF) by SFSU Professor John Logan      What the *&#@?* is going on with Pacifica?"The move brings back memories of the struggle against Pacifica management over a decade ago," writes KPFAWorker.org, "in which Pacifica hired anti-union consultants, installed armed guards, and eventually locked out its staff and shut down the station." The hiring of Jackson Lewis comes on top of the more than $100,000 that Pacifica has charged to KPFA for other anti-union legal consultants.         Listener CJ Fandel wrote of the news: "This is beyond the pale! What in the world is going on with the Board of Directors!?" We're trying to find out: SaveKPFA has sent this letter to each Pacifica national board member asking them if they support spending listener donations on Jackson Lewis. We'll let you know the results.     What can you do? As an individual, sign this petition sponsored by KPFA's union workers, demanding that Pacifica drop Jackson Lewis immediately. If you are a union member,KPFA's union asks that you also work with your local or labor council to pass a resolution against the Jackson Lewis hire. 

And please forward this email to friends and family who are in the listening areas of the other Pacifica stations -- KPFK in Los Angeles, WBAI in New York City, KPFTin Houston, and WPFW in Washington, DC. Ask them to renew their membership or become members of their local station. Members giving at least $25/year have voting rights. Governing board elections will occur at all five Pacifica stations this fall, creating an opportunity for positive change.


L.A. Theatre Works booted off KPFA, but welcomed with open arms at sister station KPFKKPFA's sister station in Los Angeles, KPFK, announced it scored a coup by signing up the award-winning program L.A. Theatre Works to run every Sunday night. "We feel it is far and away the best radio drama show in the country," KPFK's interim program director Alan Minsky told   the press.  This is the same program that interim KPFA managers Andrew Phillips and Carrie Core removed from KPFA's airwaves last fall, despite an outcry from listeners. They filled the time slot with two programs hosted by allies of Pacifica management, The Week Starts Here and TwitWit (actors reading a Twitter feed from a computer screen). Fresno's KFCF, which re-broadcasts much of KPFA's programming, soon dropped the new programs and reinstituted L.A. Theatre Works.     
____________________________________________________________
SaveKPFA WELCOMES ENDORSEMENTS from all members of the KPFA community. View ourlist of endorsers and join us by filling out this form.   FRIEND US on Facebook |  FOLLOW US on Twitter  | EMAIL US at votesavekpfa at gmail.com   

SUBSCRIBE TO THIS NEWSLETTER AT www.SaveKPFA.org      PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY.  Thanks!   STAY TUNED for more information on the fight to save KPFA/Pacifica radio. This is a list of important news and announcements. You are receiving it either because you subscribed, or because you have previously written to us. If you'd like to unsubscribe, please use the link below.    
Forward emailThis email was sent to winterdell at earthlink.net by votesavekpfa at gmail.com |  Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.SaveKPFA | PO Box 3263 | Berkeley | CA | 94703@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
March 19, 2012
The U.S. Postal Service wants to close half its mail-processing plants and about 3,600 post offices, costing as many as 100,000 jobs. The nation’s postal unions are fighting back.The Senate could vote as soon as today on the cynically named JOBS Act, which some members are rushing through to deregulate Wall Street. But a package of amendments known as the INVEST in America Act would reduce the JOBS Act’s damage to investors, pension funds and the U.S. economy. Click here to tell your senators to oppose the JOBS Act and support the amendments.
Read more and comment.  Postal Unions Fight Closures and Job Loss Union Members Help Kids Learn and Grow in W.Va. and Calif. Sutter Nurses Vote to Join CNA/NNU for Better Patient Care Chair of Financial Inquiry Committee Assails Wall Street’s Continuing ‘Breaches of Ethics’ The Right White Working Class Walker’s Job Growth Claims Debunked—Again USW Backs Arena Football Players Daniels’ Poster Child for ‘Right to Work’ Says the Law Was No Factor in Expansion Plans Humor, Twitter Can Build Audiences for Labor’s MessageRead more important news of the day on the issues working families care about.Follow the AFL-CIO:
            Take the next step. Become a mobile activist
by joining the AFL-CIO Rapid Action Text Team.
Text NEWS to AFLCIO (235246) to receive action alerts and more.
(Message and data rates may apply.)
To find out more about the AFL-CIO, please visit our website at www.aflcio.org.Click here to unsubscribe.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
-The Biggest Engine of Economic Growth? 8 Ways Taxpayers and the Government Are Necessary to CapitalismAlmost everything the American capitalist system needs is provided by taxpayer dollars and government action. READ MOREBy Colin Greer / AlterNet
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
-When 30% of Workers are Freelance, How Do They Build Power On the Job?How does one organize a workforce that is, by definition, unaffiliated? How do you hold your employers accountable when you cannot strike? READ MOREBy Atossa Araxia Abrahamian / Dissent Magazine
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
-How Darrell Issa and the Right Are Planning to Kill the U.S. Post OfficeThe Postal Service faces a threat greater than email or economics: Politics. READ MOREBy Josh Eidelson / Salon
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

"Rediscovering Poverty" -- What affluent Americans found in Michael Harrington’s 1962 book The Other America, and in all the crude conservative diatribes that followed it, was not the poor, but a flattering new way to think about themselves. 





@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
How Brown, Union Agreed On New Tax Hike Proposal

The governor feared that his plan would fail if the two
competing measures appeared on the ballot. The
California Federation of Teachers had sought talks
since November.

By Anthony York, Los Angeles Times

March 19, 2012

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tax-tic-toc-20120319,0,5203679.story

Reporting from Sacramento

On the morning of March 10, Assembly Speaker John Pérez
sat down to breakfast at Figaro Bistro in Los Feliz
with Joshua Pechthalt, the president of the California
Federation of Teachers. The speaker was engaged in a
final round of shuttle diplomacy, trying to broker a
compromise between the union and Gov. Jerry Brown that
could avoid dueling tax measures on the November
ballot.

Brown was pushing a mix of increases in sales and
upper-income taxes, but support was so tenuous that
backers feared that the competing measure to raise
taxes on incomes of $1 million or more, favored by the
teachers federation, was enough to split the pro-tax
vote and doom both initiatives to failure.

Time for a deal was running out. Even if an accord
could be reached between the governor and backers of
the union's measure, they might not have time to draft
a new initiative and gather more than 1 million
signatures before a deadline about six weeks away to
qualify for the November ballot.

Pérez, who along with Senate leader Darrell Steinberg
(D-Sacramento) had tried for months to find common
ground between the two sides, wanted to try one last
time.

Brown had resisted any talk of concessions, demanding
that his rivals on the left drop their proposal. But
faced with falling poll numbers, Brown's negotiators
laid out the governor's terms of a compromise — terms
that administration officials say they expected to be
rejected.

Under the terms, the union and its allies would abandon
their signature-gathering efforts, but the governor
would continue to circulate petitions to qualify his
original measure for the ballot, just in case the new
measure missed the qualification deadline. Also, to
speed the necessary review by state officials, the new
measure would be a slightly modified version of the
governor's original proposal.

On the other side, the teachers federation sought to
shift more of the tax burden onto upper-income earners.
If Brown agreed to tweak the formulas in his tax plan,
the union might be willing to strike a deal.

In his first interview since the accord was announced,
Brown said he believed that his measure would probably
fail if the rival proposal went forward. He also knew
that any changes to his proposal would have to be
modest enough to prevent business interests from
running a campaign against it.

There are two things to keep in mind, Brown said.
"What's good tax policy and what you can get enacted."

Pechthalt said he was hoping all along to find common
ground with Brown. "We had been trying to engage with
the governor and his administration going back to
November," he said. "They respectfully declined at
every turn."

In the week before March 10, Brown and his surrogates
had started a new line of attack against the
federation's measure: Because it dedicated all new
revenue it raised to schools and local governments, it
did nothing to stave off deeper cuts to health and
welfare programs.

"We were sensitive to that," Pechthalt said. "But we
also felt strongly about our approach."

On March 11, Pechthalt spoke to Steinberg about what a
possible compromise might look like. Steinberg's staff
devised a framework that lowered the sales tax Brown
proposed from a half-cent to a quarter-cent per dollar
and increased the tax hike on upper incomes.

"Once we felt like the regressive elements of the
governor's plan were diminished, we felt comfortable,"
Pechthalt said.

That evening, Steinberg called the governor to share
his discussions with the teachers union chief.

The main concern at that point was timing, Brown's
aides say. The task of gathering so many signatures so
quickly was daunting, and the governor was unsure if it
could be done. Brown sought the counsel of union
leaders who had run dozens of initiative campaigns.
They gave assurances but recommended keeping his backup
plan.

On Tuesday, Brown joined Pérez, Steinberg and leaders
of the state's largest unions in the Senator Hotel,
across the street from the Capitol, to outline a
possible deal.

Tuesday night, the two sides reached a tentative
agreement. The modified tax plan would raise an
additional $2 billion for the state budget next year,
and Steinberg and Pérez both agreed they would push for
some of that additional money to try to roll back
recent cuts to the state's universities.

Brown said that while the new proposal increased the
chances of a successful campaign this fall, it still
could unravel at the polls.

The mixture of taxes has been tweaked slightly, but the
heart of the measure remains a combination of sales and
upper-income tax increases.

If voters reject the measure, Brown said, he will find
another revenue plan. "I would have to do another
initiative and put another tax on," he said.

____________________________________________

PortsideLabor aims to provide material of interest to
people on the left that will help them to interpret the
world and to change it.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Readers Respond and Debate- Re: How Brown, Union Agreed on
New Tax Hike Proposal 

[ Moderator's Note: Following last night's Portside Labor
Post, comments and criticisms of different California labor
unions and the article itself have been sent to Portside.
Many of these comments were also cross-posted to other lists
(Solidarity, Oakland Greens, IWW, and others. Here are some
that Portside received or were forwarded to us.]

* Jonathan Nack responds to Portside Labor posting
* Michael Eisenscher responds to Jonathan 
* Robert Perrone responds to Michael 
* Eisenscher answers Perrone
* Rodger Scott responds to the full discussion

==========

Activists in California, including many rank and file labor
and occupy movers and shakers, are steaming over this deal.
CTA pulled the chair out from under the Millionaires Tax,
which was gathering momentum, without warning.

Most of those drawn to the Millionaires Tax campaign will
see it as a big labor union selling out real tax reform in
favor of some crumbs from Gov. Brown. Many will question
the reliability of labor as a coalition partner. They will
see likely it as another example of organized labor and
Democratic Party politicians collaborating to take a
desperately needed reform off the table.

Most damaging, many activists will again doubt whether big
labor has the stomach to engage in sharper class struggle.

As a result, the wealthy of California need not worry of any
significant tax increase. The rich are doubtlessly laughing
their asses off, while California's needy will continue to
go wanting.

It's a huge mess that other activists, within and outside of
the labor movement, who are more experienced and
knowledgeable about working with and within organized labor,
it's pluses and minuses, will have a very difficult time
trying to clean up.

In solidarity,
Jonathan Nack

===

Correction - Re: How Brown, Union Agreed On New Tax Hike
Proposal

My comment misidentified the union involved. It's the CFT,
the California Federation of Teachers, not the CTA.

Jonathan

==========

An understandable confusion (mixing up CFT with CTA),
Jonathan, because we know all those labor boss-run, thuggish
Big Labor unions look and act alike.

There's plenty of room for debate over whether CFT should
have agreed with Brown to a compromise initiative (which
does, by the way, tax the rich). But if you are going to
criticize that decision, how about doing so on the merits of
the initiatives and facts about the campaign and not
stereotypical portrayals of the union (which alone remained
committed to the initiative when other unions walked or
stayed away).

According to CFT, the new initiative raises taxes to 3% on
those making more than $500,000 (the top 1%). Unlike MTI,
however, it does not add 2% on incomes higher than $2
million. These rates sunset in 7 years, unlike MTI, which
has no sunset. It raises the sales tax by a quarter of a
per cent, half the increase in the Brown initiative. That
translates into $50 more per year from someone who earns
$20,000 if they spent every dollar on sales taxable goods.
The sales tax rate increase sunsets in four years. 85% of
the revenue the new initiative generates will come from
folks earning $200,000 and up. 15% is generated by the
increase in sales tax revenues. Brown's initiative
generates 40% from the increased sales tax rate. The new
initiative will generate $2 billion more per year than the
Brown initiative would.

While not as progressive as the MTI, it does make CA's tax
rates more progressive and, if it makes it to the ballot,
will attract the resources needed to advocate for it with
the electorate. It includes a sales tax rate hike that no
progressive would support on its own. There can be serious
doubt that it will obtain sufficient signatures to make the
ballot. And Brown continues to circulate his original
initiative petitions.

Aside from criticism of its terms, the new initiative can
also be criticized because it will likely end what looked
like a promising progressive coalition that energized
thousands of young people who are fighting for affordable
quality public education. Many who threw themselves into
the campaign have little faith in electoral politics
generally. They will probably invest their energy in other
aspects of that struggle (oil severance tax, stock
transaction tax, split-roll tax, against corporate
personhood).

CFT was the last union left standing in support of the
Millionaires Tax Initiative. It's partners in the community
are under-resourced organizations that could not finance the
campaign. CFT does not have those resources either. I'm
told that the Campaign for MTI had succeeded in gathering
only about half the signatures needed, with just a month to
go. Most of those signatures were collected by paid
petition circulators.

You can disagree with their conclusion, but CFT leaders made
a perfectly rational decision based on the belief that they
(a) would have great difficulty gathering the remaining
signatures without resources needed to hire paid circulators
and (b) would not have the resources needed to carry on a
campaign if MTI did make the ballot.

Under those circumstances, CFT leaders probably realized
that if they were going to have any leverage to negotiate
with the governor, it would have to be now. They sought to
negotiate the best compromise they could, which includes
taxes on the top 2% of income earners and a quarter cent
sales tax increase instead of the half cent the governor's
initiative contains. They made a choice to increase the
chances that an initiative passed that would provide
resources needed to avoid another round of savage budget
cuts.

Were they right? Were their projections wrong? Did they
fail to consider factors that would produce a different
outcome? Are there times when it is better to go down to
likely defeat rather than compromise principles? It's in
the answer to those questions that the terms of the debate
should be conducted, not in characterizations that rest on
stereotypes that populate the lexicon of the corporate
enemies of organized labor and the ultra-left sectarians for
whom any union leader who does not agree with them must be a
sell-out.

Were you at the Occupy Education meeting at which the
president of CFT spoke about the union's decision? I'm told
(I was not present) that Josh Pechthalt, President of CFT,
explained this at the meeting of Occupy Education. He was
treated with respect. Eric Blanc was given equal time to
present the critique. An animated debate followed. How
many Big Labor bosses do you know would show that much
respect for his union's political partners to attend such a
meeting to engage on the issue?

And contrary to what some have said, the decision was not
made in the dead of night by a couple of corrupt union
leaders who cut a deal with the devil. It was made on a
conference call of local union presidents, a majority of
whom supported that decision.

Again, there is room for criticism in how this was handled,
including for unions that turned their back on the MTI,
leaving CFT alone to carry on the campaign. But how about
grounding those criticisms in the facts rather than in
stereotypes and hyperbole. This list deserves a higher
standard of discourse than is available in so many other
corners of the left.

In solidarity,
Michael Eisenscher
(Member and delegate to the Alameda Labor Council from CFT
affiliate, Peralta Federation of Labor)

===

ADDENDUM: I neglected to say one other thing - that
signature collecting for MTI ought to continue for the same
reasons that Brown is continuing to collect for his - in
addition to other reasons that are less about the initiative
and more about the campaign and its participants. I hope
those who are most critical of the CFT decision demonstrate
their commitment by putting extra effort into qualifying the
MTI (including those who heretofore have put more energy
into political critiques than into circulating petitions).

==========

Another basis for criticizing the compromise is that the
Millionaires Tax would have guaranteed significant new
funding to higher education, including community colleges,
which have been particularly hard hit by the last several
years of budget cuts. Student fees have more than doubled in
that period; there have been draconian layoffs of part-time
temporary community college faculty and, in some districts,
even permanent faculty have been laid off. Classified
employees have also been especially hard hit. The new
funding would have gone a long way to alleviate some of
those cuts. The new funding would have gone directly to
community college districts.

The compromise will now direct all new funds from the
compromise into the state's general fund. From there, 40%
goes to K-12 and community colleges, although that is broken
down further to 89% for K-12 and 11% for community colleges.
Based on the assumptions of how much will be raised by the
compromise ($9 billion), should it qualify for the ballot
and pass, community colleges will realize approximately $396
million, whereas, the Millionaires Tax would have provided
over $750 million to community colleges.

I agree with Michael that it is important to distinguish
between unions. CFT is hardly a "big labor union," dwarfed
as it is by the 800 lb. gorilla that is the CTA. If any
union deserves criticism on the issue of progressive
taxation it is the CTA and SEIU, both of which supported the
governor's original proposal. In fact, SEIU threatened all
out war with the California Nurses Association (CNA)) if the
CNA did not pull back its funding assistance to the
Millionaires Tax. The lack of support from the CTA and SEIU
went a long way toward virtually forcing the CFT to seek a
compromise, since by itself it would have been unable to
provide the bulk of the funding for a successful campaign.
While there were other organizations involved in the
coalition to pass the Millionaires Tax, the CFT was the
principle funding source for signature gathering.

Robert Perrone
Local 2279 AFT/CFT

==========

It is the inherent nature of compromise that the final
product will have deficiencies, limitations and defects. I
don't think anyone at CFT is happy about this development.
But only those whose political purity is more important to
them than their accomplishments will be unmindful or even
indifferent to the consequences of failing to enact any tax
increases - more severe cuts - more programs terminated,
facilities closed, services denied, workers laid off.

The quarter percent sales tax increase will terminate in
four years. That gives progressives time during which they
can build for a stronger campaign, one with sufficient
funding to give it a chance of success.

Sometimes it takes more than one push to break down the
political doors. There is no shame in acknowledging the
constraints that keep you from achieving a desired end
unless that becomes a justification for giving up the fight.

Rather than throwing rocks at CFT, supporters of MTI should
compile info on all of the signers to create a huge database
to be used to build an even more powerful movement for tax
reform. It might also be instructive to evaluate the
weaknesses in the campaign for MTI. There were pros and cons
for limiting use of the revenue generated by it to fund
education primarily and a few other pubic services. Could
the initiative have been drafted to apply more broadly in
order to bring more affected parties into the effort? Would
that have resulted in less voter support even if it
generated more organizational support?

We also need to face the fact that even if MTI had made it
to the ballot and was approved by the voters, that in and of
itself would not solve the fiscal crisis of the state -
although it would have made a big contribution. There are
many other defects in the tax code that also need to be
fixed, not least of which is to establish a split roll tax
that doesn't allow corporations to avoid contributing to the
welfare of the state that makes it possible to succeed. The
oil severance tax and financial transaction tax are two more
elements of reform around which we need to build stronger
coalitions.

I also have not seen any comment from other social partners
in the MTI campaign. I would like to know how the Courage
Campaign and ACCE, for example, see things.

In solidarity,
Michael

==========

Michael and All,

I agree with many of Michael's points and disagree with some
of them.

I appreciate his effort to lay out the issues in what he
perceives to be a factual and relevant process. I think for
the most part he has succeeded. At this point, it seems to
me that those of us struggling in different ways to make
more equitable and socially responsible a dysfunctional and
undemocratic system of taxation, which contributes to the
shameful inequities in distribution of wealth, need to
analyze in as principled and pragmatic a process as we're
capable of what our options are and then follow our own
judgment and conscience as we continue that struggle.

At this time, I intend to continue supporting the
Millionaires Tax because I believe that initiative and the
Oil Extraction Tax To Fund Education are the two best
options we have. Since supporters of the Brown initiative
are still collecting signatures, we have the same right and
opportunity.

If, however, reports are accurate that CFT and supporters of
the MTI concluded they didn't have the money to put it on
the Nov. ballot because the number of signatures collected
was 250 to 350 k this close to the deadline, I concur with
Michael's view that the move to reach a compromise that
would preserve some of the more progressive provisions of
the MTI was a rational decision. I think informed and
principled people can have different interpretations of the
compromise but all of us need to recognize that the decision
was made by a majority of local union presidents--not just
the two CFT leaders. (And I've had my differences with them
over their lack of support for the Oil Extraction Tax To
Fund Education and a couple of other issues.) At this time,
don't we need to reflect calmly on the options before us,
discuss those options as thoroughly and democratically as
possible, then do our best to act in the interests of the
people?

In solidarity,
Rodger Scott,
AFT Local 2121 Executive Board and SF Labor Council Delegate
and Coordinator of the Oil Extraction Tax To Fund Education

==========

____________________________________________

PortsideLabor aims to provide material of interest to
people on the left that will help them to interpret the
world and to change it.


Material appearing here is distributed without profit or monitory gain to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the material for research and educational purposes. This is in accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. section 107..
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
 

Listen to Native Voice One http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/nv1/ppr/index.shtml



 
 


 













































 

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20120319/a95e95cf/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Educationforall mailing list