Jeb! thinks the Washington Redskins name is A-OK

September 30, 2015 Nick Cassella

Off

Remember when Jeb! said that Republicans would have to “ lose the primary to win the general ” and that American voters are looking for an “uplifting, much more positive message?” Well, that Jeb! has well and truly gone AWOL; over the past two months, he has instead been checking off a list of racial minorities to belittle. I guess he’s found out that to win the primary in 2016, Republican voters are actually looking for racism, hatred, and a dash of white privilege. Go figure. Today, Jeb! continued this newfound strategy, arguing that the Washington Redskins should not change their name . He added, “Native American tribes generally don’t find it offensive…It’s a sport for crying out loud. It’s a football team…I’m missing something here I guess.” He was also presumably missing something when he talked about “anchor babies” and then clarified that, lest people think he was referring to Hispanics, that this term was related to “ Asian people .” Maybe he was also missing something when he insinuated that Democrats get African Americans to vote for them by offering them “ free stuff .” And he was most certainly missing something when he couldn’t tell you “ what was on the mind ” of the Charleston shooter – you know, that mass murderer who went to a historic black church and yelled, “You rape our women, and you’re taking over the country. And you have to go.” So, let’s recap. October of 2015 hasn’t even arrived and already Bush has made racist comments towards: Hispanic Americans Asian Americans Native Americans African Americans Keep utilizing that “uplifting” and “positive message,” Jeb!

+ Read More

Daily Clips: September 30th, 2015

September 30, 2015 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

Elizabeth Warren should (still) run for president: My favorite political commentator at the moment, Matthew Yglesias, writes an article that I wish I had concocted. He yearns for Warren to jump into the race, noting that “so far, [a search for an alternative to Hillary Clinton] has manifested in an odd yearning for a third Joe Biden presidential campaign.” I couldn’t agree more. Yglesias concludes: In retrospect, Warren should have gotten into the race months ago, back when everyone was writing articles about how she should get into the race. But even though the campaign feels like it’s been going on since the beginning of time, it’s not remotely too late for Warren to change her mind. Oregon to give second chance to residents with marijuana convictions: Our neighbor to the south is showing Washington how justice should be retroactively served. According to the New York Times, starting next year, almost all forms of marijuana-related offenses will be eligible for expungement. This news comes as Oregon looks to begin selling legal weed on October 1st. Planned Parenthood stands tough against GOP misogyny: Congressional Republicans got what they wanted – a yelling match at PP President Cecile Richards, where they could interrupt her at will and be absolute d****. What exactly the point was all of this? I think we all know: Republicans want to ban abortions in this country and will go at any length to do so. If you’re a woman in this country, this news should absolutely alarm you. I hate to use the term “War on Women”, but the rhetoric of Republicans towards women today is getting to be very scary. Obama’s Cadillac Tax is doomed: Americans hate the idea of taxing expensive health benefits; in fact 60 percent of Americans oppose taxes “on higher-cost employer-sponsored health plans.” With these poll numbers in mind, Hillary Clinton (ever the political pragmatist) has come out agains the Cadillac Tax (as has the Chamber of Commerce). The repeal of this tax is becoming
+ Read More

+ Read More

Marco Rubio & his terrible, horrible, no good, very bad paid leave policy

September 30, 2015 Nick Cassella

Off

2016, Economics

Last week, in an eyebrow-raising move, Senator Marco Rubio detailed a plan for providing paid leave to workers. It’s a prudent political decision, seeing as 80 percent of Americans are in favor of requiring companies to provide paid family leave and also because the US is the only OECD country that doesn’t mandate such a policy . Before you start thinking he’s a socialist in Milton Friedman’s clothes, note the key caveat in Rubio’s policy proposal: Whereas Democrats like Sanders and Clinton would institute paid leave via federal legislation, Rubio would merely give tax incentives to businesses that offered paid leave, thereby passing the responsibility of basic worker protections on to businesses themselves. Because if we’ve seen anything in the short history of capitalism, it is that businesses always have the best interests of their employees at heart. Here’s how his plan would work: Rubio’s plan would offer a 25% tax credit to employers who offer a minimum of 4 weeks of paid family leave. The maximum pay out per employee, to full-time and part-time workers, would be $4,000, and the maximum leave time would be 12 weeks. “For instance,” Rubio explained, “if you are offered $1,600 in paid leave for four weeks while you take care of your newborn, which would be the equivalent of about $10 an hour, your employer could claim a tax credit for $400.” Rubio’s plan acts as a voluntary, market-based approach to solving a huge problem in America: less than 15% of US citizens have access to any kind of paid family leave . This is certainly not the first time Rubio has put the market in charge of improving complicated issues. In the past, he’s argued that we should leave it to the free-market to fix the environment and yes, he thinks we should repeal Obamacare and replace it with a market-based health care program instead . What’s more, he finds it troubling that most people believe “we need big government to protect the little guy.” Instead of being a guardian of the little guy, he thinks “big government — more often than not — is an impediment to the guy who is striving.” In essence, Marco Rubio has a cult-like devotion to the Republican god of all solutions, The Market. Give me a break. The Market
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: September 29th, 2015

September 29, 2015 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

An American was arrested every 51 seconds for pot in 2014: When talking about marijuana policy, I always know I’m talking to someone in the upper echelons of society when they say, “But pot’s practically legal already!” No, it’s not. The US government spends a mind-boggling “$3.6 billion each year enforcing laws against marijuana possession, according to a frequently cited report by the American Civil Liberties Union .” That is a whole lot of taxpayer money that is being wasted on a substance which the majority of Americans want legalized. Could Trey Gowdy be the next House majority leader? I know what you’re thinking and the answer is no, I also don’t have a clue who this guy is. After a quick Google search, I found this gem about Gowdy: The South Carolina Republican, a former state and federal prosecutor, is best known for chairing the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Oh, he sounds nice and bipartisan. Gowdy has a “Liberty Score” rating of 85% (basically, the closer to 100% you are the closer to craziness you get). To put that number in comparison, soon-to-be former Speaker of the House John Boehner had a score of 35% . Yikes. The Daily Show with Trevor Noah: The South African’s first episode aired last night and it is definitely worth a watch. I’m one of the few people who is very excited about his future. Having an objective, outside-of-the-US perspective on our politics and culture is much needed (think of John Oliver). Clinton gets recommendation endorsement from National Education Association: The 3 million-strong teachers union sent out an email to its members stating: After months of interactions with the three candidates who chose to participate in our process [Clinton, Martin O’Malley and Bernie Sanders], certain things became clear…Clinton is the best positioned candidate to win both the Democratic primary and general election. She has unmatched organizational strength, ground game, and fundraising ability to defeat the candidate of the Koch brothers. While this endorsement will certainly ruffle feathers within the #FeelTheBern crowd, the NEA’s logic is spot-on. However, I
+ Read More

+ Read More

Lies, Damn Lies, and the Idiots Claiming Seattle Is Losing Jobs

September 29, 2015 Goldy

Off

$15, Economics, Forbes, Minimum Wage, Seattle, unemployment

In his online bio, Forbes contributing blogger Mike Patton claims to provide “simple, straight-forward and unbiased analysis.” Well, he got “simple” right, in the sense that his analysis is simplistic. As for “straight-forward” and “unbiased,” not so much. Turning his analytical prowess toward the effects of Seattle’s $15 minimum wage, Patton looked at the city’s unemployment numbers and determined that “ the early results are in :” Almost six months have passed since the first wage hike (April 1, 2015). Although it’s early, thus far the data doesn’t bode well for supporters of this law. … The following graph contains Seattle’s unemployment rate from January 1, 2014 to July 31, 2015. I have marked two important dates and included the unemployment rate at those times. When the law was signed, May 1, 2014, Seattle’s unemployment rate was 3.70%. When the first wage hike occurred, April 1, 2015, unemployment was 3.0%. Since then, unemployment has risen steadily while the national average has trended lower. “If I had to guess,” Patton haphazardly guesses, “I’d say the unemployment rate will likely trend higher for several years as businesses seek ways to mitigate the negative financial consequences of this law.” Wow. I mean, just wow. We’ve seen a lot of shoddy analysis in the service of slandering Seattle’s $15 minimum wage ordinance, but Patton’s work is downright embarrassing. Patton looks at Seattle’s low unemployment rate in April of both 2014 and 2015, and the subsequent rate jumps after the city first passes and then implements its minimum wage ordinance as “clear” evidence that Seattle’s “unemployment rate has been rising.” And apparently, he conducted this simple, straight-forward, and unbiased analysis by Googling “Seattle unemployment rate” and grabbing a chart from Ycharts.com (Ycharts is the second hit on Google’s results page after a post from even-stupider Forbes blogger Tim Worstall). But any idiot clicking through that Google link to Ychart’s initial five year chart should instantly see
+ Read More

+ Read More

Starbucks Demonstrates Why Corporate Self-Policing Is Not the Best Policy

September 28, 2015 Paul Constant

Off

Minimum Wage

Back in April, I wrote on this blog about the problem with clopening shifts , which are fast becoming a normal state of affairs with minimum wage workers. (Clopening shifts, if you were unaware, are when employees work a late-night shift and then an opening shift one after the other.) I noted with approval that “Under pressure from outside sources, Starbucks agreed to self-police their clopening problem.” But I warned that other businesses would need to have regulations imposed in order to ensure that they weren’t unfairly dominating their workers’ schedules. This month, the New York Times reports , Starbucks’s self-policing is not going well: Starbucks has fallen short on these promises, according to interviews with five current or recent workers at several locations across the country. Most complained that they often receive their schedules one week or less in advance, and that the schedules vary substantially every few weeks. Two said their stores still practiced clopenings. Do I think that Starbucks intentionally lied last year when they said they would instate their own schedule fairness? Absolutely not. But I also think the difference between a corporate promise and the day-to-day operations of a cafe is quite substantial. Without the threat of a financial penalty or legal actions, management likely either didn’t absorb the importance of the clopening ban or they sacrificed it as soon as scheduling got tight. Conservatives argue often and loudly against the idea of regulations, but this is a perfect counterexample to their arguments. We need regulations not because corporations are evil entities that need to be managed by government, it’s because the institutionalization of these laws better combat the creep of wishy-washiness that occurs through self-policing, and because penalties are often a more persuasive tool than praise. If the Starbucks stores in question were violating anti-clopening laws, those aggrieved employees would be eligible for compensation for the time that they put in. As
+ Read More

+ Read More

Skunkworks Stinker of the Day: Donald Trump

September 28, 2015 Goldy

Off

Donald Trump, Stinker of the Day, taxes, trickle-down

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump insists that his tax cut plan would increase tax revenues , because growth! “Overall, it’s going to be a tremendous incentive to grow the economy and we’re going to take in the same or more money. And I think we’re going to have something that’s going to be spectacular,” Trump said. “We’re going to grow the economy so much.” Which would be great. Except, this trickle-down fantasy never, ever works . That said, it’s not luck Trump’s tax plan is any stupider than any of the other Republican tax plans. So there’s that.

+ Read More

Daily Clips: September 28th, 2015

September 28, 2015 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

Fox Host confronts Jeb! on his tax plan: In a rather tense interview, Fox host Chris Wallace pointed out that “Bush’s tax plan would, according to his last six years of tax returns, give the former Florida governor a $3 million tax cut ” and asked the candidate, “Does Jeb Bush need a $3 million tax cut?”. Wallace was also quick to point out “that his father, George H. W. Bush, called Ronald Reagan’s theory that lower tax rates would spur income growth ‘voodoo economics.'” Jeb was visibly taken aback by these straightforward questions and his answers were, quite frankly, pathetic. This has got to unnerve those within his campaign, because these same (basic) questions are sure to pop again if Jeb! makes it to the general election. You can watch the full exchange below: Jeb Bush says tax policies of his brother led to dynamic growth: Unfortunately for Jeb!, PolitiFact exists and they looked into one of his statements made in the aforementioned Wallace interview. Here was their final ruling on his claim that the tax policies of his brother “created a dynamic effect of high growth”: The definition of “high,” of course, is relative, but if you look at the most directly comparable examples — the past five presidents’ records in average, annual, inflation-adjusted growth in gross domestic product — George W. Bush ranked fourth among the five presidents, and trailed the two strongest presidents in this regard, Clinton and Reagan, by a particularly wide margin. (Reagan’s policies included both tax cuts and tax increases.) The Ben Carson bubble is bursting! It was inevitable, folks. Ben Carson was always a bigot, but his nap-like persona led the American people to believe otherwise. (“He seems so reasonable and thoughtful…and he was a doctor!”) This weekend, CNN’s Jake Tapper spoke with Carson about his views on Muslims, asking hard-hitting questions, but certainly nothing below the belt. After about seven minutes of bulls*** from Carson (“I’m assuming that if you accept all the tenets of Islam that you would have a
+ Read More

+ Read More

Lochner, Anyone? Franchise Association Lawsuit Has Always Been About a Helluva Lot More than $15

September 25, 2015 Goldy

Off

Economics, IFA, law, Lochner, Minimum Wage, Paul Clement

There was more good news on the minimum wage front today when a three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction which the International Franchise Association had sought in an effort to block enforcement of Seattle’s $15 minimum wage ordinance: The panel held that IFA did not show that it was likely to succeed on the merits or that a preliminary injunction was in the public interest. Rejecting IFA’s claims that the Seattle ordinance violated the dormant Commerce Clause, the panel determined that there was insufficient evidence of a burden on interstate commerce. Rejecting IFA’s claim brought under the Equal Protection Clause, the panel held that the district court did not err in finding a legitimate purpose in the classification and a rational relationship between franchisees and their classification as large employers. The panel further rejected IFA’s First Amendment challenge after determining that the Seattle ordinance was not motivated by a desire to suppress speech, the conduct at issue was not franchisee expression, and the ordinance did not have the effect of targeting expressive activity. The panel also held that ordinance was not preempted by the Lanham Act and did not violate the Washington state constitution. You know, as expected. As I wrote when the suit was first filed back in June 2014, the IFA’s claims have always been “ downright laughable .” But I won’t be laughing if the US Supreme Court decides to hear the IFA’s inevitable appeal, because this lawsuit has always been about a helluva more than $15. At first glance, the IFA’s claims look like a grab bag of grasped straws. But when you look at who’s litigating the claims—arch-conservative former Solicitor General Paul Clement— a more devious legal strategy starts to emerge . And of particular concern is Clement’s appeal to the dormant Commerce Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment—making arguments
+ Read More

+ Read More

Jeb Bush Says Black People Vote for Democrats Because They Get “Free Stuff”

September 25, 2015 Paul Constant

Off

2016, Economics, Race

At the East Cooper Republican Women’s Club annual shrimp dinner, Jeb Bush was asked how he thinks the Republican Party should reach out to African-Americans. His response is one that you’ll hear repeated a lot over the next few months: “Our message is one of hope and aspiration. It isn’t one of division and get in line and we’ll take care of you with free stuff. Our message is one that is uplifting — that says you can achieve earned success.” Huh. That statement is at once racist, classist, and disingenuous. At least Mitt Romney had the sense to make most of these kinds of statements behind closed doors , where he thought he wasn’t being recorded. First of all, let’s talk about the economic side of Bush’s argument. Look: nobody’s asking to be taken care of “with free stuff.” Nobody below the poverty line feels like the king of the world because they have to wait in line for hours to get food stamps. And if we didn’t provide assistance programs to people who need it, we’d be paying in lots of other, more unpleasant ways. If Bush had to live like a poor person for a week, he’d understand that this is not the Monopoly man tossing bags of cash around; poor people have to work to get and maintain benefits, and they do it because they have no other choice. On a racial level, what Bush said is even more idiotic. The statement is so beyond condescending—to reiterate, he just implied that an entire race of people has been addicted to free stuff and they need to be granted their dignity—that it has to be planned. The way I see it, Bush is doing one of two things here: he’s either dog-whistling to racist voters by playing to the unrealistic stereotype of African-Americans that
+ Read More

+ Read More

Civic Ventures