Daily Clips: January 7th, 2016

January 7, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

The gun lobby’s con game will come to an end: “The apologists for the weapons industry — they pass themselves off as the gun-rights movement — demonstrate their intellectual bankruptcy by regularly contradicting themselves with a straight face.” That’s quite an opening to a column, EJ Dionne. Throughout, one can feel his anger and the frustration coursing throughout his words. He pointed out the blatant contradictions of the gun lobby, but this was not the strength of his argument. After all, we all know how intransigent the NRA and its proponents can be. What stuck with me was the following take-away: But something important happened in the East Room when Obama offered a series of constrained but useful steps toward limiting the carnage on our streets, in our schools and houses of worship and movie theaters. He made clear that the era of cowering before the gun lobby and apologizing, trimming, hedging and equivocating is over. We will look back upon Obama’s presidency as the time when the gun responsibility movement found its voice. And in many ways, the president made this journey with all of us. While he certainly cannot be credited as the catalyst for the entire transformation, his leadership on the issue has been very powerful. It looks to carry into the 2016 election as well. Dionne concludes: Obama isn’t running for reelection, but the 2016 Democratic presidential candidates have shown that they, too, are unafraid to take on those who remain unmoved by death after death. At this point, Democrats have little to lose. Only fearlessness will flip the politics of guns and begin to put Republicans on the defensive. DNC Chair says young women have been complacent since Roe v. Wade: Debbie, Debbie, Debbie. If you continue to make statements like this, you may very well find yourself as the #1 enemy for the progressive cause (and young women). Stop. Making. Enemies. And. Unite. The. Party. US jobs market holding firmer despite slowing growth: According to Reuters, “the number of Americans filing for jobless benefits fell
+ Read More

+ Read More

You Really Ought to See The Big Short

January 6, 2016 Paul Constant

Off

Pop Culture

It’s not very often that we talk about movies here at Civic Skunk Works, but this is a special occasion. Over the holiday break, I caught up on my awards-season movie-watching (Star Wars is fun, Carol is awesome, I was disappointed with The Hateful Eight) and The Big Short was my favorite movie of the lot. It was incredibly fun to watch—funny, inventive, well-acted, and directed with a simmering sense of anger by Anchorman director Adam McKay. You should definitely watch it. And yes, the movie is based on Michael Lewis’s book with the same title, and yes the book is better than the movie and you should read it. But the movie is entertaining and educational in its own right; I think people who’ve read the book would find a lot to enjoy in the movie. The Big Short, if you didn’t know, is the true story of a small group of investors who decided to bet on the housing bubble bursting. (Spoiler alert for anybody who was in a coma in 2008: the housing bubble did, eventually burst.) The movie ingeniously makes the characters—played by Ryan Gosling, Steve Carell, Christian Bale, and others—so dorky and likable that you’re actively rooting for them, which means at various points during the movie you realize that you’re hoping for the economy to collapse. The moral ambiguity of the whole thing is difficult to wrap your head around—the investors are horrified that the housing bubble is built on lies and deception and ignorance, but they’re also hoping to profit off of it—and that mixture of outrage and guilt creates a nice narrative drive that makes the movie a pleasure to watch. Don’t just take my word for it—even Bloomberg‘s Barry Ritholz , who wrote an excellent book about the economic downturn , says the movie “gets the broad strokes of the crisis
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: January 6th, 2016

January 6, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

A president can’t end our nation’s gun addiction. Only grassroots efforts can: So says Zach Silk, our Civic Ventures President, who penned a fantastic article in The Guardian today. Zach was the campaign manager for Initiative 594, where “in 2014, Washington became the first state to beat the NRA at the ballot when voters approved universal background checks by an overwhelming margin.” Silk likens the gun responsibility movement to the “marriage equality campaign before it.” Like gay marriage, “the gun responsibility movement is learning from its mistakes – talking to voters and chipping away at the larger issue one small victory at a time. But most importantly, we’re learning to speak to the shared American belief in community, personal responsibility and the right to protect one’s family from violence.” He concludes: “We won marriage equality one conversation at a time, over Thanksgiving dinners and Facebook threads and pitchers of beer. That’s how we’ll end the gun violence epidemic, too: by respectfully and patiently taking the case to your neighbors, friends and family, you effect change where it matters most, making it easier to pass laws at the local level.” Here’s how much Obamacare has cut the uninsured rate in every state: Very interesting article which highlights how some states, such as South Dakota, are having real success with Obamacare while others, like Delaware and Wyoming, are not. In fact, Wyoming has seen a 9.6 percent increase in the uninsured rate. This flies in the face of a national decline in the uninsured rate and still remains a bit of a mystery. Oil slides to an 11-year low: According to Reuters, “Oil prices slid more than 4 percent to new 11-year lows on Wednesday as the row between Saudi Arabia and Iran made any cooperation between major exporters to cut output even more unlikely.” Tweet of the day: Remember when the government "took away our cars" by requiring licensing and registration? — Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) January 6, 2016

+ Read More

Studying Minimum Wage During The Recession? Good Luck

January 5, 2016 Hanna Brooks Olsen

Off

$15, Minimum Wage, unemployment

To be considered even somewhat conclusive, a scientific study is typically expected to identify just one variable—one aspect of the research which can clearly be shown to have an impact on the outcome. For some reason, the same is not expected in political economy—at least not according to new research which “indicates” (kind of) that higher minimum wages lead to job losses among young, uneducated people. Conducted by Jeffrey Clemens at the University of California San Diego for the National Bureau of Economic Research, the paper cites higher minimum wages between 2006 and 2010 as the a major reason why employment among young people saw a sharp decline. “My baseline estimate is that this period’s full set of minimum wage increases reduced employment among individuals ages 16 to 30 with less than a high school education by 5.6 percentage points,” Clemens explains in the abstract adding that “this estimate accounts for 43 percent of the sustained, 13 percentage point decline in this skill group’s employment rate and a 0.49 percentage point decline in employment across the full population ages 16 to 64.” Clemens’ framework seems sounds on its face—he’s not just comparing unemployment to wages, and has also included additional numbers, including housing declines. However, at no point does the paper address the documented cultural trend of educated individuals re-entering or remaining in the low-wage workforce as a result of the recession, or the depletion of middle-income jobs during that same time . It’s no secret that during the Great Recession, workers of all skill and experience levels found themselves without a paycheck, or with a retirement fund that simply wasn’t going to cut it. As a result, many turned back to lower-skilled jobs in service and other industries to make ends meet, effectively crowding out individuals who were less desirable for the same jobs—not because employers didn’t want to pay high wages to unskilled workers, but because there were simply better
+ Read More

+ Read More

Marco Rubio Wants You To Freak The F**K Out

January 5, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

2016

Before you watch Marco Rubio’s latest TV ad, please take a deep breath and try to remain calm. It didn’t work, huh? You’re probably buying guns right now in order to stop ISIS from putting you in a cage and burning you alive. I don’t blame you. That Call of Duty soundtrack in the background got my blood pumping, too. Thankfully, Marco is there for you. He’s wearing a flag pin on his suit, so you know he’s patriotic and has your best interests at heart. And he just promised that he’s going to keep you safe. So that’s good. Economy – who cares about the economy? Evil exists in the world. Why worry about jobs and wages when our world is about to end? As Marco said earlier this year, “We can’t even have an economy if we’re not safe.” Good point, Senator. But this blatant fear-mongering can only take you so far. At some point, you’ll have to sell people on your ridiculous trickle-down tax plan and your utter disregard for people earning the minimum wage . Until then, good luck preying on people’s fears. You’ll need it.

+ Read More

Daily Clips: January 5th, 2015

January 5, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

Rubio, justifying his missed votes, says, "We’re not going to fix America with senators and congressmen.” — Shane Goldmacher (@ShaneGoldmacher) January 5, 2016 Good grief, what a ridiculous statement from Rubio. Look, I understand he doesn’t want to be seen as the “establishment” candidate, but implying that America can’t be fixed by federal representatives is disingenuous and delusional. As EJ Dionne wrote yesterday , Rubio’s attempt to label himself as both an “outsider” and a “senator” appears to be a politically expedient way of “appeasing everyone” and “creating the impression, as an Iowa pastor told my Post colleagues Sean Sullivan and David Fahrenthold last month, that you’re a candidate ‘talking out of both sides of his mouth.'” And on that note: 51 percent of Trump’s supporters say they’re certain to back him, while only 26 percent of Rubio’s supporters do. Fear of small terror: David Brooks’ latest column highlights how, “These days, we all live at risk of random terror, whether we are in Paris, San Bernardino, Boston or Fort Hood. Many of us have had brushes with these sorts of attacks. It’s partly randomness that determines whether you happen to be in the wrong spot at the wrong time.” He’s not wrong. The conclusions he draws are also quite sound (“Openness is worth the occasional horror fanatics cause”). Unfortunately, Republicans like Brooks only seem to be moved by terror that is provoked by terrorists. But he fails to mention in this article any mention of gun violence. You know, that form of “small terror” that hits America every single day . Most Americans support background checks: “Consistently, at least 70 percent of Americans said they favor background checks.” A useful talking point for your conversations about gun violence prevention.

+ Read More

Bill Clinton: This Election Will Be About Inclusion & Shared Prosperity

January 4, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

2016, Economics

Hillary Clinton is less than a month away from the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, and with that in mind, she released her “ secret weapon ” upon the masses today in New Hampshire: her husband. When Bill Clinton took the stage earlier today, it represented the former president’s “ first solo appearance on the campaign trail for Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid .” From the beginning of his speech, the former president made clear that “this election is about restoring broadly shared prosperity” to the American people. This wasn’t some midnight musing from Mr. Clinton, either. The notion of more equitable growth has been the organizing principle of Hillary Clinton’s campaign from the get-go. In fact, she opened her first campaign speech with this very theme; noting how “prosperity can’t be just for CEOs and hedge fund managers.” She argued against trickle-down economics and its uneven, unproductive, and unjust economic gains. She reiterated in the same speech, “now it’s time – your time to secure the gains and move ahead…The middle class needs more growth and more fairness. Growth and fairness go together. For lasting prosperity, you can’t have one without the other.” Today, Bill Clinton followed his wife’s lead. He, too, brought up trickle-down theory and its disastrous effects on the economy (though he failed to mention his involvement in perpetuating such an economic dogma). He drew differences between Reagan and himself, pointing out that when Reagan was president those at the top did very well, but when he was president “we grew together.” Along with equitable growth, inclusivity was a major theme of Mr. Clinton’s first stump speech. Right after speaking about reestablishing “broadly shared prosperity,” Mr. Clinton claimed “you have to have inclusive economics, inclusive social policy, and then we gotta have politics that are inclusive enough to actually get something done.” He went on – listen to the clip here: Inclusion is clearly a driving theme of the Hillary campaign. And we
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: January 4th, 2016

January 4, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

Why aren’t we calling the Oregon occupiers ‘terrorists?’ In short, because these “occupiers” are white. And as history has shown, being white in America provides endless justifications for horrifying behavior. It’s why, as of yesterday, “the Washington Post called them ‘occupiers’ [and] The New York Times opted for ‘armed activists’ and ‘militia men.'” The author points out how “it is hard to imagine” that words such as insurrection or revolt “would be avoided if, for instance, a group of armed black Americans took possession of a federal or state courthouse to protest the police.” Take a look at John Kasich’s new ad: It offers the same cliche talking points and industrial vistas which fetishize the working class man. A highly ineffectual ad, John Kasich keeps reminding people that 1) he is a career politician (hardly a plus in this election cycle) and 2) he’s a guy that gets the job done. Consequently, the ad comes off feeling very superficial and very focus-grouped. Obama starts 2016 with fight over gun violence prevention: God, there Obama goes again “politicizing” issues. When will Barack just roll over and let 30,000 Americans continue to die from gun violence? According to the AP, during this week Obama is “expected to sign off on a package of proposals aimed at curbing gun violence” and “at the top of the list is an effort to expand background checks on gun sales by forcing more sellers to register as federally licensed gun dealers.” How…commonsensical? Here’s how Breitbart/Trump reacted to the news: Mitt Romney worries about Jeb Bush: Romney told Washington Post journalists that, “a Bush-versus-Clinton head-to-head would be too easy for the Democrats,” adding “I like Jeb a lot, I think he’d be a great president, but felt he was unfairly but severely burdened by the W. years – and when I say the W. years, it’s not only what happened to the economy, but the tragedy in Iraq.”

+ Read More

Civic Ventures