WA Secretary of State Kim Wyman is defending the indefensible

February 29, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Washington State is leading again on another pressing civic issue. Earlier this year, Democrats in Olympia introduced legislation that would “automatically register eligible voters who have an enhanced drivers license, commercial driver’s license or apply for benefits for certain programs through the Department of Social and Health Services or the state Health Benefits Exchange.” This proposal passed the state House (controlled by Democrats) but has since been bottled up in the Republican-controlled Senate. Washington’s secretary of state, Kim Wyman (R) is a supporter of the law, but admits that “ there are very, very long odds right now ” for its success. How has this come to pass? How can Republicans actually stand in the way of this legislation? Automatic voter registration shouldn’t be a policy which is considered “partisan” in a thriving democracy. Yet here we are in 2016 with the Republican party (both nationally and federally) opposed to any suggestion of increased democratic participation. Their arguments against this “liberal” proposal are hardly unfamiliar. They claim it is an example of creeping “big government” and warn that adopting such a policy would lead to a “slippery slope” where it would “ eventually lead to compulsory voting and fining people who don’t turn out, like in Australia .” As per usual, these arguments have little basis in reality and only prey on fear and philosophical fallacies. If opponents of voter registration actually cared about the truth, they would have seen that the proposed registration law actually gives citizens the opportunity to opt out. Our neighbor to the south, Oregon, did just that. It’s worth reading about the success of their registration law in full : Oregon began implementing its program through the state’s DMV at the beginning of the year, and through the first six weeks, 7 percent of people who received cards alerting them to their new registration returned the cards asking to be taken off the rolls. But the state registered more than 10,000 new voters over that same time period, dwarfing the monthly average of 2,000 new registrations it
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: February 29th, 2016

February 29, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

College, the skills gap, and the student loan crisis: The American Prospect sat down with economist Marshall Steinbaum, someone who I had never heard of before this morning. His relative anonymity should not stop you from reading his thoughts on education, however. Steinbuam’s in-depth take on student loans and college in particular is much needed in today’s day and age where specificity is lacking. (Seriously, go to Hillary Clinton’s website and try and find a specific number for refinanced interest rates. You can’t.) Here was my favorite answer from Steinbaum: I think we’ve made our bed: People have to go to college to work, and hence it’s incumbent on us to make sure they can actually find a job and that college is affordable and non-exclusionary. But we could rethink everything. We could forget the “skills gap” nonsense, and go back to a world where economic policy is organized around making sure everyone who works makes a decent living, regardless of educational attainment, and that our universal K-12 system actually gives everyone the academic background they need not just to enter the economy, but to prosper in it. SCOTUS and abortion: Reuters reports that this Wednesday the US Supreme Court will hear “a major abortion case for the first time in nearly a decade” where “the regulations at issue will not involve fetuses or the mother, but rather standards for doctors and facilities where the procedure is performed.” Remember, because of the recent death of Antonin Scalia, “if the justices split 4-4, no national legal precedent would be set but the lower court decision upholding the Texas law would stand.” A tipping point for automatic voter registration ? “I have met many Democrats that are convinced that Republican are trying to keep their party from voting, and I’ve met many Republicans that are convinced that Democrats are cheating,” said Kim Wyman, the top elections official in Washington state. “And it’s really hard to convince either side otherwise.” Um…Kim
+ Read More

+ Read More

It’s Been a Very Good Week for Seattle’s Minimum Wage

February 26, 2016 Paul Constant

Off

Minimum Wage

Mark Perry, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute, published a post on Seattle’s minimum wage earlier this month. As you’d expect from the conservative think tank’s most rabid attack dog, Perry claimed that since raising the minimum wage, Seattle was suffering poor employment numbers in relation to the rest of Washington. This is nothing new. Perry has published over two dozen anti-minimum wage posts in the last year, about half of which were centered directly on Seattle. But this latest post was different: Perry seemed more confident than in his dozen or so other hit pieces. Perry had previously based his numbers on regional data, which didn’t prove his point at all. But now he was claiming to highlight Seattle-specific numbers, which he said proved that Seattle employment has fallen by 11,000 jobs since last year’s unemployment hike. Enter Michael Hiltzik at the L.A. Times , who published an excellent refutation of Perry’s latest claims, starting with this significant point: Unfortunately, local economists say Perry is still using bad data. Although he attributes the city-only numbers to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, they’re not reliable jobs numbers. Perry’s source is the Local Area Unemployment Statistics file, or LAUS, which is based on a small sampling. It’s aimed at counting the number of employed people living in the sample area (in this case, Seattle), not the number of jobs. The data are “prone to error,” University of Washington economist Jacob Vigdor told me by email, and “basically worthless for any serious analysis.” Indeed, Vigdor — who is overseeing the university’s analysis of minimum-wage data — notes that the same statistics for Bellevue and Everett, Wash., showed exactly the same percentage decrease that Perry found in Seattle, even though they haven’t increased their minimum wage. There’s much more, and you should read the whole thing. But this isn’t the end of the assault
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: February 26th, 2016

February 26, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

Matthew Yglesias’ take on the GOP Debate: But at this point, Trump already has a commanding lead in the polls. And from the standpoint of someone who’s already bought into the idea of President Trump, it’s not clear what these attacks amount to. Trump’s pitch is that he’s a ruthless businessman who now wants to change careers and exercise his ruthlessness on behalf of the (implicitly white and Christian) traditional definition of the American nation. Nothing Rubio said or did really challenged any of the key premises of that pitch. David Brooks almost comes to terms with the modern GOP: Brooks bemoans how “over the past generation we have seen the rise of a group of people who are against politics. These groups – best exemplified by the Tea Party but not exclusive to the right – want to elect people who have no political experience.” Ok, first thing. How can he honestly say this is “not exclusive to the right”? What part of the Democratic party is revolting by pushing “outsiders”? As one astute commentator, SAF93 points out in the comment section: Your column skirts the fact that these sentiments grew out of a GOP strategy of blaming government for societal problems: Ronald Reagan declared that government is the problem. GOP politicians and SCOTUS since Reagan have governed badly, shifting power and resources from people toward corporations and elites, failing to address real problems and failing to uphold the core American values of democracy and fairness. US consumer spending gains momentum: The Commerce Department said consumer spending increased 0.5 percent, the largest gain since March, as households ramped up purchases of a range of goods and the return to normal winter temperatures boosted demand for heating. Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity, rose by an upwardly revised 0.1 percent in December. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast consumer spending rising 0.3 percent last month after a
+ Read More

+ Read More

NEW PODCAST EPISODE: “Gig Economy”

February 25, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Economics, podcast

With more and more Americans moving from traditional jobs to freelance and part-time work, the so called “gig economy” is changing the very nature of employment. How will the middle class survive the loss of benefits and security? A new social contract – a “Shared Security System” – is one possible answer. Listen to our fourth episode and let us know what you think of our solution!

+ Read More

Why Paid Sick Leave is Feminist AF

February 25, 2016 Hanna Brooks Olsen

Off

gender wage gap, Income inequality, paid sick leave, Scheduling, sick leave

What is or is not feminist when it comes to politics will likely never be fully resolved, but boy howdy, we sure do love to talk about it. There have been acres of pixels dedicated to the debate over whether a vote for Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders is more or less feminist than a vote for the other candidate, not to mention plenty about the perceived feminism of candidates like Carly Fiorina and yes, even Sarah Palin. And of course, there’s John Kasich and his line about female voters “leaving the kitchen” to elect him—a statement which I would call arguably one of the least feminist comments uttered at a stump speech in the last decade if it weren’t for almost every single thing out of the mouths of Donald Trump and Mike Huckabee and any number of other white men who have run or are currently running for office. So I completely understand the skepticism and even exhaustion around this line of political criticism and critical thinking. But I feel quite confident in saying that regardless of which presidential bubble you color in on your November ballot, a vote on behalf of paid sick leave is one of the more inclusive, intersectional votes you can cast. Basically, paid sick leave is feminist AF. Allow me to explain. First, let’s get straight that intersectional feminism means raising up all kinds of people; it’s not about limiting the access or rights of men or white people or whatever else teenage trolls on Twitter seem to think. By “feminist,” I mean paid sick leave is extremely good for furthering the cause of equity, generally. Now let’s move on. Both an increase to the minimum wage and requiring employers to provide paid sick leave would directly benefit women and families (of note: for the rest of this piece,
+ Read More

+ Read More

Mutually Assured Obstruction: McConnell’s SCOTUS Gambit Leaves Dems No Choice but To Go Nuclear

February 25, 2016 Goldy

Off

Filibuster, Mitch McConnell, News, President Obama, Supreme Court, US Senate

Not only are Republicans refusing to consider any Obama appointment to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has even refused to commit to confirming a nominee put forth by the next president — you know, should that president be a Democrat. And for all the chatter about what this means for the future of the United States Supreme Court, I’d like to take a moment to consider what this means for the future of the US Senate. Um… BOOM!!! If a Republican Senate majority sets a precedent by denying a Democratic president his constitutional authority to appoint a SCOTUS justice, then given a similar opportunity, a Democratic Senate majority must return the favor in kind. The failure to retaliate would only incentivize the Republicans to do this again and again, leaving them exclusive control over the ideological balance of the Supreme Court. So Democrats must vow to reject the nominees of all future Republican presidents. And I don’t just mean during an election year — I mean ever. Republicans must be made to understand that if they deny this president his right to appoint a justice to this particular Supreme Court seat, the Republicans will assure that no president with an opposition Senate will ever be able to appoint a justice again. Sounds pretty dysfunctional, right? So given the current rules (whereby a single spiteful member can pretty much block any bill or motion from coming to a vote), how could such a pathologically partisan Senate ever hope to function again? Of course, it can’t. That’s why, should the Democrats regain control of the Senate this November, the first thing the new majority must do is eliminate the body’s longstanding super-majority rules. In other words, Democrats must choose the “nuclear option” and kill the filibuster. And should the Republicans retain their majority in the face of a justifiably angry and indignant Democratic opposition, McConnell
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: February 25th, 2016

February 25, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

The Party of ‘No way!’ Over the last eight years it’s become something of a cliche to label the Republicans as the party of “no.” They’ve fought against pretty much everything President Obama has thrown their way. It’s become astonishingly clear they have no intention to govern. They are simply there to clog up the system, get people angry at the government’s inadequacies, and then run campaigns which are centered around the old conservative trope “government is ineffective and evil.” Kristof’s piece highlights “the larger issue” of GOP obstructionism by waxing nostalgic about politics “back in his day.” See here: When I was growing up, the G.O.P. was the serious, prudent, boring party, while the Democrats included a menagerie of populists, rascals and firebrands. Today it’s the G.O.P. that embraces the George Wallace demagogues, and its aim is less to govern than to cause gridlock. That’s not true of everyone — the House speaker, Paul Ryan, seems to have genuine aspirations to legislate. But to be a Republican lawmaker today is too often to seek to block appointments, obstruct programs and shut down government. Politics becomes less about building things up than about burning them down. 8 in 10 Hispanics have unfavorable view of Trump: A Washington Post and Univision News poll finds that among Hispanic voters, Trump falls behind Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders by historically large margins in general election matchups. It’s an incredibly detailed poll with many insights. Here are some of the best tidbits: The Post-Univision survey tested those four GOP candidates against Clinton and against Sanders. While all trail badly among Hispanics at this point, Trump does the worst — losing the Hispanic vote to Clinton by 73 to 16 percent. That 57-point gap is little changed from a 54-point deficit recorded last June, but is significantly wider than the 44-point margin by which former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney lost
+ Read More

+ Read More

Why Does Hillary Clinton Champion Universal Pre-K, But Disregard Universal College?

February 24, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Policy

Hillary Clinton has made universal pre-k a major part of her campaign platform. She has thrown her support behind this ambitious policy proposal because she believes that it would offer “better prospects for lifelong economic opportunity.” She laments how “only 55 percent of all America’s 3 and 4 year olds are enrolled in preschool.” And predictably, lower income families are the most affected. Only 64 percent of four-year-olds from families making 50-60k a year are able to attend preschool . That’s well below the rate of attendance for families making more than $100,000 (89 percent). What’s worse? The rest of the developed world is passing us by. As Clinton notes, “many of our economic competitors are racing ahead. They are making big investments in preschool and early education.” If America wants to remain competitive, she implores that we must “ensure that every 4-year-old in America has access to high-quality preschool in the next 10 years.” Her argument for universalizing pre-k is extremely well made and convincing. I agree with her – “every child should have the tools and skills to thrive in tomorrow’s economy, especially those kids from our most vulnerable and at-risk communities.” But couldn’t all of these points be equally applied to free college? In fact, the Bernie Sanders campaign uses Hillary’s exact arguments for universal pre-k to advocate for tuition free college. According to Sanders, “in a highly competitive global economy, we need the best-educated workforce in the world.” Sound familiar? Bernie’s free college plan would originate from federal funding, where “ the federal government would pay $2 in matching funds for every dollar states spend on making tuition free at public colleges and universities . In a similar vein, Hillary’s pre-k plan would be achieved “by providing new federal funding for states that expand access to high quality preschool.” Their implementation is nearly indistinguishable. At this point, Hillary would probably retort that implementing free college would be far more difficult than universalizing pre-k. This, however, would be a broad generalization that doesn’t match the reality. For there are those within the
+ Read More

+ Read More

Daily Clips: February 24th, 2016

February 24, 2016 Nick Cassella

Off

Daily Clips

Twilight of the Super PAC: Super PACs are new phenomena in American politics. They are a product of two judicial decisions : the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, delivered in January 2010, and the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Speechnow.org v. Federal Election Commission, two months later. Together, these two decisions enabled the creation of a new entity: a political action committee that could accept unlimited donations so long as it did not coordinate its expenditure with any political campaign… Disgust with the costly ineffectiveness of super PACs may explain one of the most important mysteries of the current phase of the 2016 campaign. Bill Gates says the energy breakthrough that will “save our planet” is less than 15 years away: Ezra Klein talks with Gates at length (forty minutes) about technology, innovation, and energy. As you may expect, the conversation is riveting. Here are some tidbits from the interview I found particularly interesting (and relates to our robots and automation podcast where we address Gates’ dystopian visions): EK: I know you take the risk of creating artificial intelligence that ultimately turns against us pretty seriously; I’m curious where you think we are in terms of building artificial intelligence. I know there’s a lot of disagreement in the field about, are we 40 years away? Are we 500 years away? What do you think is the state of AI research right now, and when do you think it will really begin feeding back into the economy and into innovation? BG: Well, with robotics, you have to think of three different milestones. One is just pure labor substitution for jobs that are largely physical and visual manipulation — driving, security guard, warehouse work, waiter, maid. That threshold — I don’t think you’d get much disagreement that over the next 15 years the robotic equivalents in terms of cost, in terms of reliability, will become a substitute to those activities. So that’s the first stage, and you’d
+ Read More

+ Read More

Civic Ventures