Boone County Democratic Party is accepting applications for the Central Committee

The Boone County Democratic Party is seeking applications for the Central Committee.

Joining the Central Committee means that you get to play an important role in  representing the Missouri Democratic Party in Boone County; encouraging among all voters and citizens of Boone County,  an active interest in governmental affairs; fostering and perpetuating the ideals and principles of the Democratic Party; encouraging and developing leadership in the Democratic Party; encouraging party responsibility;  maintaining and promoting harmony in the Democratic Party rank and file: and promoting the interest of the Democratic Party and its candidates over those of the opposing candidates and political parties.

Members of the Central Committee represent townships in Boone County and wards in Columbia. Click here to see the Vacancies on Central Committee

If you are interested in applying for the Central Committee or have any questions please contact Homer Page at 573-446-0441, email

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

5 Facts About The Child Migrants On Our Southern Border

In all of the political debate over the children at the southern border, a fundamental fact seems to be getting lost: these are children fleeing murder, rape, and other violence in some of the most dangerous countries in world. The Center for American Progress has issued a brief to provide more details about the situation faced by these child refugees. We’ve highlighted a few key facts and figures, and check outthe full report here.

1. The countries these children are fleeing from are the most dangerous countries in the world. Honduras has the highest murder rate in the world, while El Salvador and Guatemala sit at numbers four and five, respectively.


2. In fact, Honduras is more violent than Iraq was at the height of the insurgency.The 2012 murder rate in Honduras was 30 percent higher than the civilian casualty rate in Iraq in 2007, when the insurgency was at its peak.


3. The most violent cities in Central America are far more violent than cities in the United States. The three Central American cities with the highest homicide rates are far more dangerous than the worst cities in the United States.


4. Children and girls are increasingly being targeted. Gangs and other organized criminal groups are targeting children, reports show. Children ages 12 and younger are the fastest-growing group of child refugees. That group has seen a 117 percent increase in arrivals since last year.


5. More child refugees are girls. More female children are fleeing than ever before: In just the past year, the number of girls fleeing unaccompanied to the United States has increased 77 percent.


BOTTOM LINE: Given the extraordinary violence in Central America, we need to show compassion and take care of these child refugees who have traveled thousands of miles, often alone. They deserve a hearing to determine if their claims are valid, and we should treat them humanely throughout that process, while sending resources to expedite it.

(Excerpted from Think Progress 8/14/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

When ordinary citizens chose not to vote

A shattering new study by two political science professors has found that ordinary Americans have virtually no impact whatsoever on the making of national policy in our country. The analysts found that rich individuals and business-controlled interest groups largely shape policy outcomes in the United States.

This study should be a loud wake-up call to the vast majority of Americans who are bypassed by their government. To reclaim the promise of American democracy, ordinary citizens must act positively to change the relationship between the people and our government

The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a “non-significant, near-zero level.” The analysts further discovered that rich individuals and business-dominated interest groups dominate the policymaking process. The mass-based interest groups had minimal influence compared to the business-based interest groups.

The study also debunks the notion that the policy preferences of business and the rich reflect the views of common citizens. They found to the contrary that such preferences often sharply diverge and when they do, the economic elites and business interests almost always win and the ordinary Americans lose.

The authors also say that given limitations to tapping into the full power elite in America and their policy preferences, “the real world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater” than their findings indicate.

Ultimately, Gilens and Page conclude from their work, “economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.”

Rich individuals and business interests have the capacity to hire the lobbyists that shadow legislators in Washington and to fill the campaign coffers of political candidates. Ordinary citizens are themselves partly to blame, however, because they do not choose to vote.

Excerpted from The Hill 8/12/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Is a Hard Life Inherited?

ONE delusion common among America’s successful people is that they triumphed just because of hard work and intelligence.

In fact, their big break came when they were conceived in middle-class American families who loved them, read them stories, and nurtured them with Little League sports, library cards and music lessons. They were programmed for success by the time they were zygotes.

Yet many are oblivious of their own advantages, and of other people’s disadvantages. The result is a meanspiritedness in the political world or, at best, a lack of empathy toward those struggling — partly explaining the hostility to state expansion of Medicaid, to long-term unemployment benefits, or to raising the minimum wage to keep up with inflation.

Too often wealthy people born on third base blithely criticize the poor for failing to hit home runs. The advantaged sometimes perceive empathy as a sign of muddle-headed weakness, rather than as a marker of civilization.

In effect, we have a class divide on top of a racial divide, creating a vastly uneven playing field, and one of its metrics is educational failure. High school dropouts are five times as likely as college graduates to earn the minimum wage or less, and 16.5 million workers would benefit directly from a raise in the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.

But just as wealthy Americans inherit opportunity, working-class men inherit adversity. As a result, they often miss out on three pillars of middle-class life: a job, marriage and a stable family, and seeing their children succeed.

This crisis in working-class America doesn’t get the attention it deserves, perhaps because most of us in the chattering class aren’t a part of it.

There are steps that could help, including a higher minimum wage, early childhood programs, and a focus on education as an escalator to opportunity. But the essential starting point is empathy.

(Excerpted from New York Times 8/9/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Our Gratitude / Our Commitment


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Republican Congress, Unhinged on Immigration

It was a remarkable two days of legislative dysfunction, even for congressional Republicans, who have been pushing the limits of unhinged governance.

The House speaker, John Boehner, tried on Thursday to pass a bill dealing with the crisis of migrant children at the Texas border — a harsh bill to deport the children more quickly to their violent home countries in Central America, and to add more layers of border enforcement. But it wasn’t harsh enough to suit the Tea Party, and it was pulled for lack of votes. The hapless House leadership had to drag members back from the start of a five-week vacation to try again on Friday.

The revised legislation sought to appease the hard-liners, who were insisting on swiftly expelling migrant children but also intent on killing the Obama administration’s program to halt the deportations of young immigrants known as Dreamers. Tea Party members believe, delusionally, that the program, called DACA, has some connection to the recent surge of child migrants, who would never qualify for it. On Friday night, the House passed a bill that dragged immigration reform so far to the right that it would never become law.

As Congress takes the rest of the summer off, there may be no two happier House Republicans than Steve King and Michele Bachmann, charter members of the “hell no” caucus that resolutely blocks all efforts at sensible immigration reform. The Senate’s attempt to address the border crisis, meanwhile, is also dead — filibustered by Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama. Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who engineered the House revolt, was exultant. Nothing will happen there until September, if then.

Meanwhile, the border crisis is still a crisis and people are suffering. The Border Patrol and refugee programs will run short of money for aiding and processing traumatized children. Immigration courts will still be overloaded, due process will continue to be shortchanged or denied. Because House Republicans killed a comprehensive reform bill that passed the Senate more than a year ago, the larger immigration system, choked by obsolete laws, backlogs and bureaucratic breakdowns, still awaits repairs.

Eleven million people are still living outside the law with no way to legalize their status. Farmers and other business owners who depend on immigrant labor are still looking to Congress to bring order and efficiency to the system. They have been waiting for at least a decade. They will have to wait some more.

Congressional nihilism has created a vacuum. Now it’s President Obama’s job to fill it, to keep his promise to end the border crisis and find ways to redirect immigration enforcement and protect possibly millions of families from unjust deportation. Of course, regardless of what he does, the system will still be marked by chaos and pain. And the hard-liners will scream at any action he takes.

Having spent the summer howling about a catastrophe at the border, Republicans are now congratulating themselves for refusing to solve it.

(Excerpted from New York Times 8/02/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

How we treat vulnerable children on the border shows the world America’s values

The debate that came to a head in Washington this week on the unaccompanied children crossing the U.S.-Mexico border can be boiled down to one clear choice: Protect them and give them due process or change the law and send them back to possible death. While some may disagree with this characterization, the truth is inescapable, as are the life-and-death consequences facing this most vulnerable population.

Disturbingly, on Friday the House of Representatives was steering toward the latter course.

Let’s not kid ourselves. Subjecting these children to removal without the due process of a formal immigration hearing would no doubt mean that the vast majority would be returned to the gangs and drug cartels that threaten them in Central America. Mexican children, for example, are regularly returned to Mexico this way, after only a short interview with a Border Patrol agent to determine whether an asylum claim is valid, despite the fact that the United Nations found that more than 60 percent of them have a claim to protection under international law.

The real issue here is who we are as Americans. As a leader in human rights protection around the world, we often instruct other nations to receive refugees or protect human rights. Yet when child refugees appear on our own border, we struggle to respond in a humane way. Calls for deploying the National Guard and more border enforcement, for example, suggest that these children and families threaten our national security when they are the ones running from terror. Instead of sending an army to the border, we should be sending an army of child welfare and mental health experts.

To be fair, our elected officials are right to have concerns about the long-term effects of the current policy. Where should we draw the line? But some of these children would qualify for asylum as a targeted group under U.S. domestic and international refugee law, and many others would have a legitimate claim to admission on other grounds; sending them back without due process cannot be our answer.

(Excerpted from Washington Post 7/30/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

ALEC Offshoot Takes Aim at Local Government

After forty years of pushing corporate-friendly policy in state legislatures, this week the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is launching its new project aimed at doing the same at the local level.

The director of the American City County Exchange (ACCE), Jon Russell, has been described as a “divisive” local government official, better known for pushing a national anti-immigrant agenda than for serving local interests and his constituents. ACCE’s first meeting will coincide with ALEC’s Annual Meeting in Dallas, Texas this week.

The creation of ACCE comes as national corporate and ideological interests increasingly try to exert influence over municipal government.

Early reports suggests that ACCE will pursue similar policy objectives as ALEC. According toThe Guardian, “An early draft of the agenda for [the] meeting revealingly listed ACCE’s very first workshop under the simple title: ‘Privatization’ – though in the final version the wording had been sanitized into: ‘Effective Tools for Promoting Limited Government’.” Privatization has been a long term goal for many ALEC member firms, and ALEC model bills have called for the creation of a special state commission to privatize public services. Other ALEC bills call for the privatization of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, public schools, state pensions and more. Another workshop at the inaugural ACCE meeting is titled “Releasing Local Governments From the Grip of Collective Bargaining,” which fits into ALEC’s long-standing antipathy towards unions.

Like ALEC, ACCE’s funding appears comes almost entirely from its corporate members. Local elected officials are asked to pay just $100 for a two year membership, where corporate members pay between $10,000 and $25,000.

Some are skeptical of ALEC’s newfound commitment to local control. For years, ALEC has pushed state-level preemption bills to prohibit local governments from enacting policies like paid sick days, a higher minimum wage, municipal broadband, or limits on GMOs, all of which would benefit ALEC’s corporate members.

Given this history, many local officials aren’t buying that ALEC and ACCE are looking out for the best interests of their constituents, as opposed to the interests of ACCE’s corporate funders.

(Excerpted from PR Watch 7/31/14 )

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Time for Ethics Reform – II

When it comes to denying that ill-timed campaign checks influence public policy, Missouri Republicans are having a hard time keeping their stories straight. 

n the day before his House committee voted to exempt e-cigarettes from most tobacco regulation (and taxes), state Rep. Caleb Jones, R-California, received a $2,500 campaign donation from tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds, the Tribune reported.

Gov. Jay Nixon has since vetoed the legislation.

What caught our attention was Mr. Jones’ explanation that the check had nothing to do with his vote.

The check was written on April 23, and that’s the date that shows up on his Missouri Ethics Commission report. But the date that matters, Mr. Jones told the Tribune, was when he deposited the check. During the legislative session, he says, he rarely checks the post office box of his campaign. So, Mr. Jones says, he didn’t even know the check was there until long after the vote. He deposited the check on May 23, a couple of weeks after the session ended.

What is most interesting about that explanation is that it’s the exact opposite one other Republicans gave us when we noted a different ill-timed check from lobbyist Steve Tilley to the House Republican Campaign Committee. That check, for $10,000, came the day after Mr. Tilley signed up Tesla Motors as a client. By a couple of days after the check was deposited, anti-Tesla legislation had died an auspicious death.

At the time, Mr. Tilley, House Majority Floor Leader John Diehl, R-Town and Country, and other Republicans in charge of the HRCC told us that what mattered wasn’t when the check was deposited, but when it was written. The check, they said, was written before Mr. Tilley was working for Tesla.

To recap: If the date the check is written makes you look bad, wait to deposit it and use that date. If the deposit date makes you look bad, blame it on the date the check was written.

Rinse. Repeat.

Here’s what voters know: Missouri is the only state in the nation that has no limits on lobbyists’ gifts and no limits on campaign donations. The companies trying to get the Legislature to bend to their will know this and are willing to write whatever size checks they need to get their way.

Lawmakers always deny the poorly timed checks have anything to do with their votes, unless, of course, it’s somebody in the opposite party, in which case they’re dirty as hell.

It’s a silly game. Ethics legislation could take away the argument, or at least make it more difficult, by limiting the flow of money, or at least requiring more disclosure during the legislative session. The brief-lived 2010 ethics law required 48-hour notice of any donation over $500 during the session.

(Excerpted from St. Louis Today 7/21/14 ).

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Vote No on Amendment 1- “Right to Farm”

The Boone County Democratic Central Committee recommends a NO VOTE on Amendment 1 the “Right to Farm” as it does not protect Missouri’s traditional family farms. It strips Missourians of their rights and ability to regulate food safety, including GMO-labeling and pollutants. By forbidding any state rules to regulate agriculture such as regulating food safety and protecting the land and farm animals on it, this amendment allow big agribusiness to write its own rules and ignore Missourians and their elected representives.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Time for ethics reform

 Prompted by Reynolds American, the legislature passed a bill prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes to minors… The money trail is especially enlightening. Records show Reynolds American gave generous campaign contributions to key committee leaders as the bill made its way through the legislative process. For example, Caleb Jones, a Republican from California, Mo., who chairs the House general laws committee, received $2,500 from the cigarette maker on April 23. His committee hearing was April 24. Caleb Rowden, a Republican from Columbia, sponsored the bill and received a $1,000 contribution on the day it passed the House. The top leaders of the House, Speaker Tim Jones and majority leader John Diehl, both received $12,000 donations from Reynolds American in June.

(Excerpted from Progress Missouri High Five at Five: Friday, July 18)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

FAIR: Missouri Republicans true to their ALEC oaths: ALEC first. Missouri taxpayers? Well, maybe later.

FAIR: Remember when Missouri Republicans denied up and down that they were shills for the American Legislative Exchange Council? Thanks to Sen. Mike Parson, R-Bolivar, such denials can forever be ignored. Thanks, Mr. Parson, for your unintentional honesty.

Mr. Parson was the sponsor of Senate Bill 508, an ALEC-written bill with the primary purpose of making it difficult for people to become “navigators” who would help connect Missourians living in poverty with the health insurance they are now able to obtain under the Affordable Care Act. A similar bill was already tossed by the courts for being unconstitutional. This is another attempt to make it harder for poor people to live, a favorite tact of the corporate villains who fund ALEC.

This week, Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, vetoed SB 508. Why? Mr. Parson and his fellow partners in crime didn’t even bother to fix a typo in the ALEC-written bill that refers to the wrong federal law.

“It appears that in copying and pasting from this ALEC-model act, the General Assembly failed to correct this incorrect reference to Public Law 92-554,” wrote Mr. Nixon in his veto message. While some may believe such an error is ‘close enough’ for a model act, it cannot be allowed to become the law of this State.”

All of a sudden, the ALEC oath signed by people like Mr. Parson and Speaker of the House Tim Jones and other Missouri Republicans makes that much more sense:

“I will act with care and loyalty and put the interests of the organization first.”

ALEC first. Missouri taxpayers? Well, maybe later.

Thanks, Mr. Parson, for your incompetence. Making the case that the Missouri Republican Party is just a front for out-of-state corporate interests was never so easy.

(Excerpted from St. Louis Today 7/8/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Nixon vetoes copycat ALEC bill that legislature shouldn’t have passed

When copying someone else’s work to pass off as your own, it’s best to clean up the typos before publication.

The Missouri General Assembly learned that the hard way this week, as Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed one of its bills, citing “a significant drafting error.”

The error turned out to be an incorrect number. The bill, which unnecessarily requires criminal background checks for people who work or volunteer as “navigators” to help people enroll in the new health insurance exchanges, refers to Public Law 92-554. But that is a federal statute dealing with alcohol abuse. The correct reference would be Public Law 92-544, which pertains to background checks.

With unconcealed enjoyment, the Democratic governor noted in his veto message that “model legislation” from the American Legislative Exchange Council contains the same error.

“It appears that in copying and pasting from the ALEC model act, the General Assembly failed to correct this incorrect reference…,” Nixon wrote.

Zinger alert. The GOP-dominated legislature has been accused of taking its marching orders from the exchange council, which wines and dines mostly Republican state lawmakers in its quest to promote corporate agendas. The verbatim language of the bill, error and all, reinforces that notion.

For good measure, Nixon noted in a footnote that while some legislatures corrected the error, other states have “simply parroted the incorrect reference from the ALEC model act.” Kansas, for example. Its legislature included the error in a bill which passed the Senate but didn’t have time to clear the House.

These bills are another petty GOP attempt to sabotage the Affordable Care Act. Republicans claim background checks are needed to protect citizens who share financial information. But similar checks aren’t required for tax preparers, who see as much or more than the navigators. Many navigators work as volunteers, and shouldn’t be subjected to the hassle and expense of undergoing criminal background checks.

Even without a drafting error, these copycat bills are veto material.

Excerpted from Kansas City Star 7/8/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Would ‘Right To Farm’ Ballot Question Protect Family Farms Or Ag Corporations?

In November 2010, Missouri voters narrowly approved a statute called the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act, known at the time as “Proposition B,” with the bulk of the “yes” votes coming from the St. Louis and Kansas City areas and most of the “no” votes from rural Missouri. Many dog breeders in Missouri are primarily farmers who took breeding up as a side business, or who transitioned to doing it full-time because it proved more lucrative.

Five months later, during the 2011 legislative session, Republican lawmakers and Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon agreed on a bill that dropped the phrase “puppy mills” and undid most of the new rules in the voter-approved law, including a 50-dog limit per breeder.

That led to a broader push by GOP leaders and various agriculture interests to install the right to farm and ranch within the Missouri Constitution.

Carolyn Amparan of the Missouri Chapter of the Sierra Club, Osage Group, says the ballot measure [Right to Farm] could give agribusinesses the right to challenge state and local pollution laws in court.

“Missouri has had clean water laws for over 40 years, and other anti-pollution laws as well, and farming in Missouri has continued to grow and prosper,” Amparan told the amendment’s opponents at last month’s rally. “Let’s not let agribusiness or puppy mill owners control our state … we want the freedom for our voters to decide what is right for the state of Missouri and when it comes to the safety of our food, our water, our air, and our soil.”

(Excerpted from St. Louis Public Radio 7/6/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Nixon vetoes “sham” payday loan legislation

Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed legislation re-writing Missouri’s payday loan laws Thursday, describing the newly proposed limits as an industry-backed “sham” that fell short of “true reform.”

The Democratic governor said it was better to leave the law as it is, with the hopes of pushing for more stringent regulations in future years, than to enact a modest revision passed by the Republican-led Legislature.

“Missourians want meaningful payday lending reform, not a sham effort at reform that allows such predatory practices to continue,” Nixon said in a written statement announcing the veto.

(Excerpted from Daily Journel on Line 7/10/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Turns Out, Republicans Love Obamacare

Conservative groups have invested millions of dollars in opposing the Affordable Care Act, but they appear to have had little success in turning Americans against the law. In fact, according to a new poll from the Commonwealth Fund, individuals and families who enroll in Obamacare — including the overwhelming majority of Republicans — are satisfied with the product:

Overall, 73 percent of people who bought health plans and 87 percent of those who signed up for Medicaid said they were somewhat or very satisfied with their new health insurance. Seventy-four percent of newly insured Republicans liked their plans. Even 77 percent of people who had insurance before — including members of the much-publicized group whose plans got canceled last year — were happy with their new coverage.

The study also found that the percentage of uninsured has dropped, from 20 percent to 15 percent, after the first open enrollment period, with 9.5 million fewer people now uninsured. Latinos, the most likely of any racial group to lack health insurance, are seeing the biggest gains in coverage. “The percent uninsured fell from 36 percent in July–September 2013 to 23 percent in April–June 2014,” Commonwealth reports.

Moreover, states that expanded their Medicaid programs experienced the biggest drop in uninsurance rates for low-income citizens. In the 25 states and the District of Columbia that implemented coverage expansion for poorer residents, the average uninsured rate for people living below the poverty level fell to 17 percent from 28 percent. The 26 states that have rejected Medicaid expansion continue to see the uninsured rate among low income individuals hover at 36 percent.
The number of uninsured young adults dropped the most, the survey found, from 28 percent to 18 percent.
Commonwealth Fund conducted the survey from a July-to-September 2013 period, before Americans began enrolling in the Affordable Care Act, and then again from April-to-June 2014, following the end of open enrollment.

(Excerpted from Think Progress 7/10/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Millennials get cut off at the polls

First they came for blacks, and we said nothing. Then they came for Latinos, poor people and married women, and we again ignored the warning signs.

Now, after our years of apathy, they’re coming for us: the nation’s millennials.

Across the country, Republican state policymakers have hoisted barriers to voting by passing voter-ID laws and curtailing electoral accommodations such as same-day registration and early voting. These policy changes are allegedly intended to eradicate the imagined scourge of voter fraud, but the real point seems to be voter suppression.

For a time, the targeted populations were primarily racial, ethnic and income groups that traditionally vote Democratic. Now they happen to include Gen-Y’ers, more specifically my college-age brethren. We millennials may be fickle in our loyalties, generally distrustful of government institutions and unaligned with any political party, but our generation’s motley, liberal-to-libertarian-leaning ideological preferences still threaten red-state leadership.

In response, Republicans have set out to erect creative, if potentially unconstitutional, Tough-Mudder-style obstacle courses along our path to the polls.

Last year in Ohio, for example, Republican legislators proposed a measure that would effectively strip hundreds of millions of dollars from state schools if they continued to provide students paying out-of-state tuition with the paperwork necessary to register to vote in the state (as courts have said college students are legally allowed to do). In Maine, the secretary of state investigated 200 university students for voter fraud; he found no evidence of wrongdoing but then sent a threatening letter telling them that they must either obtain a Maine driver’s license and register their vehicles or cancel their state voter registrations. In Texas, photo identification is required to vote and, while concealed handgun licenses count, state-school-issued student IDs don’t.

North Carolina’s efforts have been particularly aggressive, perhaps because young people represent an especially threatening voting bloc to the Republicans in control there. Without the strong turnout of young voters in 2008, after all, Barack Obama would not have become the first Democratic presidential candidate in more than two decades to carry the Tar Heel state.

Like other states, North Carolina has eliminated many accommodations disproportionately used by young people and other first-time voters, such as same-day registration, and instituted voter-ID requirements that don’t recognize student IDs. But it has also stopped allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to fill out voter-registration forms early so that they can be automatically registered upon reaching majority age. Another state Senate bill last year would have effectively raised taxes on parents of students who registered to vote where they attend college.

Perhaps it is unsurprising, then, that the state faces a lawsuit filed by college students, aided by several voter registration advocacy groups, as the New York Times reported Sunday. The suit essentially claims that the state is engaging in age discrimination. Age discrimination accusations may be off-limits to young people in employment settings — federal law doesn’t protect workers under age 40 — but when it comes to elections, the plaintiffs have a shot. The 26th Amendment, which lowered the federal voting age to 18 in 1971 , guarantees that the right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”

Republican lawmakers may feel threatened by the political proclivities of millennials, but the truth is, aside from 2008, young people are not usually much of a concern to either party because our turnout rates are so poor. Of all age groups, Americans 18 to 29 consistently have the lowest participation rates — even in the 2008 election, when our generation was galvanized around an unusually inspiring presidential candidate promising hope and change. That year, just 51 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds cast ballots. Sadly, it was the first time since 1972 that a majority of young people voted.

For years, get-out-the-vote groups such as Rock the Vote and Citizen Change have tried to market voting as rebellious and enviably adult (including by enlisting celebrity spokespeople who were unregistered themselves, and at least one who was possibly barred from voting due to felony records). If Paris Hilton, 50 Cent and Madonna can’t convince young people to vote, maybe a bunch of old white men trying to bar their path will do the job.

(Excerpted from Washington Post 6/07/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Lawsuit targets misleading GOP early voting proposal

A St. Louis civil rights leader is challenging the ballot wording for a proposed constitutional amendment allowing early voting.

At issue is a proposal referred to the November ballot by the Republican-led Legislature that would allow six days of early voting, with no excuse necessary, before general elections.

The lawsuit contends the ballot summary is misleading because it fails to note that early voting would take effect only if funded by the Legislature. It also says the summary should note that early voting would be allowed only during regular business hours.

The lawsuit was filed in Cole County Circuit Court by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of civil rights leader Norman Seay.

It asks a judge to either block the measure from the ballot or re-write the summary.

(Excerpted from KMOU 6/8/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Charlatans, Cranks – Does Missouri Follow Kansas’ Lead?

Two years ago Kansas embarked on a remarkable fiscal experiment: It sharply slashed income taxes without any clear idea of what would replace the lost revenue. Sam Brownback, the governor, proposed the legislation — in percentage terms, the largest tax cut in one year any state has ever enacted — in close consultation with the economist Arthur Laffer. And Mr. Brownback predicted that the cuts would jump-start an economic boom — “Look out, Texas,” he proclaimed.

But Kansas isn’t booming — in fact, its economy is lagging both neighboring states and America as a whole. Meanwhile, the state’s budget has plunged deep into deficit, provoking a Moody’s downgrade of its debt.

There’s an important lesson here — but it’s not what you think. Yes, the Kansas debacle shows that tax cuts don’t have magical powers, but we already knew that. The real lesson from Kansas is the enduring power of bad ideas, as long as those ideas serve the interests of the right people.

Why, after all, should anyone believe at this late date in supply-side economics, which claims that tax cuts boost the economy so much that they largely if not entirely pay for themselves? The doctrine crashed and burned two decades ago, when just about everyone on the right — after claiming, speciously, that the economy’s performance under Ronald Reagan validated their doctrine — went on to predict that Bill Clinton’s tax hike on the wealthy would cause a recession if not an outright depression. What actually happened was a spectacular economic expansion.

Nor is it just liberals who have long considered supply-side economics and those promoting it to have been discredited by experience. In 1998, in the first edition of his best-selling economics textbook, Harvard’s N. Gregory Mankiw — very much a Republican, and later chairman of George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers — famously wrote about the damage done by “charlatans and cranks.” In particular, he highlighted the role of “a small group of economists” who “advised presidential candidate Ronald Reagan that an across-the-board cut in income tax rates would raise tax revenue.” Chief among that “small group” was none other than Art Laffer.

And it’s not as if supply-siders later redeemed themselves. On the contrary, they’ve been as ludicrously wrong in recent years as they were in the 1990s. For example, five years have passed since Mr. Laffer warned Americans that “we can expect rapidly rising prices and much, much higher interest rates over the next four or five years.” Just about everyone in his camp agreed. But what we got instead was low inflation and record-low interest rates.

So how did the charlatans and cranks end up dictating policy in Kansas, and to a more limited extent in other states? Follow the money.

For the Brownback tax cuts didn’t emerge out of thin air. They closely followed a blueprint laid out by the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, which has also supported a series of economic studies purporting to show that tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy will promote rapid economic growth. The studies are embarrassingly bad, and the council’s Board of Scholars — which includes both Mr. Laffer and Stephen Moore of the Heritage Foundation — doesn’t exactly shout credibility. But it’s good enough for antigovernment work.

And what is ALEC? It’s a secretive group, financed by major corporations, that drafts model legislation for conservative state-level politicians. Ed Pilkington of The Guardian, who acquired a number of leaked ALEC documents, describes it as “almost a dating service between politicians at the state level, local elected politicians, and many of America’s biggest companies.” And most of ALEC’s efforts are directed, not surprisingly, at privatization, deregulation, and tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy.

And I do mean for the wealthy. While ALEC supports big income-tax cuts, it calls for increases in the sales tax — which fall most heavily on lower-income households — and reductions in tax-based support for working households. So its agenda involves cutting taxes at the top while actually increasing taxes at the bottom, as well as cutting social services.

But how can you justify enriching the already wealthy while making life harder for those struggling to get by? The answer is, you need an economic theory claiming that such a policy is the key to prosperity for all. So supply-side economics fills a need backed by lots of money, and the fact that it keeps failing doesn’t matter.

And the Kansas debacle won’t matter either. Oh, it will briefly give states considering similar policies pause. But the effect won’t last long, because faith in tax-cut magic isn’t about evidence; it’s about finding reasons to give powerful interests what they want.

(Excerpted from Krugman New York Times 6/29/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

The Great Divide – Inequality Is Not Inevitable

AN insidious trend has developed over this past third of a century. A country that experienced shared growth after World War II began to tear apart, so much so that when the Great Recession hit in late 2007, one could no longer ignore the fissures that had come to define the American economic landscape. How did this “shining city on a hill” become the advanced country with the greatest level of inequality?

The straightforward answer: our policies and our politics. So why has America chosen these inequality-enhancing policies? Part of the answer is that as World War II faded into memory, so too did the solidarity it had engendered. As America triumphed in the Cold War, there didn’t seem to be a viable competitor to our economic model. Without this international competition, we no longer had to show that our system could deliver for most of our citizens.

Ideology and interests combined nefariously. Some drew the wrong lesson from the collapse of the Soviet system. The pendulum swung from much too much government there to much too little here. Corporate interests argued for getting rid of regulations, even when those regulations had done so much to protect and improve our environment, our safety, our health and the economy itself.

The American political system is overrun by money. Economic inequality translates into political inequality, and political inequality yields increasing economic inequality.
Our economy, our democracy and our society have paid for these gross inequities. The true test of an economy is not how much wealth its princes can accumulate in tax havens, but how well off the typical citizen is — even more so in America where our self-image is rooted in our claim to be the great middle-class society. But median incomes are lower than they were a quarter-century ago. Growth has gone to the very, very top, whose share has almost quadrupled since 1980. Money that was meant to have trickled down has instead evaporated in the balmy climate of the Cayman Islands.

With almost a quarter of American children younger than 5 living in poverty, and with America doing so little for its poor, the deprivations of one generation are being visited upon the next. Of course, no country has ever come close to providing complete equality of opportunity. But why is America one of the advanced countries where the life prospects of the young are most sharply determined by the income and education of their parents?

(Excerpted from Stiglitz New York Times 6/27/14)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off