Content by Pat Cleary
Posted at 1:35am on Mar. 2, 2007 Card Check Epilogue
A Blow for Democracy
By Pat Cleary
As most of you know by now, the anti-democracy card check bill passed the House Thursday by a margin of 241-185. This in spite of enormous pressure from business -- and lots of Red State readers.
Here's a link to the roll call vote and here's a link to a Congressional roster in case you want to weigh in with your Member of Congress to say either, "Thanks" or "Thanks for Nothin'." Hold 'em accountable.
Thanks to all of you who weighed in. This thing ain't over. It's on to the Senate...
Posted in Congress — Comments (7)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:18am on Mar. 1, 2007 In Their Haste to Scrap Democracy, Unions Ignore the Facts
Vote Expected Today
By Pat Cleary
As the US Congress stands on the brink of eliminating secret ballot elections, thereby joining the ranks of North Korea, Cuba and other totalitarian regimes, we thought it might be a good idea to set the record straight on some yarns being spun by the unions in their desperate attempt to pass the anti-democracy card check bill.
Lucky for organized labor, almost no one in the Congress has a working knowledge of the National Labor Relations Act or the procedures under which the Act is administered. If they did, they would understand how specious some of labor's claims have been. Of course, this assumes that labor's lackeys on the Hill would be persuaded by the facts, a dubious proposition, we admit.
Myth: The unions say they are unable to talk to employees in order to to try to get them to support the union, in that the employer has sole Svengali-like control over the employees and has sole access to them.
Fact: Under current law, unions only need 30% of the employees in a unit to sign cards in order to force an election. Once they do, the employer is required to provide the union with a list of the names and home addresses of all voting-eligible employees, whether or not they signed cards. This "Excelsior" list (named after a 1966 NLRB case) has gone virtually unmentioned in this whole debate. It's not like the unions can't reach these employees. In fact, they can reach them right in their homes -- and do.
Read more "Myths and Facts" below the fold...
Posted in Congress — Comments (1)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:02am on Mar. 1, 2007 Card Check on C-SPAN This Morning
Tune In -- Call In -- At 7:45 a.m. EST
By Pat Cleary
C-SPAN's Washington Journal this morning at 7:45 a.m.EST will feature a debate on the anti-democracy card check bill (likely to be voted on in the House today). On the side of right will be Rep. John Kline (R-MN) and representing the dark side will be Rep.Phil Hare (D-IL). Take a gander at Hare's FEC report -- behold the union PAC tsunami, unbelievable even by Washington standards. No wonder this guy thinks it's a fabulous idea to toss elections out the window.
Tune in and feel free to call in, too.
Posted in Congress — Comments (0)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 9:30am on Feb. 27, 2007 What Price Democracy?
In The Case of The Anti-Democracy Card Check Bill, It's $30 Million
By Pat Cleary
You hear frequently in public discourse -- especially in times of war -- about the cost of democracy. Well, did you ever wonder how much democracy really costs? Thanks to some publicly-available information, we're able to tell you: About $30 million.
Yup -- that's how much the AFL-CIO and its various unions paid to well over 200 House candidates, both incumbents and challengers (and all Democrats) in the last election cycle. For that sum, these folks are willing to turn their backs on a central democratic principle -- secret ballot elections -- and support the anti-democracy card check bill.
In fact, of the top 20 House recipients of union PAC money -- all Dems -- all but one (Speaker Pelosi) is a co-sponsor of the anti-democracy bill. The Speaker, as you may know, doesn't usually sponsor legislation. These top 20 alone hauled in almost $9 million of workers' hard-earned dues. You can just scroll through chief sponsor George Miller's (D-CA) FEC report and behold the embarrassment of union PAC riches.
So the next time you hear someone ask -- rhetorically or not, "What price democracy?" Just confidently answer, "$30 million." For this group of Democrats in the House, it appears that's the going rate, the price at which they're willing to throw democracy out the window.
Don't forget to click here to send a message to your Member of Congress, tell them to stand up for democracy.
Posted in Congress — Comments (13)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:43am on Feb. 26, 2007 This Week: Do Your Part to Save Democracy
The Dems' Plan to Toss Out Secret Ballot Elections
By Pat Cleary
This week, the House of Representatives is poised to deal a blow to secret ballot elections here at home. Congress is expected to vote on H.R. 800, the anti-democracy card check bill maybe as early as Wednesday. Here's what you need to do:
Please take the time to weigh in. Much is at stake. In their haste to protect the unions, the majority of the House of Representatives is poised to do damage to a fundamental principle of democracy.
Posted in Economy — Comments (4)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 9:47am on Feb. 21, 2007 Today, Dem Candidates Pay Homage to AFSCME
More Union Members' Money Down the Rat Hole
By Pat Cleary
Years ago, a local mayor was preparing to meet with his recalcitrant city council. Someone cracked that he was off to "kiss their rings." Responded the Mayor, "I wish their rings were all I had to kiss."
We were reminded of that anecdote when we read this piece in the WaPo over the weekend about the parade of Democrat Presidential candidates -- save Barack Obama, who will do his part in Chicago on March 3 -- schlepping to Las Vegas to pay homage to AFSCME, the giant public employee union, in the eventual hopes of winning their endorsement. AFSCME, you may know, is batting .500, having followed an early endorsement of Bill Clinton in '92 with a similarly early endorsement in 2000 of this guy. Oops.
According to the WaPo article, AFSCME kingpin Gerry McEntee, "makes no secret that he and his union... want to be major players in picking the next Democratic presidential nominee." Hmmm... Wonder if they even care who the Republican nominee is? Figure that half of their members don't support the eventual Democrat nominee in the general election. What happens to their money? Guess they're just disenfranchised. What does McEntee care?
So out to Vegas they go -- amidst all the other moral turpitude -- to bow, to kowtow, to promise, to pander -- and yes, to kiss the rings. You can bet there will be lots promises of support of the anti-democracy card check bill and God knows what all else.
In short, they will promise anything they need to in order to make sure AFSCME flushes their members' money down the rathole in their direction. Who knows? Maybe some AFSCME members will be fed up enough to get wise to their Beck rights and ask for their money back.
Posted in Endorsements — Comments (2)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:02am on Feb. 6, 2007 Today in Congress, A Blow To Democracy
The Dems' Case Against Secret-Ballot Elections
By Pat Cleary
A sad day in Congress today, for today is the day that Rep. George Miller (D-CA), Chair of the House Education and Workforce Committee, is expected to formally introduce the "Card check" bill -- a most innocuous name for a most pernicious bill. This bill will upset not only some 70+ years of settled labor law in this country but with it, over 200 years of democracy.
Read on...
Posted in Congress — Comments (3)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 9:49am on Jan. 19, 2007 Welcome 'The Committee on World Travel and Junkets'
....In Which Nancy Pelosi Tries an End-Run Around John Dingell on Global Warming
By Pat Cleary
Quite a storm a-brewin' among the Dems over in the House of Representatives, a storm we would admit --unlike hurricanes -- is caused by global warming.
Read on...
Posted in Congress — Comments (1)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:27am on Jan. 18, 2007 HR 6: Toward More Energy Dependence
By Pat Cleary
Last Election Day, in a rare victory for common sense in California, voters turned back a measure that would have put a surtax on oil produced in the state. Wisely, the electorate saw this for what it was: An attempt to make California oil more expensive to produce. The effect was easy to see: Production would be driven to other states and the price of gas would climb in the Golden State. Having failed in California, a prominent Californian, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, aims now to take this bad idea national in the form of H.R. 6, which will likely reach the House floor today.
What H.R. 6 will do is repeal several tax provisions -- or at least insofar as they apply to one industry -- duly passed by bi-partisan majorities in both houses. Unfortunately (from Pelosi & Company's perspective) some of these provisions benefit the oil industry by rewarding domestic exploration and production. Oh, the horrors! For example, it will rule oil and gas companies ineligible for an otherwise-legitimate tax deduction as a domestic manufacturer (in their case, of petroleum and petroleum by-products, like gasoline) under Sect. 199 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 and will adversely change recently-passed depreciation rules for energy exploration activities. In so doing, it will not only take away some of the incentive for domestic exploration and production, but it will drive up the price of oil and will drive exploration overseas, making us even more dependent on foreign sources of oil. In other words, it will do to the US what the failed California proposition threatened to do to California.
And lest you think this cleverly-named CLEAN Act is about energy, think again. First of all, this is a Ways & Means Committee bill, an odd point of origination for energy legislation. Second, the Dems' fact sheet on the bill is rife with poll-tested class warfare gibberish, sneering about "raking in record profits" and "Big Oil Giveaways." Never mind that 90% of the nation's oil and gas wells are drilled by the small independent producers and that ExxonMobil paid over twice as much in taxes in the 3d quarter of '06 than they made in profits. This is a crusade, get outta the way.
You would think "energy dependence" would be a loser of a political cause, but apparently not when wrapped in Big Oil rhetoric. At the end of the day, HR 6 will leave us far more dependent on foreign sources of energy. The so-called CLEAN Act is one more step in the Dems' war on profits, and a big step in the wrong direction on energy.
Posted in Energy — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:57am on Jan. 12, 2007 HR 4: Displacing the Market With Government's Heavy Hand
First, Do No Harm
By Pat Cleary
Further to Pejman's excellent post below:
"When you get in bed with the federal government," Ronald Reagan famously said, "You get more than a good night's sleep." Today, as part of its "100 Hours" march, the Congress will try its level best to foul private sector success with the heavy hand of government. At issue is H.R. 4, the bill that will allow the US Government to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies when purchasing drugs for the newly-enacted -- and highly successful -- Medicare Part D program. On its face, it sounds great, as do most "100 Hours" items: Let the government use its enormous buying power -- sort of like Wal-Mart on (prescription) steroids -- and presto, watch the prices plummet. Only problem is, it doesn't work.
Unfortunately for the proponents of this bill, there are far too many real-life examples of government-negotiated prices for pharmaceuticals. In those that come immediately to mind both here and abroad -- the EU, Canada, Medicaid and the Veterans Administration (VA) -- it's been a miserable failure, serving only to reduce beneficiaries' access to medication. The plain truth about the VA plan -- held up by liberals as the most shining example of how this can work -- is that the VA keeps prices low by limiting drug choices.
According to this article in yesterday's WaPo, "VA prices are also low because VA, which prescribes medications for 4.4 million veterans annually, has a relatively narrow formulary, or list of approved drugs. The agency secures big discounts from the manufacturers of a few drugs in each class by promising not to offer competing drugs." Prices may drop, but so do the number of drugs available to seniors. Lost in the shuffle are some of the newest, most effective medicines. In fact, this recent Weekly Standard article notes that a mere 19 percent of prescription drugs approved since 2000 and 38 percent of those approved from 1990-2000 are available through the VA prescription drug plan. Not a single drug regarded as a priority medicine by the Food and Drug Administration since 2000 are available under the VA plan.
At core, this debate is about whether lawmakers put their trust in the market or the government. This year alone, premiums for the drug benefit under Medicare Part B is 40% lower than originally expected as drug makers compete for their share of the market. As Robert Goldberg points out in the Weekly Standard piece, above, some 2 million VA beneficiaries have voted with their feet, leaving the land of government-negotiated prices for Medicare Part D. The promise of lower prices evaporates in the face of fewer choices. Said the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office in a letter to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair John Dingell (D-MI) on Wednesday:
"CBO estimates that H.R. 4 would have a negligible effect on federal spending
because we anticipate that the Secretary would be unable to negotiate prices
across the broad range of covered Part D drugs that are more favorable than
those obtained by [prescription drug plans] under current law."
While Congress debates a better deal for the nation's seniors, the market is working. Those intent on injecting the heavy hand of government into Medicare Part D would do well to heed the warning of a famous Greek doctor: "First, do no harm."