Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Why ALEC is BAD,
AND Why Right Wing False Assumptions / One-Size-Hurts-All Solutions Are Disastrous,/

This piece in the Op/Ed section on Monday, June 18 2012, of the New York Times sums up so much of what is wrong with Right Wing-nut legislative solutions and Right Wing-nut Ideology.

It assumes that the ideology and the solution fits the problem; it presumes that the people imposing the solutions don't actually need to know a damn thing about the problem they are attempting to address - badly.  And most of all, it imposes solutions which are the OPPOSITE of Freedom and Liberty, and representative government where people elect those who govern.  The right relies on theory that has NO substantive facts from experience to back it up, and that theory is badly flawed and not widely supported by the mainstream of economics where this sort of theory is peer reviewed and critiqued by people who know and understand economics.

We have elected representatives who will NOT balance budgets appropriately, or address issues.  We have right wingers who want to resolve financial problems by taking from those who can least give it, and by refusing --- despite overwhelming support and desire for taxation of the upper income brackets -- under any circumstances.

Their claims that the wealthy are the job creators is hideously flawed; if that were true, the right having redistributed the overwhelming majority of our national wealth TO the richest few percent, would have created UNPRECEDENTED quantities of jobs.

Instead, we have had, applying this business formula, caused unprecedented job LOSS in this country, financial ruin, and jobs outsourced overseas at slave labor prices.  The right has exported misery, while succeeding ONLY in growing misery, and loss and failure at home.

They have, as a result, destabilized and greatly weakened this nation.  They have done harm that if not entirely irreparable, will take decades, and possibly generations to repair.

The right is NOT making us MORE FREE, the right is NOT making us STRONGER OR MORE SECURE, the right is NOT making us MORE COMPETITIVE in a global economy.  Most of all the right is NOT making us a more inclusive and equitable, or just, society under law. 

The policies and ideology of the right are intrusive, they are oppressive, they are contrary to the fundamental philosophy of our Founding Fathers and their foundational documents.  The right is engaging in the same kind of heavy handed oppressive actions that prompted the American Revolution, and the role the right is playing is that of King George III's government.

The Right is GROSSLY CORRUPT, the Right is OWNED BY SPECIAL INTEREST.  Make no mistake, those special interests will make huge profits at the expense of receivership and bankruptcies, and the selling off of assets, where alternatives would have actually served the people of the state, not the special interest vultures.  ALEC pulls the puppet strings of the conservative legislators, who appear either to be in collusion, or too stupid to know or care what it is they are doing, so long as they get their cut of the action from ALEC in the form of direct and indirect payoffs.

From the NYTimes:

When ALEC Takes Over Your Town


By JOE NOCERA  Published: June 18, 2012
(Emphasis where added is mine - DG)
The Rhode Island State Legislature finally adjourned its 2012 session around 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday morning. It had been a brutal last few days.

In May, the State Senate had approved a supplemental property tax increase of 13.8 percent, to be imposed on the residents of Woonsocket, a struggling city with a $10 million deficit. But when the bill moved to the House of Representatives, two conservative Woonsocket representatives refused to go along, and no amount of late-night negotiating could change their minds. Everyone finally gave up and went home.

The state has named a budget commission to grapple with Woonsocket’s money woes. Ultimately, though, a receiver may have to be appointed — which is to say, a person not beholden to the voters, who would nonetheless have the power to abrogate union contracts and do whatever else he or she deems necessary to erase the deficit. Incredibly, the two Woonsocket legislators have pushed for a receiver, despite the pain that it would likely bring their city.

Or maybe it’s not so incredible. It turns out that one of them, Jon Brien, is also on the national board of the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. Although ALEC is probably best known for its support of the Stand Your Ground law in Florida, the conservative group has a very clear agenda for dealing with state budgets. It wants to shrink them. Although Brien has denied that he is applying the ALEC philosophy to his small city, it looks, in fact, as if that’s exactly what he is doing. It’s not pretty.

Woonsocket’s problems stem from the decision of Rhode Island’s previous governor, a Republican named Don Carcieri, to balance the state’s budget by cutting state aid to the cities. All of Rhode Island’s poorer cities had become dependent on that aid, so when the economy soured, they essentially ran out of money. Providence had to renegotiate the retirement benefits of its municipal workers. Central Falls actually sought bankruptcy court protection — and a receiver was put in charge of its finances. As for Woonsocket, its current difficulties came to light last fall when the school district revealed a huge, unanticipated budget shortfall.

The two Woonsocket legislators quickly decided to apply Rahm Emanuel’s famous maxim about never letting a crisis go to waste. The fact that their town had a big budget deficit meant that if they played their cards right, they could do a lot more than just fix the schools’ problem. They could actually shrink the town government!

And how does one go about doing that? By refusing to go along with tax increases and forcing the city to the edge of bankruptcy, thus raising the possibility of bringing in a receiver. “You never move faster than when you have a piano hanging over your head,” Brien told me. “The receiver is that piano.”
He went on to say that the municipal unions — police, firefighters, teachers — “have been given pensions and benefits the city can no longer afford” but have no incentive to renegotiate. But a receiver, with the wave of a magic wand, can instantly cut their pensions, and there isn’t a thing they can do about it. When I asked Brien how bad the pension problem was in Woonsocket, he told me he didn’t know. “I’m a state legislator,” he said. “I don’t get into that level of municipal finance.”

Here’s the rub. Pensions are not the core problem in Woonsocket. Yes, Woonsocket has a pension shortfall, but it is more manageable than many other places and has almost nothing to do with the current crisis. “The meme in Rhode Island is that if there is a problem, you can trace it back to the public employees,” says Bob Plain, a journalist who runs the Web site RIFuture.org. In Providence, the pensions, with annual cost of living adjustment of up to 6 percent, were, indeed, a huge problem. (Note: My brother used to work for Angel Taveras, the city’s mayor.) But that’s just not true in Woonsocket.

Yet, in Central Falls, the receiver took an ax to retiree benefits, cutting them by 55 percent, meaning that many retirees are now getting pensions of under $20,000. The receiver has also laid off city workers, closed the city’s library and shuttered a popular community center. This is the future Woonsocket now faces, thanks to its own legislators.

Shrinking government sounds appealing. We all have our favorite examples of silly regulations and bloated bureaucracies. But struggling municipalities like Woonsocket don’t have a lot of fat; cutting means reducing or eliminating programs that citizens depend on. And, in any case, in a democracy, the decision of what — and whether — to cut should rest with elected officials who are responsible to voters, not to an unelected receiver using bankruptcy law to unilaterally make cuts.

That may be the ALEC solution, but it shouldn’t be ours.

Related News
Conservative Nonprofit Acts as a Stealth Business Lobbyist (April 22, 2012)



Related in Opinion
Paul Krugman: Lobbyists, Guns and Money (March 26, 2012).
Editorial: The Big Money Behind State Laws (February 13, 2012)

No comments:

Post a Comment