Party Competition and Industrial Structure in the 2012 Elections | Next New Deal

Key Findings:

• Existing data sources used for studies of campaign finance have a variety of serious flaws.
• As a result, the degree to which major parties’ presidential candidates depend on very large donors has been underestimated and the role small donors play exaggerated.
• The relation between the money split between the parties and the proportion of votes received by their candidates in House and Senate races appears to be quite straightforward.
• Firms and executives in industries strongly affected by proposed regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions heavily backed Mitt Romney. So did much, but not all, of finance.
• President Obama’s support within big business was broader than hitherto recognized. His level of support from firms in telecommunications and software was very strong indeed, sometimes equaling or exceeding Romney’s. Many firms and sectors most involved in the recent controversies over surveillance were among the President’s strongest supporters.
• Republican candidates showed sharply different levels of contributions from small donors; President Obama’s campaign, while heavily dependent on large donors, attracted more support from small donors than did his Republican opponent.
• Big business support for Tea Party candidates for Congress was substantial, but well below levels for more mainstream Republicans. Many of the same sectors that strongly supported Romney also backed Tea Party candidates. Backing for Tea Party candidates by Too Big To Fail banks ran above the average of business as a whole by every measure.

Party Competition and Industrial Structure in the 2012 Elections | Next New Deal

Party Competition and Industrial Structure in the 2012 Elections | Next New Deal

Key Findings:

• Existing data sources used for studies of campaign finance have a variety of serious flaws.
• As a result, the degree to which major parties’ presidential candidates depend on very large donors has been underestimated and the role small donors play exaggerated.
• The relation between the money split between the parties and the proportion of votes received by their candidates in House and Senate races appears to be quite straightforward.
• Firms and executives in industries strongly affected by proposed regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions heavily backed Mitt Romney. So did much, but not all, of finance.
• President Obama’s support within big business was broader than hitherto recognized. His level of support from firms in telecommunications and software was very strong indeed, sometimes equaling or exceeding Romney’s. Many firms and sectors most involved in the recent controversies over surveillance were among the President’s strongest supporters.
• Republican candidates showed sharply different levels of contributions from small donors; President Obama’s campaign, while heavily dependent on large donors, attracted more support from small donors than did his Republican opponent.
• Big business support for Tea Party candidates for Congress was substantial, but well below levels for more mainstream Republicans. Many of the same sectors that strongly supported Romney also backed Tea Party candidates. Backing for Tea Party candidates by Too Big To Fail banks ran above the average of business as a whole by every measure.

Party Competition and Industrial Structure in the 2012 Elections | Next New Deal

Inside the ‘ALEC Universe’ | Eye on ALEC, Q&A, What Matters Today | BillMoyers.com

Wisconsin Representative Chris Taylor, a Democrat, attended ALEC’s conference last week to learn about the organization responsible for so many of her state laws.

One guy I was talking to, who was from one of these right wing think tanks was saying we need to curb Obama’s reckless power with these administrative regulations, and he wanted a federal constitutional amendment saying Congress has to approve federal regulations. I said, I don’t think most people are going to want to amend the Constitution for that. I don’t think that ignites people. Maybe it does on the far right, but most people don’t really care about that. And he said, “Oh, well, you really don’t need people to do this. You just need control over the legislature and you need money, and we have both.”

That sentiment was underscored so many times to me, that they don’t want people involved in the political process, or in the policy process. And that seems to be the intent in a lot of ways: You have a think tank in every state and all they do is come up with these very, very regressive policies, you have corporations who are going to benefit so they fund it all, and then you have the legislators as your foot soldiers to carry out the tasks.

This is terrifying. The illusion of freedom and democracy is collapsing before our eyes because it’s getting to the point where it isn’t even necessary for those with power to pretend any more. 

Something should be done.

But what?

Inside the ‘ALEC Universe’ | Eye on ALEC, Q&A, What Matters Today | BillMoyers.com

Inside the ‘ALEC Universe’ | Eye on ALEC, Q&A, What Matters Today | BillMoyers.com

Wisconsin Representative Chris Taylor, a Democrat, attended ALEC’s conference last week to learn about the organization responsible for so many of her state laws.

One guy I was talking to, who was from one of these right wing think tanks was saying we need to curb Obama’s reckless power with these administrative regulations, and he wanted a federal constitutional amendment saying Congress has to approve federal regulations. I said, I don’t think most people are going to want to amend the Constitution for that. I don’t think that ignites people. Maybe it does on the far right, but most people don’t really care about that. And he said, “Oh, well, you really don’t need people to do this. You just need control over the legislature and you need money, and we have both.”

That sentiment was underscored so many times to me, that they don’t want people involved in the political process, or in the policy process. And that seems to be the intent in a lot of ways: You have a think tank in every state and all they do is come up with these very, very regressive policies, you have corporations who are going to benefit so they fund it all, and then you have the legislators as your foot soldiers to carry out the tasks.

This is terrifying. The illusion of freedom and democracy is collapsing before our eyes because it’s getting to the point where it isn’t even necessary for those with power to pretend any more. 

Something should be done.

But what?

Inside the ‘ALEC Universe’ | Eye on ALEC, Q&A, What Matters Today | BillMoyers.com

Chomsky: The U.S. Behaves Nothing Like a Democracy, But You’ll Never Hear About It in Our ‘Free Press’

In a powerful speech, Chomsky lays out how the majority of policies of the US are practically opposite of wide swathes of the public.

I won’t say very much about the first, environmental catastrophe. That should be obvious. Certainly the scale of the danger should be obvious to anyone with eyes open, anyone who is literate, particularly those who read scientific journals. Every issue of a technical journal virtually has more dire warnings than the last one.

There are various reactions to this around the world. There are some who seek to act decisively to prevent possible catastrophe. At the other extreme, major efforts are underway to accelerate the danger. Leading the effort to intensify the likely disaster is the richest and most powerful country in world history, with incomparable advantages and the most prominent example of RECD – the one that others are striving towards.

Leading the efforts to preserve conditions in which our immediate descendants might have a decent life, are the so-called “primitive” societies: First Nations in Canada, Aboriginal societies in Australia, tribal societies and others like them. The countries that have large and influential indigenous populations are well in the lead in the effort to “defend the Earth”. That’s their phrase. The countries that have driven indigenous populations to extinction or extreme marginalization are racing forward enthusiastically towards destruction. This is one of the major features of contemporary history. One of those things that ought to be on front pages. So take Ecuador, which has a large indigenous population. It’s seeking aid from the rich countries to allow it to keep its substantial hydrocarbon reserves underground, which is where they ought to be. Now meanwhile, the U.S. and Canada are enthusiastically seeking to burn every drop of fossil fuel, including the most dangerous kind – Canadian tar sands – and to do so as quickly and fully as possible – without a side glance on what the world might look like after this extravagant commitment to self-destruction.

I know I keep sharing his work but it just seems so important.

A long transcript of a speech but worth reading all of it.

Chomsky: The U.S. Behaves Nothing Like a Democracy, But You’ll Never Hear About It in Our ‘Free Press’

Chomsky: The U.S. Behaves Nothing Like a Democracy, But You’ll Never Hear About It in Our ‘Free Press’

In a powerful speech, Chomsky lays out how the majority of policies of the US are practically opposite of wide swathes of the public.

I won’t say very much about the first, environmental catastrophe. That should be obvious. Certainly the scale of the danger should be obvious to anyone with eyes open, anyone who is literate, particularly those who read scientific journals. Every issue of a technical journal virtually has more dire warnings than the last one.

There are various reactions to this around the world. There are some who seek to act decisively to prevent possible catastrophe. At the other extreme, major efforts are underway to accelerate the danger. Leading the effort to intensify the likely disaster is the richest and most powerful country in world history, with incomparable advantages and the most prominent example of RECD – the one that others are striving towards.

Leading the efforts to preserve conditions in which our immediate descendants might have a decent life, are the so-called “primitive” societies: First Nations in Canada, Aboriginal societies in Australia, tribal societies and others like them. The countries that have large and influential indigenous populations are well in the lead in the effort to “defend the Earth”. That’s their phrase. The countries that have driven indigenous populations to extinction or extreme marginalization are racing forward enthusiastically towards destruction. This is one of the major features of contemporary history. One of those things that ought to be on front pages. So take Ecuador, which has a large indigenous population. It’s seeking aid from the rich countries to allow it to keep its substantial hydrocarbon reserves underground, which is where they ought to be. Now meanwhile, the U.S. and Canada are enthusiastically seeking to burn every drop of fossil fuel, including the most dangerous kind – Canadian tar sands – and to do so as quickly and fully as possible – without a side glance on what the world might look like after this extravagant commitment to self-destruction.

I know I keep sharing his work but it just seems so important.

A long transcript of a speech but worth reading all of it.

Chomsky: The U.S. Behaves Nothing Like a Democracy, But You’ll Never Hear About It in Our ‘Free Press’

Children given lifelong ban on talking about fracking

Two Pennsylvanian children will live their lives under a gag order imposed under a $750,000 settlement

This seems a little unreasonable, doesn’t it?

I can’t help but think a life time gagging order on children whose childhood has been ruined by fracking seems a little extreme and, oh I don’t know, undemocratic?

Is democratic even a word that has any meaning any more?

Children given lifelong ban on talking about fracking

Children given lifelong ban on talking about fracking

Two Pennsylvanian children will live their lives under a gag order imposed under a $750,000 settlement

This seems a little unreasonable, doesn’t it?

I can’t help but think a life time gagging order on children whose childhood has been ruined by fracking seems a little extreme and, oh I don’t know, undemocratic?

Is democratic even a word that has any meaning any more?

Children given lifelong ban on talking about fracking

Liberty, Liberalism and Surveillance: a historic overview | openDemocracy

To be free we not only need to have no fear of interference but no fear that there could be interference. But that latter assurance is precisely what cannot be given if our actions are under surveillance. So long as surveillance is going on, we always could have our freedom of action limited if someone chose to limit it. The fact that they may not make that choice does not make us any less free, because we are not free from surveillance and the possible uses that can be made of it. Only when we are free from such possible invasions of our rights are we free; and this freedom can be guaranteed only where there is no surveillance.

 

I feel that with every post I get but one step further away from that green card I crave.

Liberty, Liberalism and Surveillance: a historic overview | openDemocracy

20 Things You Should Know About the Bill That Could Ruin America

Last week the U.S. Senate passed 93-7 a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that includes provisions giving the military the right to detain you forever and without charge if they think you’re some kind of terrorist. Consider it an early holiday present! There is no exchange policy, sorry.

Oh dear. Better had wake up and have some participatory democracy and such like

20 Things You Should Know About the Bill That Could Ruin America

20 Things You Should Know About the Bill That Could Ruin America

Last week the U.S. Senate passed 93-7 a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that includes provisions giving the military the right to detain you forever and without charge if they think you’re some kind of terrorist. Consider it an early holiday present! There is no exchange policy, sorry.

Oh dear. Better had wake up and have some participatory democracy and such like

20 Things You Should Know About the Bill That Could Ruin America

Share this:

I was very excited because The Naked Cowboy did put down his name for the race for The White House 2012. 

I then realised the last time I had heard this story was late in 2010 so I thought I’d check up on his campaign as I hadn’t seen him at any of the debates.

To my horror, on clicking on this website: http://nc4president.com/ I found that his subscription had lapsed. NOOOOOOOOOOOO! Today is the day that democracy truly died. Truly. Died. Not Truly Scrumptious, no, Truly Died.

(Thank you for the Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang joke; you are welcome.)

In my despair I continue to search for cowboy nakedness and thankfully discovered he has a reality show on Youtube. So click his picture and enjoy, as I enjoyed, the greatest 10 minutes of my life. You can then worry, as I did, as to how long he will be allowed to use the opening credits of The Sopranos, without being beaten around the ankles with lead piping, by HBO.

Share this:

I was very excited because The Naked Cowboy did put down his name for the race for The White House 2012. 

I then realised the last time I had heard this story was late in 2010 so I thought I’d check up on his campaign as I hadn’t seen him at any of the debates.

To my horror, on clicking on this website: http://nc4president.com/ I found that his subscription had lapsed. NOOOOOOOOOOOO! Today is the day that democracy truly died. Truly. Died. Not Truly Scrumptious, no, Truly Died.

(Thank you for the Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang joke; you are welcome.)

In my despair I continue to search for cowboy nakedness and thankfully discovered he has a reality show on Youtube. So click his picture and enjoy, as I enjoyed, the greatest 10 minutes of my life. You can then worry, as I did, as to how long he will be allowed to use the opening credits of The Sopranos, without being beaten around the ankles with lead piping, by HBO.