1
0

Makes political bribes illegal Prop 32


 invite response                
2012 Oct 2, 1:21am   6,489 views  32 comments

by FortWayne   ➕follow (1)   💰tip   ignore  

http://www.yesprop32.com/

The video "Tragic" explains how Prop 32 would reduce special interest control over politicians, exemplified by the California's teachers union blocking SB 1530, a bill that would have made it easier to fire teachers accused of child molestation, violence and drug abuse.

« First        Comments 12 - 32 of 32        Search these comments

12   EBGuy   2012 Oct 3, 9:07am  

he wants to forbid the 10 firefighters at station 23 from combining a $20 donation
Looks like all the firefighters in the state are in the anti-Prop 32 camp for $3 million already. Firefighters need to lobby beacuse... why again? Firefighters in my town start at a salary of $80k.

13   EBGuy   2012 Oct 3, 9:22am  

For reference, this article says that a typical CTA member will pay about $170 annually in non-agency fees (this would become a voluntary contribution if Prop 32 passes). This gives the CTA about $50million per year to shower on Sacramento. Former state senator Gloria Romero of Democrats for Education Reform says California Teachers Association officials "walk around like they're God." She recalls knocking on Democratic doors trying to line up votes. "They always wanted to know where's CTA," because that's "their sugar daddy."
"I remember sitting in Democratic caucus" and hearing lawmakers call the unions "our allies, our friends and allies," she says. "And I thought, the NAACP is never included." Grass-roots school-reform groups were also "never included. Our 'allies' are SEIU, CTA, the California school employees."

14   EBGuy   2012 Oct 3, 9:40am  

TL said: unless they meet a host of obsene requirements, like annual written permission.
As far as I can tell, that is the only requirement. If you find anything else, let me know. I'm not sure how onerous that requirement is -- don't folks make health insurance selections each year.

15   Vicente   2012 Oct 3, 9:49am  

EBGuy says

don't folks make health insurance selections each year.

All my selections like healthcare, legal, etc. are assumed to RIDE the same as last year unless I care to request changes.

My employer doesn't require me whip out my credit card to pay each and every one of my providers every month. The other major change in Prop32 is specifically to deny this convenient payment aspect, in order to make it harder.

Why should ANYTHING be deducted from a paycheck, shouldn't it be the employee's responsibility to mail FICA etc. in every month after getting paid?

So the analogy is poor, although I can see why you'd look at it that way.

16   EBGuy   2012 Oct 3, 10:08am  

The other major change in Prop32 is specifically to deny this convenient payment aspect, in order to make it harder.
You're right, and the analogy was incorrect. Amazingly enough, I (usually) renew my Sierra Club membership each year. I think that's the proper analogy. Elective and non-coercive.

17   EBGuy   2012 Oct 4, 4:00am  

What happened to Ceffer's post? I thought it was pretty good.
I saw my first No on Prop 32: Say No to Special Exemptions campaign sign today. I will give public employee unions some credit here; usually it is the right that comes up with clever memes (ie - death tax, etc). If anyone can find a "special exemption" in the text of the law (cite article, section), I'll give some serious thought to changing my vote.
Vicente said: Why should ANYTHING be deducted from a paycheck Federal, state, and local taxes, as well as union dues (agency fees) make sense. The idea that a lobbying organization should have access to anyone's paycheck strikes me as wrong. YMMV.

18   marcus   2012 Oct 4, 11:26am  

This is definitely the right time for decreasing teacher union's power. They're on the ropes. In California class sizes are up, many teachers such as in LA have taken pay cuts for the last 4 years. The teachers already feel powerless in this fiscal environment.

This is the perfect opportunity to voucherize public education. Kill public education. Fuck the greedy teachers ! They don't care about the kids. All they want is those awesome salaries and benefits they get for doing almost nothing.

Let's replace the public school teachers with computers and bring in $10/hr aides to help. And then voucherize it so that people with the money can supplement it and send their kids to private schols. MAybe some of the best public schools can be converted to private schools.

It's exactly the right reform for education if we really want to set the clock back 12 decades or so.

Chidren should be allowed to work too. It is a free country after all. We need to boost the population soon. What better way to do that than to make children a necessary source of income ! (for low income people that is)

19   Ceffer   2012 Oct 4, 11:48am  

EBGuy says

What happened to Ceffer's post? I thought it was pretty good.

Instant Rant Replay from another thread, since you asked.

"So, the argument against 32 is that unions should have the same corrupt lobbying abilities as crime lords and corporations, and they should continue to have unilateral power of involuntary and unlimited payroll withdrawals over their members to fund whatever they see fit anyway they see fit.

Without corrupt powers of lobbying, the unions can never properly and competitively influence politicians under the table as an end run around taxpayer approval so that they in essence, can control the financial pot by continuing to bribe the politicians.

Without these special corrupting, lobbying powers, the process is just so much more inefficient. It would force the poor unions to actually argue the merits before the taxpayers when otherwise they can simply buy the politicians. It is terrible that taxpayers and voters would actually remove that power to influence and corrupt the politicians from our selfless teachers and government workers, who are only corrupting the pols for the good of the taxpayer, even if the taxpayer does not know or acknowledge this selfless act.

The only slight difference is that corporations are TAXPAYERS and the unions are TAXSUCKEES who are bankrupting our cities, counties and state. The TAXSUCKEES simply want the power to corrupt on an equal footing with the TAXPAYERS, they don't care a bit if the corporations rob us blind in some other venue, honor amongst thieves and all that.

Those are some great selling points for voting against 32, I vote for equal opportunity corruption, no on 32! So glad the unions are taking the high road again!"

20   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 3:55am  

Let's go one more round before the election. I'm still leaning toward voting Yes on 32. There's definitely some good con arguments, I just don't think I've seen them here.
Also, here's a meta question open to the group: why should ANY political lobbying organization be given access to workers' paychecks? (NOTE: this is a question about using paycheck deductions for political purposes, not agency fee deductions).

21   MisdemeanorRebel   2012 Nov 5, 5:42am  

PACs dominate the elections.

Voting YES on 32 will allow the top 1%, their LLCs, Real Estate Trusts, etc. to give unlimited funds to PACs and SuperPACs, while establishing barriers to unions and other membership groups from doing likewise.

Payroll Union Dues cannot be used for political contributions at all, even though most union dues do not go to politics, but to Union Services for Members.

Even Voluntary contributions by Union Members must be accompanied by annual written permission; these permissions must be available and stored (an expense) by Unions and other Membership Organizations. This gives righties a great opportunity to stymie Membership Organizations from donating - they can create endless Court obstacles by demanding constant "proofs" of written permission. In this manner, they can drain time, money and energy away from their opponents.

According to opensecrets.org corporate donations outweigh union donations 15:1.

To make Prop 32 fair, it would require that every shareholder not only give permission for companies to donate to PACs, but disallow corporate cash from being used -- shareholders could only VOLUNTARILY donate their own money, and only then with written permission good for only one year.

22   Vicente   2012 Nov 5, 5:50am  

EBGuy says

why should ANY political lobbying organization be given access to workers' paychecks?

Here's the problem:

Mexican standoff, but YOU drop your weapon first and I promise I'll drop mine later. Really.

Will Koch Brothers or Walton ultra-billiionaires be affected in their influence by Prop32? Nope.

Much like our ridiculous "free trade" agreements where we eviscerate our tariffs in hopes that everyone else will naturally follow suit. We've seen the end result of that, we get laughed about and taken advantage of.

I'd be totally OK with some across the board ending of money in politics. However that is not on the board. Prop32 is a straight-up effort by Richie Rich to eliminate competition for influence. The further you go down that road, the more firmly the wealthy solidify their grip. The End.

23   Vicente   2012 Nov 5, 5:55am  

EBGuy says

Amazingly enough, I (usually) renew my Sierra Club membership each year. I think that's the proper analogy. Elective and non-coercive.

What? My AAA & DAN memberships are auto-renew. Don't other clubs do the same thing? This is more like voter-literacy testing, it's deliberate to make participation more likely to not happen at all.

24   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 6:04am  

Even Voluntary contributions by Union Members must be accompanied by annual written permission
My take was that they are targeting "set and forget" yearly contributions via credit card (PS - vicente, I just refreshed and see you've commented on this as well). It is one of the elements I'm not overly excited about, but at they same time I don't think the requirements are onerous. BTW, TL, that second sentence is masterful (though, perhaps, it would get flagged for weasel words in wiki). Just so that pat.net readers are clear, if Prop 32 to were to succeed, unions would still be allowed to make unlimited contributions to PACs and super-PACs.

25   Vicente   2012 Nov 5, 6:19am  

EBGuy says

I don't think the requirements are onerous.

Onerous, perhaps not. But the intent is quite clear, to undercut the funding and hit it at the "little guy" level. I can't make it any clearer how insidious and evil this is.

Right now I renew my car registration online. How about they required your renewal be hand-delivered by check or cash (no credit cards) to the DMV office? Only a little inconvenient and not onerous right? It's just "reasonable" that we want people to run a minor gauntlet so we can somehow discourage bad things. People would be up in arms about it.

It's clear Richie Rich chips away a little here, chips away a little there, all "reasonable" and not onerous measures considered as invidual measures. As a whole cloth though, it's clear that the wealthy class is gaining more power and fewer restrictions over time, and everything is eroding for everyone else.

You really should ask yourself if Prop32 is to REDUCE BRIBES why it doesn't include corporate contributions to political candicates and groups. So only some kind of contributions are bribes, the other kinds are perfectly legit eh? Yes I see how Mr. Wayne thinks about it, but we Americans are supposed to be all equal before the law. These days corporations are not only people, they are "more people" than we are. We've been demoted from citizens to consumers.

26   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 6:31am  

As they saw "all politics is local." For the local perspective, every man, woman and child in my town is responsible for a $5k unfunded liability for city employee pensions and benefits. The city council's way of dealing with budget shortfalls is to fill in swimming pools with dirt (and then throw a parcel tax on the ballot). One city council challenger has the endorsement of the public safety groups. The firefighters independent expenditure committee just spent $7.5k on her behalf. I have to admit, I like the new CA laws that require committees to file disclosures online; they lead to a more informed electorate.
Prop 32 is a big hammer to deal with issues that must be addressed at the state level. My only misgivings are whether it's too big of a hammer.

27   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 6:49am  

Vicente said: You really should ask yourself if Prop32 is to REDUCE BRIBES why it doesn't include corporate contributions to political candidates
Uhh.. It does. From the proposition text:
85150. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and this title, no corporation, labor union, or public employee labor union shall make a contribution to any candidate, candidate controlled committee; or to any other committee, including a political party committee, if such funds will be used to make contributions to any candidate or candidate controlled committee.

Vicente, please don't tell me you fell for that "special exemption" gambit.
To be clear, the Citizens United ruling allows unlimited contributions by corporations and unions to PACs and SuperPACs. These entities can NOT coordinate with a candidate controlled committee.

28   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 7:10am  

The poster formerly known as Shrek said: Because the US Supreme Court has declared such legislation to be unconstitutional anyway?
No. You're incorrect. The five-justice majority in Citizens United ruled that corporations and labor unions may spend their own money to support or oppose political candidates through independent communications like television advertisements. The decision did not disturb prohibitions on corporate contributions to candidates.

29   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 11:10am  

Vicente said: But the intent is quite clear, to undercut the funding and hit it at the "little guy" level.
One last go around. Who is the little guy? It certainly isn't public safety officers, prison guards, nurses, or even teachers. And certainly not you. The public sector unions are placing a tremendous strain on the states finances.
The lowest rung might be service workers employed by low bid contractors.
Two different perspectives on the Displaced Property Service Employees Opportunity Act (SB 350) which was passed last year.
http://activerain.com/blogsview/2448938/california-s-legislature-unclear-on-the-whole-jobs-thingy-
http://labusinessjournal.com/news/2011/sep/12/property-service-workers-deserve-job-security/

30   Vicente   2012 Nov 5, 3:19pm  

EBGuy says

Vicente said: But the intent is quite clear, to undercut the funding and hit it at the "little guy" level.

One last go around. Who is the little guy?

So teachers are not citizens? Perhaps you grew up in some alternate America where Mrs. Grundy doesn't count. In the America I grew up in, Americans were CITIZENS not consumers, and corporations were not "people".

31   Vicente   2012 Nov 5, 3:24pm  

EBGuy says

To be clear, the Citizens United ruling allows unlimited contributions by corporations and unions to PACs and SuperPACs. These entities can NOT coordinate with a candidate controlled committee.

This notion of some invisible wall where they hardly know each other exist, is complete nonsense. Obviously they coordinate, they just don't do it OPENLY. It's like saying that Al Qaeda cells don't coordinate. Just because they don't have an org chart and a phone directory?

Colbert already covered this PAC idiocy well.

http://colbertsuperpac.com/

Please explain why 11 MILLION DOLLARS of money went into this Prop. 32 nonsense from the Koch Brothers? Yeah we are really getting corrupt influences out of government aren't we, by letting big money umm....errr.... help us with that. In secret, because if the backers weren't hidden it might poison the notion that this is grassroots thing....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/05/california-11-million-campaign-donation_n_2078917.html

32   EBGuy   2012 Nov 5, 4:43pm  

So teachers are not citizens?
Where did you get that? I'm not going to put them in the obscenely compensated category, but with pensions, they do okay for themselves. I don't think they need to be showering $50 million per year in Sacramento (unless they elect to do that). Teachers protect me from the Koch Brothers how?
I've been following the corporate personhood meme long before Citizens United. I am not, by any means, defending it. Don't worry, I'll show up for the protest and sign the petitions. I still haven't marked an X on this sucker. The unfunded liabilities aren't going away.... sigh.

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions