Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu
Alternative Text Alternative Text Alternative Text Alternative Text
Survivor of US Drone Attack:
Obama Belongs on List of World's Tyrants

Poisoning Black Cities: Corporate Campaign to Ethnically Cleanse US Cities Massive Marches in Poland
Against Authoritarian Threat of Far-Right
Ethiopia’s Invisible Crisis: Land Rights Activists Kidnapped and Tortured

Global Perspectives Now Global Perspectives Now
Showing posts with label state legislature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label state legislature. Show all posts

How States Are Fighting to Keep Towns From Offering Their Own Broadband — Monopolies for Corporations, Competition for Everyone Else

North Carolina and Tennessee are the latest states to side with telecoms, which have long lobbied against allowing cities to become Internet providers.




By Leticia MirandaPro Publica
Earlier this year, the Federal Communications Commission voted to ease the way for cities to become Internet service providers. So-called municipal broadband is already a reality in a few towns, often providing Internet access and faster service to rural communities that cable companies don’t serve.

The cable and telecommunications industry have long lobbied against city-run broadband, arguing that taxpayer money should not fund potential competitors to private companies.

The telecom companies have what may seem like an unlikely ally: states. Roughly 20 states have restrictions against municipal broadband.

And the attorneys general in North Carolina and Tennessee have recently filed lawsuits in an attempt to overrule the FCC and block towns in these states from expanding publicly funded Internet service.

North Carolina’s attorney general argued in a suit filed last month that the “FCC unlawfully inserted itself between the State and the State’s political subdivisions.” Tennessee’s attorney general filed a similar suit in March.

Tennessee has hired one of the country’s largest telecom lobbying and law firms, Wiley Rein, to represent the state in its suit. The firm, founded by a former FCC chairman, has represented AT&T, Verizon and Qwest, among others.

James Tierney, director of the National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School, said it is not unusual for attorneys general to seek outside counsel for specialized cases that they view as a priority.

Asked about the suit, the Tennessee attorney general’s office told ProPublica, “This is a question of the state’s sovereign ability to define the role of its local governmental units.” North Carolina Attorney General’s office said in a statement that the “legal defense of state laws by the Attorney General’s office is a statutory requirement.”

As the New York Times detailed last year, state attorneys general have become a major target of corporate lobbyists and contributors including AT&T, Comcast and T-Mobile.

North Carolina is no exception. The state’s Attorney General Roy Cooper received roughly $35,000 from the telecommunications industry in his 2012 run for office. Only the state’s retail industry gave more.

The donations are just a small part of contributions the industry has made in the states. In North Carolina’s 2014 elections, the telecommunications industry gave a combined $870,000 to candidates in both parties, which made it one of the top industries to contribute that year. Candidates in Tennessee received nearly $921,000 from AT&T and other industry players in 2014.

The FCC’s decision came after two towns – City of Wilson in North Carolina and Chattanooga in Tennessee – appealed to the agency to be able to expand their networks.

The vote has rattled some companies. In a government filing earlier this year, Comcast cited the FCC’s decision as a risk to the company’s business: “Any changes to the regulatory framework applicable to any of our services or businesses could have a negative impact on our businesses and results of operations.”

If the court upholds the FCC’s authority to preempt restrictions in North Carolina and Tennessee, it may embolden other cities to file petitions with the agency, according to lawyer Jim Baller, who represents Wilson and the Chattanooga Electric Power Board. “A victory by the FCC would be a very welcome result for many communities across America,” said Baller.

For some residents in and outside of Chattanooga, clearing the way to city-run broadband would mean the sort of faster Internet access that others might take for granted.

For 12 years, Eva VanHook, 39, of Georgetown, Tennessee, lived with a satellite broadband connection so slow that she’d read a book while waiting for a web page to load. In order for her son to access online materials for his school assignments, she’d drive him 12 miles to their church parking lot, where he could access faster WiFi.

Charter, the local Internet service provider, declined several requests by her husband to build lines out to her home. Only last month did Charter connect her home to the Internet. “Even the possibility to jump on [the local utility’s] gigabit network would blow our minds right now,” VanHook said. “There is nothing faster than Chattanooga. Just through meeting them and hearing them speak and having them understand what’s going on, that’s the kind of place I want to do business.”



Reprinted with permission from ProPublica

Vouchers on the Move: Return to School Segregation?

How to abolish public schools with school vouchers


By Jonas Persson
Twenty-five years ago, Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson signed the nation's first school voucher bill into law. Pitched as social mobility tickets for minority students, Wisconsin vouchers allow children to attend private, and sometimes religious, schools on the taxpayers' dime.

But as shown by the murky history of the voucher movement, and by the way voucher programs have developed in Wisconsin and other states, racial equity had nothing to do with it. It was a scheme cooked up out of an ideological disdain for public schools and teachers' unions, and first used to actually preserve school segregation in the South.

Today, vouchers bills are on the move in multiple states and on Capitol Hill. GOP presidential hopefuls, who want to boost their free market bona fides for a 2016 run, have been outbidding themselves in touting vouchers as educational panaceas that will not only help minority children close education gaps, but cut corporate and property taxes in the process.

A Nationwide Voucher Program?

On April 15, Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced an amendment to an omnibus education bill that would have spelled the end to federal education aid as we know it.

Under the amendment to the Senate bill, which is a revamp of the No Child Left Behind Act, federal Title I dollars, intended to support public schools with a high proportion of low-income students, would instead follow individual students even if they choose to attend private schools.

This would have paved the way for a multi-billion-dollar nationwide voucher system, siphoning money from public school districts to private and possibly religious schools that—unlike their public counterpart—have no obligation to serve minority, at-risk or special-needs students. These schools are also free to ditch the science curriculum in favor of climate-denial and creationism.

A few months earlier, Congressman Luke Messer (R-IN) bused a bunch of kids to the Capitol to celebrate "National School Choice Week." Among the speakers were Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). Their enthusiasm, however, was somewhat dampened by the kids who—for all Messer's emceeing—seemed ill at ease with being displayed as placard-wearing pawns in a political game.

Precisely what kind of school choice Messer had in mind became clear when he introduced a voucher amendment to the House version of the bill. Both Messer and Paul chose to withdraw their respective amendments, but introducing them in the first place is a way of flexing their muscles. Vouchers are gaining traction and Messer, who chairs the Congressional School Choice Caucus, has vowed not to rest until "every kid in America has that kind of opportunity."

Secretive Group of Millionaires (ALEC) Still Wreaking Havoc On Workers — ALEC 'Give Workers Less' Legislation Pops Up in Multiple States

Cookie-Cutter ALEC Right-to-Work Bills Pop Across Country

By Jody Knauss and Jonas Persson
This week, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker signed an anti-union right-to-work (RTW) bill into law. RTW laws require unions to provide the same representation and workplace services to all workers in a workplace but make contributing to the cost of that representation optional. They lead to smaller, weaker unions and lower worker wages and benefits.

The Center for Media and Democracy detailed the fact that the Wisconsin bill was taken almost word for word from the American Legislative Exchange Council "model" bill. (See CMD's side-by-side here.) And we reported on the Koch and Bradley Foundation funding behind the panoply of usual suspects that flew into the state to testify on behalf of the bill, including "experts" from the National Right to Work Committee, the Mackinac Center and the Heritage Foundation with assists from ALEC "scholar" Richard Vedder and State Policy Network "stink tanks" like the Wisconsin Public Research Institute. And let's not forget the $1 million in TV ads from the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity group.

But the push for RTW continues in multiple states in a variety of forms. From a legally dubious executive order in Illinois to an equally suspect county-level strategy in Kentucky, ALEC's effort to disable unions as an organized voice for working families marches on.

New Hampshire: Working families won a round last week when two Republicans in the State Senate voted with all 10 Democrats against a RTW bill, resulting in a 12-12 tie which defeats the bill. Even so, two other RTW bills continue to move through the State House. H.B. 658 is taken straight from the ALEC playbook. (See side-by-side here and below.) Democratic Governor Maggie Hassan is a RTW opponent.


Missouri: Missouri has two identical RTW bills (H.B. 116 and H.B. 569) that borrow language from ALEC, sponsored by two ALEC legislators (Rep. Eric Burlison and Rep. Bill Lant respectively.) H.B. 116 bill passed the Missouri House on February 12, the first time a RTW bill has ever been approved in a chamber of the state’s legislature. Despite an overwhelming Republican House majority, 23 Republicans voted against the bill. The legislation now moves on to the State Senate, where Republicans hold a 25-9 majority.

Last night there was an "informational" hearing in the Senate on S.B 127 by ALEC legislator Senator Dan Brown, with key portions taken verbatim from ALEC. (See the side-by-side here.) If the bill also passes the Senate, Governor Jay Nixon has vowed to veto it. On the evidence thus far, and despite a promise from Grover Norquist, Republicans do not have the votes to overturn a veto.

New Mexico: The Republican-controlled New Mexico State House passed a combined public- and private sector RTW bill (H.B. 75) on February 25. ALEC has versions of both these bills and bill author Rep. Dennis Roch is an ALEC member. In an apparent effort to make the legislation more palatable, the measure also includes a 50-cent increase in the state’s minimum wage, to $8.00 per hour. The bill now moves on to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where a hearing was held Sunday and a vote is expected this week. Senate Democrats claim to have the votes to stop it. Republican Governor Susana Martinez is a supporter.

Late last night, the Senate's Public Affairs Committee voted to table the legislation for the session.

West Virginia: Republicans took control of both houses of the state’s legislature in 2014 and ALEC member Rep. John Overington promptly introduced an ALEC RTW bill H.B.2643 (see side-by-side here). However, Majority Leader Mitch Carmichael said recently that, with the session due to end March 14 and the bill still in committee, RTW was dead for the 2015 session. Just to make sure, 6,000 union supporters rallied at the State Capitol on Saturday.

Kentucky: Democrats in both the State House and governor’s office have stymied the corporate push for RTW at the state level in Kentucky. An ALEC RTW bill (S.B. 1) authored by ALEC member and Senate President Robert Stivers, passed in the Republican-controlled Senate but did not make it out of committee in the House. (See side-by-side here.)

The bigger action in Kentucky is at the local level. Since mid-December, ten counties in Kentucky have passed local RTW ordinances, and others are exploring the possibility. Challenging a half-century of settled labor law, the Heritage Foundation and the new ALEC offshoot, the American City and County Exchange (ACCE), are promoting the idea that localities also have authority under National Labor Relations Act to enact RTW. Kentucky’s Attorney General does not share that interpretation and a coalition of Kentucky unions has filed in federal court to overturn the ordinances. This ALEC/ACCE strategy was featured on the front page of the New York Times.

Illinois: Billionaire Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner has issued an executive order implementing RTW for Illinois public sector workers and preemptively filed suit in federal court trying to get the current law declared unconstitutional. He has also pushed for enabling legislation to allow Illinois localities to pass Kentucky-style local RTW ordinances. An ALEC RTW bill (H.B. 4139) has been introduced in Illinois, but may not pass in the Democratic-controlled legislature. (See the side-by-side here.)

Michigan: Republican State Rep. Gary Glenn, a founding member of the Michigan Freedom to Work Coalition, has decided Michigan's 2012 RTW law did not go far enough. Glenn has introduced a bill (H.B. 4312) to extend RTW to the police, fire and public safety unions exempted from the 2012 law, and another (H.B. 4311) that would do away with exclusive representation in the public sector by banning public sector unions from representing non-members.

Other states: A public-sector RTW bill died in committee in the Montana House on February 27. An ALEC-modeled RTW bill died in committee in the Colorado House on Feb. 4.

See CMD's side-by side comparisons between ALEC's Right to Work Act and bills introduced in: New Hampshire, Missouri, West Virginia, Kentucky, Illinois and Colorado.

AttachmentSize
il_rtw_alec_.pdf89.1 KB
ky_rtw_alec_.pdf86.86 KB
wv_rtw_alec_.pdf90 KB
nh_rtw_alec.pdf90.22 KB
co_rtw_alec_.pdf90.29 KB
mo_rtw_alec_.pdf91.12 KB

______________
Jody Knauss is Senior Analyst and Writer at CMD. He has two decades of business, labor, and economic policy experience.



Reprinted with permission from PRWatch.




How The Republicans Stole The 2014 Elections: Re-Drew Voting Districts To Overwhelmingly Favor the GOP — Massive Gerrymandering

The two charts indicate that while the percentage of votes cast for Republicans was only slightly than  the percentage of votes cast for Democrats (top graph), the number of seats won by Republicans was  much higher. (Results from Pennsylvania's 2014 Midterms)
The two charts indicate that while the percentage of votes cast for Republicans was only slightly than  the percentage of votes cast for Democrats (top graph), the number of seats won by Republicans was  much higher. (Results from Pennsylvania's 2014 Midterms)
The two charts indicate that while the percentage of votes cast for
Republicans was only slightly more than the percentage of votes cast
for Democrats (top graph), the number of seats won by Republicans
was much higher. (Results from Pennsylvania's 2014 Midterms)

By Lee Fang
In the midterm elections, Republicans appear to have won their largest House majority since the Hoover administration. Republicans won on the weakness of Democratic candidates, a poor resource allocation strategy by Democratic party leaders, particularly DCCC chair Steve Israel, and an election narrative that did little to inspire base Democratic voters. That being said, in many ways, the game was rigged from the start. The GOP benefitted from the most egregious gerrymandering in American history.

As Rolling Stone reported, GOP donors plowed cash into state legislative efforts in 2010 for the very purpose of redrawing congressional lines. In the following year, as the Tea Party wave brought hundreds of Republicans into office, newly empowered Republican governors and state legislatures carved congressional districts for maximum partisan advantage. Democrats attempted this too, but only in two states: Maryland and Illinois. For the GOP however, strictly partisan gerrymandering prevailed in Ohio, Pennsylvania Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Texas, Louisiana, Arizona, Tennessee and beyond.

Here’s an example from the election last night. In Pennsylvania, one state in which the GOP drew the congressional districts in a brazenly partisan way, Democratic candidates collected 44 percent of the vote, yet Democratic candidates won only 5 House seats out of 18. In other words, Democrats secured only 27 percent of Pennsylvania’s congressional seats despite winning nearly half of the votes.

Read More

Political Armageddon Looms for Democrats: The Consequences Of An All-Too-Likely Republican Senate





By Seth D. Michaels
When 2015 rolls around, will an all-Republican-controlled 114th Congress come with it? It pains me to say it, but I wouldn’t want to bet much against it. A Republican takeover of the Senate is quite likely, and the outcome would be pretty dreadful.


[...]

So you don’t need to speculate about what their legislative priorities would look like. We’ve seen their votes.

Those votes include the Paul Ryan budget with its huge cuts to safety-net programs and fundamental changes to Medicare. It includes a bevy of limits on access to abortion and birth control, harsh and punitive measures aimed at immigrants and lower-income people who get public assistance, and repeated attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act in its entirety. And it includes a whole lot of ideological grandstanding, including, most recently, the attempt to sue the President. Thanks to the need to negotiate with a Democratic Senate, the House Republicans’ worst impulses are constrained, at the moment.

A case study for what bigger Republican legislative majorities are likely to do comes out of North Carolina, where Thom Tillis, the Speaker of the state House, is in a very close race against Sen. Kay Hagan. There, unified Republican control resulted in policies that massively redistribute power from poorer to richer, including unemployment insurance cuts, restrictions on voting rights, and a shift in the tax burden from income to sales taxes. Other Republican state legislatures, including Michigan, Wisconsin, and Kansas, have used the power they emerged with after 2010 to pursue ideological pet projects.

John Boehner and Kevin McCarthy are the ostensible leaders of the House Republicans. The agenda for the caucus, though, is set by its rightmost members. This bloc has frequently thrown D.C. into chaos, scuttling Boehner’s efforts at deal-making and pulling policy to the right. A Republican Senate majority would face similar pressures. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas is working to build himself into the leader of the hard Republican right in Washington, driving the October 2013 shutdown and helping organize resistance to Boehner’s proposed border bill. What would he attempt to do as part of a Senate majority?

GOP control of the House has meant a weaker economy. Standoffs over government funding and the debt ceiling are routine. The 2011 debt-ceiling fight led to completely unnecessary sequestration cuts. We’ve seen chaos in federal contracts and furloughs for federal employees. “Cut and grow” economics has been a sick joke. Food stamps have been cut and unemployment insurance extensions have lapsed. Time and time again, Republicans have thrown anchors to the recovery.

The next debt ceiling increase is expected to be necessary on March 15, 2015. Mitch McConnell has already committed thoroughly to the lie that raising the debt ceiling is a favor to Obama that requires concessions on Obama’s part. What will be the ransom demands next time?

Read More

Solar Energy Users Under Attack: Secretive Group of Right-Wing Millionaires (ALEC) Attacks Solar Users With Funds From Utility Trade Group

Solar Energy installation
By Nick Surgey
As the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) prepares to meet in Dallas this week, the Center for Media and Democracy has uncovered new evidence that Edison Electric Institute (EEI) -- the trade association for the U.S. utility industry -- has been funding ALEC's legislative assault on solar energy.

Although ALEC recently proclaimed that it was being falsely portrayed as "anti-clean energy," these latest revelations confirm that ALEC continues to pursue a polluters' wish list, despite its PR pronouncements.

"Solar Is Dumb," says ALEC Legislator

As documented by Suzanne Goldenberg and Ed Pilkington in The Guardian late last year, ALEC has been peddling legislation designed to increase costs for Americans who have invested in solar panels for their homes and businesses, which ALEC's rep attempted to label as “freeriders.” Through ALEC's bill and campaign, the group has been pushing changes to state laws that would increase costs for homeowners with solar who sell excess energy back to the grid, known as “net metering.”

The CMD documents underscore what Gabe Elsner of the Energy & Policy Institute has uncovered, which is that EEI is a prime player in ALEC -- footing the bill and calling the shots on the anti-renewable agenda. This shows that some powerful utilities -- which include public and private entities -- are backing ALEC's extreme agenda, not just global coal and oil corporations.

At the ALEC “Spring Task Force Summit,” held in Kansas City, Missouri, in May, legislators and lobbyists sat down together to eat lunch and hear about the threat of solar.

As reported previously by Wisconsin state Rep. Chris Taylor -- a Democrat who has written about ALEC's extreme agenda -- during the sponsored ALEC lunch, “legislators from Utah and Oklahoma bragged about slowing the development of solar energy in their states.” She noted that Minnesota state Rep. Pat Garofalo, a Republican, actually told the room “solar is dumb.”

Now it is known that, according to emails recently obtained by CMD through open records requests, the legislators’ lunch for the anti-solar agenda was sponsored by EEI.

ALEC offers a range of sponsorship options for its corporate clients and funders. An ALEC document obtained by CMD, lists the 2013 price for a policy workshop during an ALEC conference at $25,000 - $40,000. No price was listed for a session at which participants would also receive lunch, although presumably a lunch workshop's cost could be even higher. It is a small price to pay, however, to capture an audience of legislators from across the country along with food and drink.

According to Elsner, who works for a Washington D.C.-based think tank that conducts research on fossil fuel industry lobbyists, EEI also helped develop the ALEC model legislation on net metering.

Captured on video by Elsner, Rick Tempchin -- Executive Director, Retail Energy Services, at the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) -- confirmed that they worked with ALEC to develop the “model” legislation, which was formally adopted by ALEC in January 2014.

"EEI and its member companies join ALEC to advance an agenda that protects the utility industry’s profits at the expense of ratepayers,” Elsner told CMD. “That’s why EEI funds ALEC. The growth of cheap clean energy is a threat to the utility industry’s bottom line, and ALEC is a useful tool to lobby state legislators for special interests trying to squash the clean energy market.”

EEI ignored repeated requests for comment.

Solar Success Threatens Big Polluters

Solar Energy installation
The U.S. solar industry is booming, with a 60% increase in-home solar installations in 2013, resulting in reductions in carbon pollution, and a large number of well-paying solar-installation jobs.

Business Insider recently reported there are now more people employed in the solar sector in the U.S. than there are coal miners.

This growing solar market represents a threat to the long-held monopoly on electricity production held by utilities. EEI represents companies that generate seventy percent of the electricity in the United States, with thirty-seven percent of the total generated from burning coal and thirty percent from "natural gas," which is predominantly methane -- a "potent" carbon in terms of its effect on warming temperatures.

In addition to its anti-solar work to help charge solar customers more, ALEC has also been attempting to weaken or fully repeal so-called “Renewable Portfolio Standards” – which are state laws that require utilities to provide a certain percentage of electricity from renewable sources at some set point in the future. ALEC's bill adopts the Koch "freedom" frame for public policy by calling this legislative agenda the “Electricity Freedom Act,” although it would greatly undermine state efforts to free Americans from over-dependence on fossil fuels that are contributing to the climate and ocean changes underway.

ALEC's task force on this issue was previously led by staffer Todd Wynn, who is now at EEI and who echoed the Charles Koch playbook in claiming that state efforts to decrease reliance on fossil fuels and increase the use of cleaner energy was supposedly a "crony capitalist" policy.

The language for the Electricity Freedom Act was brought to ALEC by the Heartland Institute, an Illinois-based operation that itself receives funding from the fossil fuel industry, and is probably best known for its extremism in comparing people who believe in climate change to the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski.

One of Heartland's key spokespeople peddling its effort to derail initiatives to address climate change, James Taylor, was recently discredited in the landmark Showtime series "Years of Living Dangerously." Taylor claimed to interviewer America Ferrera that he was a scientist because he had taken some science classes in college. As Connor Gibson of Greenpeace noted, by the Heartland definition almost everyone is a scientist. (CMD's research and its Executive Director, Lisa Graves, was featured in the film along with the investigations of Brendan DeMelle of DeSmog blog.)

On the Agenda in Dallas: “How to Think and Talk About Climate and Energy Issues”

ALEC is also working to derail proposed EPA rules to limit carbon pollution from coal plants.

Documents obtained by CMD, and first reported by Suzanne Goldenberg of The Guardian in May, show that ALEC has conducted monthly conference calls with lobbyists and legislators, encouraging lawmakers to activate their state’s Attorney General to litigate the proposed standards.

It has also been promoting a number of bills over the past 12 months on this subject, and ALEC will consider a new proposed bill at its Dallas conference this week titled “Resolution Concerning EPA’s Proposed Guidelines for Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants" and ALEC is providing political messaging to its legislative members in a new session called “How to Think and Talk About Climate and Energy Issues.”

In addition to financial support from EEI, ALEC also receives funding from the coal giant Peabody Energy, ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Koch Industries and other fossil fuel companies. The corporate co-chair of ALEC’s Energy, Environment and Agriculture task force, which helps set the agenda for the task force, is Paul Loeffelman, a lobbyist with American Electric Power (AEP) which is a member of EEI. AEP generates sixty percent of its electricity from burning coal.

The co-leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Raul Grijalva, has called on the Interior Department to investigate the influence of AEP and other corporations on these policies.

"No Comment"

CMD asked ALEC to comment on what EEI received in return for its cash, but ALEC’s Senior Director, Communications and Public Affairs, Wilhelm Meierling refused to answer questions about EEI’s funding, beyond confirming that they are a member.

In a statement, Meierling told CMD: “All work conducted at ALEC is led by out (sic) public sector members and any resulting resolutions are approved by the board of directors, comprised solely of legislators.”

Stung by criticism that ALEC resembled a "pay to play" operation, ALEC has attempted to re-brand itself as a "legislator-driven organization,” publicly announcing a new rule that only legislators can propose ALEC “model” bills. However, corporate lobbyists and politicians vote as equals on those bills at ALEC task forces where, as Dana Milbank colorfully noted, the press is barred despite ALEC's PR claims. Additionally, CMD subsequently uncovered documents showing how lobbyists distribute bills to ALEC legislators in advance and provide a detailed script so legislators could advocate the legislation at ALEC as if it were their own ideas.

Although ALEC has removed its "Top 10 Myths About Global Warming" from its site as part of its public relations remake, ALEC's prior sessions have included climate change denialist propaganda such as "Warming up to Climate Change," as reported by then-Wisconsin state Rep. Mark Pocan, who now serves in Congress. He observed that session and wrote for The Progressive how ALEC lawmakers lapped up claims that increased carbon dioxide is good for you.

Just last year, ALEC featured a weather personality who claimed that the planet was getting colder, despite the severe melting of ice in polar regions, where fossil fuel companies are expanding their investments.

It remains to be seen what messages ALEC politicians will be told they should echo at this year's conference.

____________________
Lisa Graves, the President of The Progressive/CMD, contributed research to this article.



Reprinted with permission from PRWatch.

After Subpoenas in Criminal Probe of Right-Wing Wisconsin Governor — Wisconsin GOP Tries to Quietly Legalize the Activities Under Investigation

"Scott Walker - Governor Gollum"
"Scott Walker - Governor Gollum" (Illustration by DonkeyHotey)

By Brendan Fischer
New documents indicate that just weeks after the first subpoenas were issued in Wisconsin's "John Doe" criminal campaign finance probe in October 2013, senate Republicans had begun working to change state law to legalize the activities under investigation.

Legislative Republicans surprised many in the state in March of 2014 when they tried to rush Senate Bill 654 through the legislature to explicitly carve-out an exception to the state's campaign finance statutes for so-called "issue ads," those thinly-veiled election messages that stop short of telling viewers to vote for or against a candidate.

The John Doe investigation was never mentioned during testimony on SB 654, even among the bill's opponents.

At the time, the most obvious implication of SB 654 was less disclosure of funds spent to influence state elections. Many were also alarmed at how Republicans tried to fast-track the bill through the legislature in the final days of the legislative session, with minimal opportunity for public input.

"Forget, for a moment, the troubling provisions in these bills," the Wisconsin State Journal editorialized on March 6. "What's most offensive is their late unveiling and speedy hearings that are designed to dodge public scrutiny."

Now, the Center for Media and Democracy's review of the SB 654 drafting files shows that senate elections committee chair Sen. Mary Lazich (R) had begun working on the bill five months earlier, in October 2013 -- just weeks after secret John Doe subpoenas were issued to Wisconsin Club for Growth, the Walker campaign, and other groups.

The timing provides further evidence that the legislation was designed to have an impact on the conduct under investigation in the John Doe. The Center for Media and Democracy identified this possibility when the bill was being debated, but it was never discussed when the legislation was being fast tracked and debated in March.

Bill Drafted Two Weeks after John Doe Subpoenas

On October 3, 2013, prosecutors secretly served Wisconsin Club for Growth director Eric O'Keefe with a subpoena in the John Doe investigation, and executed search warrants on the homes of Walker's top campaign advisor R.J. Johnson (who also was the Club's chief strategist) and his associate Deborah Jordahl.

Two weeks after the secret subpoenas were issued, drafting records show that an aide to Sen. Lazich, Zach Bemis, contacted the Legislative Reference Bureau and requested a bill that would rewrite state law, reverse court of appeals precedent, and exempt "issue ads" from Wisconsin campaign finance statutes.

At the time, the John Doe was operating under strict secrecy orders. But recently-unsealed documents show that the bipartisan group of John Doe prosecutors alleged that the Walker campaign and legislative leaders were part of a "criminal scheme" to violate Wisconsin's disclosure and donation laws during the 2011 and 2012 recall elections, based on evidence of coordination with nonprofit groups such as Wisconsin Club for Growth. The Club spent at least $9.1 million on electoral issue ads during the recalls, and acted as a hub for funneling millions more to other politically-active groups.

By changing the law to put issue ads beyond the reach of Wisconsin's campaign finance statutes, Lazich's bill would have had the effect of legalizing the issue ad coordination under investigation. Lazich was the subject of a recall attempt in 2011.

The October 18 drafting request states that Lazich's office wanted the bill "today." The bill was quickly drawn up by the LRB, but Lazich would not introduce it for five months.

In the meantime, Wisconsin Club for Growth and the Walker campaign challenged the subpoenas in state court, and argued that the investigation should not move forward since Wisconsin law doesn't explicitly mention issue ads. Prosecutors argued that appellate courts had interpreted Wisconsin statutes to count "issue ads" coordinated with a candidate as contributions, which must comply with disclosure requirements and contribution limits. The Walker campaign may have committed a criminal violation, prosecutors alleged, by knowingly filing false campaign finance reports omitting millions of dollars of contributions.

In January, Judge Gregory Peterson sided with the Club's arguments and quashed subpoenas issued to Wisconsin Club for Growth, the Walker campaign, and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce. But two weeks later he stayed his own order and asked an appellate court to resolve the plausible legal interpretations in the dispute between prosecutors and the Walker campaign over the scope of Wisconsin law.

In February, while the state court appeal was pending, Wisconsin Club for Growth sued in federal court to stop the investigation, claiming it amounted to a violation of their purported free speech rights. (Their complaint also attacked the Center for Media and Democracy with false claims that were rebutted.)

In March, during the dwindling days of the legislative session, Senator Lazich introduced the bill her office had first drafted in October. It was introduced late on a Monday, scheduled for its only public hearing on Wednesday, and fast-tracked for passage with minimal public review.

Groups Implicated in John Doe Backed SB 654

The three groups that registered to lobby in favor of SB 654 have also been implicated in the John Doe investigation.

Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce backed SB 654, and its Vice President of Government Relations, Scott Manley, testified in support of the bill. According to recently-unsealed court documents, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce affiliate received a subpoena in the John Doe and prosecutors believe WMC was deeply involved in the alleged criminal coordination scheme. WMC's Senior Vice President James Buchen regularly participated in conference calls with Walker and others about the 2011 and 2012 recall elections. WMC also received nearly $3.4 million from Wisconsin Club for Growth, and according to prosecutors, "became a means used by WiCFG for placement of advertisements during the recall campaign supporting Governor Scott Walker and criticizing his opponents."

Wisconsin Family Action also lobbied in favor of the bill, and was effectively an arm of Wisconsin Club for Growth during the recall elections. It received 90 percent of its funding in 2011 from Citizens for a Strong America, which was 99.99% funded by Wisconsin Club for Growth and controlled by R.J. Johnson. It also received $253,000 from Citizens for a Strong America in 2012.

The powerful Wisconsin Realtors Association was the third group to support SB 654. The realtor's trade association is one of the biggest political spenders in the state, and gave at least $1 million to Wisconsin Club for Growth during the 2010-2011 fiscal year. The association's top lobbyist at the time, Jim Villa, is a longtime confidant of Governor Walker -- he was Walker's chief of staff during his time as a state legislator and during part of Walker's time as County Executive -- and was recently awarded a high-ranking job in the University of Wisconsin System.

Each of those testifying insisted that SB 654 only "codified" existing law. But they failed to mention how it would overturn the same Wisconsin Court of Appeals precedent that prosecutors were relying on in the John Doe investigation.

Ultimately SB 654 stalled in committee.

Jay Heck, Executive Director of Common Cause Wisconsin, testified against SB 654 in March 2014, but tells the Center for Media and Democracy that he thought it "inconceivable" at the time that Republicans would be seeking to change the law on coordination in the middle of a criminal investigation, and that the organizations pushing SB 654 were doing so while subject to subpoenas in a criminal case. Their connection to the John Doe was not public at the time the bill was being debated, and the investigation was never mentioned during their testimony.

But given the new evidence that Lazich's office called for the bill just weeks after the John Doe subpoenas were served, he now says "this is more than coincidental."

"I'm just in disbelief at how brazen this is," he said.

The John Doe remains halted but is currently under review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which reversed an order by Judge Rudolph Randa to destroy the evidence obtained in the criminal case. A state appellate court is also reviewing Judge Peterson's decision from January.


Reprinted with permission from PRWatch.

GOP Politicians Submit State Legislation Drafted by Group of Right-Wing Millionaires (ALEC) — Dingbat Plagiarizers Don't Even Bother to Fix the Typos

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon.
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon.
By Brendan Fischer
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon has vetoed a bill that included a drafting error copied-and-pasted from American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) model legislation, and criticized ALEC members for having "simply parroted ... the ALEC model act without alteration."

"While some may believe that such an error is 'close enough' for a model act, it cannot be allowed to become the law of this State," Nixon, a Democrat, wrote in his veto message. "Particularly in an area of the law that is the subject of ongoing litigation, a glaring defect such as this cannot be ignored."

Missouri Senate Bill 508, sponsored by ALEC member Sen. Mike Parsons, was modeled after the ALEC Navigator Background Check Act, and aimed to create new hurdles for health care “navigators” who enroll Missourians in healthcare plans under the Affordable Care Act. The bill was voted on by ALEC's corporate and politician members at ALEC's December 2013 meeting, and became official ALEC policy in January 2014.

The original ALEC model legislation would have required a navigator to submit fingerprints to the state highway patrol for a background check, and referenced the federal Public Law 92-554 -- but the correct reference is to Public Law 92-544, which deals with federal criminal records. The error in the ALEC model bill was copied-and-pasted verbatim into the Missouri legislation.

"Some state legislatures that have considered similar navigator-related legislation derived from ALEC model legislation have taken the opportunity to fix the incorrect reference from the ALEC model before enacting it," such as Arizona, Nixon wrote in his veto message. "However, like the Missouri General Assembly, other state legislatures considering such legislation have simply parroted the incorrect reference from the ALEC model act without alteration," noting that politicians in neighboring Kansas made the same mistake.

This isn’t the first time that ALEC politicians have pushed ALEC legislation without paying much attention. Two years ago in Florida, Florida state Rep. Rachel Burgin (R) forgot to remove ALEC’s mission statement from a bill she introduced.

The Navigator Background Check Act was one of several ALEC model bills introduced in the Missouri legislature in 2014, according to a list compiled by Progress Missouri. Between 47 and 57 Missouri politicians are ALEC members, according to a report from Progress Missouri, Center for Media and Democracy, Common Cause, and Missouri Jobs with Justice Voter Action.

ALEC held its most recent meeting in Kansas City, Missouri in May.



Reprinted with permission from PRWatch.

Wall Street Wants to Make It Illegal for You to See What It's Doing With Public Money — And North Carolina Wants to Help Them

Photo by Cory Doctorow.
Photo by Cory Doctorow.
By David Sirota
In the last few months, there has been increasing pressure on public officials to stop hiding the basic terms of the investment agreements being cemented between governments and Wall Street’s “alternative investment” industry.

That pressure has been intensified, in part, by two sets of recent leaks showing how these alternative investment companies (private equity, hedge funds, venture capital, etc.) are using the secret deals to make hundreds of millions of dollars off taxpayers. It is also in response to the Securities and Exchange Commission recently declaring that many of the stealth schemes may be illegal.

And yet, as the demands for transparency grow louder, a potentially precedent-setting push for even more secrecy is emerging. Pando has learned that legislators in North Carolina — whose $86 billion public pension fund is the 7th largest in America – are proposing to statutorily bar the public from seeing details of the state’s Wall Street transactions for at least a decade. That time frame is significant: according to experts, it would conceal the terms of the investment agreements for longer than the statute of limitations of various securities laws.

In other words, the legislation – which could serve as a model in state legislatures everywhere – would bar the disclosure of the state’s financial transactions until many existing securities laws against financial fraud become unenforceable.

A growing scandal in North Carolina

If the North Carolina Retirement System and its sole trustee, Treasurer Janet Cowell (D), seem familiar to tech readers, that is because the NC system is one of the lead plaintiffs in the class action suit surrounding Facebook’s initial public offering. Additionally, as part of her career in the financial sector, Cowell was the marketing director for the tech-focused VC firm, SJF Ventures.

Like other states, North Carolina has been redacting and/or refusing to release the contractual terms of its pension fund’s massive Wall Street investments, even though the contracts involve public money and a public agency. In recent months, that practice exploded into a full-fledged political scandal when the State Employees Association of North Carolina released a 147-page report from former SEC investigator Ted Siedle.

The report asserted that under Cowell, up to $30 billion of state money is now being managed by high-risk, high-fee Wall Street firms, and that the state could soon be paying $1 billion a year in fees to those firms. The report also noted that the investment strategy “has underperformed the average public plan by $6.8 billion” and it alleged that Cowell has misled the public about how where exactly she is investing taxpayer dollars. The union has called for a federal investigation, while Cowell has publicly denied the allegations.

Read More

Who Is Behind the National Right to Work Committee and its Anti-Union Crusade?: The Koch Brothers and the John Birch Society


The fewer the number of people unionized, the more corporate executives feel free to steal all the profits and prosperity for themselves.


The fewer people in unions, the less workers share in company prosperity.


By Jay Riestenberg and Mary Bottari
As the U.S. Supreme Court's 2014 session comes to a close, one of the major cases left for a decision is Harris vs. Quinn,which could effect millions of public sector workers in the United States.

The case originates in Illinois, where home health care workers have been successfully organized by public sector unions. Now, a small group of these workers, represented by lawyers from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, have sued and their lawyers contend that the agency fees, or the fair share dues that even non-union members of a bargaining unit are required to pay to unions that bargain for higher wages on their behalf, violate the First Amendment. Agency fees are barred in so-called "right to work" states, which have much less unionization and lower wages and benefits.

Joel Rogers, a professor of law and sociology at the University of Wisconsin, calls it "the most important labor law case the court has considered in decades." This is because when the Supreme Court decided to take on the case, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation dramatically expanded the scope of the case beyond the home health care workers to include all public sector workers, from teachers and firefighters to sanitation workers to librarians. If the court follows National Right to Work's lead, every state in the country would essentially turn into an anti-union "right to work" state, which would be a significant blow to public sector unions' collective bargaining efforts and also complicate thousands of existing contracts between organized workers and municipalities, cities, counties, and states across the country.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation (NRTWLDF) is the 501(c)(3) arm of the National Right to Work Committee (NRTWC), a 501(c)(4) organization. Additionally, the National Institute for Labor Relations Research is an affiliated anti-union research shop. Founded nearly 60 years ago, the NRTWC has been a national leader in the effort to destroy public and private sector unions. The groups have increased their funding and staffing in recent years. In 2012, the three groups combined reported over $25 million in revenue, making them a powerful instrument of the corporate and ideological interests that want to keep wages low and silence the voice of organized labor in the political arena.

NRTWC's success and the demise of unions in the United States has directly contributed to the erosion of high-paying middle class jobs and to growing inequality, as this chart from the Economic Policy Institute graphically illustrates.

National Right to Work's Deep Connections to the Koch Brothers and the John Birch Society

The NRTWC has deep connections within the national right-wing network led by the Koch brothers. Reed Larson, who led the NRTW groups for over three decades, hails from Wichita, Kansas, the hometown of Charles and David Koch. Larson became an early leader of the radical right-wing John Birch Society in Kansas, which Fred Koch (the father of Charles and David) helped found. Several other founders and early leaders of the NRTWC were members and leaders of the John Birch Society, specifically the Wichita chapter of which Fred Koch was an active member.

The groups remain tied to the Kochs. In 2012, the Kochs' Freedom Partners group funneled $1 million to the National Right to Work Committee, while the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation gave a $15,000 grant to the NRTWLDF, which has also received significant funding from the Koch-connected DonorsTrust and Donors Capital Fund. Today, at least three former Koch associates work as attorneys for the NRTWLDF.

In June 2010, Mark Mix, the current head of the NRTW groups, attended the Kochs' exclusive Aspen strategy meeting to give a presentation on how to mobilize conservatives for the 2010 election, along with representatives from Koch-backed groups such as the Center to Protect Patient Rights (now called American Encore) and Americans for Prosperity.

In addition to the Koch brothers, the NRTWLDF has received significant funding from many big name conservative donors, including the Walton Family Foundation (of Walmart), the Coors family's Castle Rock Foundation, Wisconsin's Bradley Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Searle Freedom Trust.

A $33 Million Anti-Worker Lobby Shop with Ties to ALEC, SPN, and More

In order to push their extreme agenda, the NRTWC has launched a massive lobbying effort at both the state and federal level. In the U.S. Congress alone, the NRTWC has spent over $33 million on lobbying between 1999 and 2013. NRTWC has lobbied Congress to pass a national "Right to Work Act," which is sponsored by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY). Paul has lent his name to several NRTWC advocacy and fundraising letters and received over $27,000 in campaign contributions from the NRTWC’s federal political action committee. The NRTWC also strongly opposed the Employee Free Choice Act, which would have made it easier for workers to organize, while supported legislation that would weaken the regulatory authority of the National Labor Relations Board over employers.

The NRTWC also does extensive lobbying on the state level. In 2012, lobbyists registered with the NRTWC were on the ground in Indiana and Michigan when both states passed anti-union "right to work" bills and are big supporters of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and his efforts to crush public sector unions. The NRTWC was an exhibitor at the 2011 annual conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the corporate bill mill exposed by CMD in 2011. ALEC's "Right to Work Act," which has been in the ALEC library since at least 1980, is one of its most commonly used "model" bills. When Republicans took trifecta control of 26 state houses in November of 2010, it was a top agenda item at the December 2010 ALEC meeting. According to a 2010 email from ALEC to Wisconsin legislators that CMD obtained, ALEC referred to its "Right to Work Act" as a "solution… for your state's most pressing issues." Currently 24 states are so-called "right to work" states. In 2013, 15 states introduced legislation based on ALEC's "Right to Work Act."

The NRTWLDF is also an associate member of the State Policy Network (SPN), an $84 million dollar network of 64 state-based "think tanks." The State Policy Network's affiliate in Michigan, the Mackinac Center, was one of the major supporters behind "right to work" when the legislature passed the bill in 2012. Through its board, staff, and other activities, the NRTW groups also have close connections to Americans for Prosperity, the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union, and the Republican National Committee.

Crossing the Line: Whistleblower Alleges New Election Law Violations

From the beginning, the NRTWC had a focus on influencing U.S. elections. The NRTWC has spent millions in dark money electoral ads, including $7 million during the 2012 election. Although a leading group on the right, the NRTWC has also attacked Republicans such as John Boehner and Bob Dole for not adhering to their extreme policy agenda.

The NRTWC's long history of pushing the line in campaign finance and electoral activity as a nonprofit led to an FEC case against it at the U.S. Supreme Court in 1982, in which the court ruled against the NRTWC for illegally raising money for electoral activities. The NRTWC continued to engage in controversial campaign-related activities, and evidence suggests that the National Right to Work Committee spent $100,000 on private detectives in 1984 to infiltrate the AFL-CIO, NEA, and Walter Mondale's presidential campaign. By the time that case was brought to court, the statute of limitations had expired.

Today, the NRTWC continues to generate controversy for engaging in campaign related activities. In January 2014, the Center for Responsive Politics detailed whistleblower allegations that the NRTWC was running "a massive off-the-books mass mailing operation" attempting to influence the 2010 election in Iowa and possibly other states. The NRTWC did not disclose that it was participating in political activity that year to the IRS. The whistleblower also alleged that the NRTWC was coordinating its activities with candidates' campaigns during the election. Former IRS official Marcus Owens commented to the news outlet that "people have gone to jail for precisely the facts that you are describing." At the center of the controversy was then-NRTWC Vice President Doug Stafford, who is the former chief of staff for U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY).
NRTWC Lawyers Push Their Agenda through the Courts

The legal arm of NRTWC was launched in 1968 to take the anti-worker agenda to the courts. With the Harris v. Quinn case, the NRTWLDF is seeking to re-litigate the Abood vs. Detroit Board of Education Supreme Court case it lost in 1977, which upheld the constitutionality of fair share dues. Over the years, the NRTWLDF has done little to improve wages, benefits, health or safety protections for American workers, but has tried scores of cases against unions and organized labor revealing its political agenda. With a large team of lawyers and millions in funding from national right-wing sources, the NRTWLDF is currently trying cases in Arkansas, Missouri, California, Michigan, Colorado, and Ohio.

NRTWLDF's also recently filed suit to block workers in the Volkswagen Chattanooga plant from voting for union representation and to prevent Volkswagen from voluntarily consenting to any future organizing drives.

Professor Rogers and other labor experts contend that the NRTWC's success in the U.S. Supreme Court "would be a disaster for labor, particularly for the public sector unions that traditionally rely more heavily on agency shop agreements." As Rogers points out, it is technically possible to form a union in a "right to work" state, but when union members are free to stop paying their dues, the union becomes a weak and ineffective organization. The results for American workers are clear. Research shows that "right to work" states have lower wages, less health care and more poverty.



Reprinted with permission from PRWatch.


National Network of Stink Tanks: Comcast and Time Warner Cable Finance Right-Wing Propaganda Mills Via ALEC


"ALEC CROW - 21st Century Disenfranchisement" (Illustration by DonkeyHotey)
"ALEC CROW - 21st Century Disenfranchisement"
(Illustration by DonkeyHotey)
By Jay Riestenberg
As Comcast moves forward with its plan to take over Time Warner Cable, their legislative agenda is facing greater scrutiny. As CMD has documented, both Comcast and Time Warner Cable are funders of ALEC, a corporate bill-mill where corporations and state lawmakers vote behind closed doors on bills that benefit the corporations' bottom line, often at resort meetings where legislators are wined and dined at corporate expense.

Comcast and Time Warner Cable also financially underwrite a large network of state-based "think tanks" that work to push ALEC's corporate agenda into law.

As detailed in CMD's November 2013 report, "Exposed: The State Policy Network -- The Powerful Right-wing Network Helping To Hijack State Politics and Government," the State Policy Network is a network of 64 right-wing "think tanks" -- which CMD dubbed "stink tanks" -- that was founded in part by ALEC. These in-state special interest groups push largely the same national corporate-backed agenda of ALEC in state legislatures.


CMD has uncovered that a number of ALEC's funders are also funding SPN and its network of think tanks -- including Comcast, Time Warner Cable, AT&T, Microsoft, Verizon, and Facebook. Other SPN funders include large corporations and right-wing CEO families like the Koch brothers' family fortune, the Bradley Foundation, and the Walton family.

The Washington Policy Center Leads SPN's Efforts to Support Big Telecom

Perhaps more than any other SPN affiliate, the Washington Policy Center (WPC) has been the leading the stink tank network on telecom issues. WPC is ALEC's state chair in Washington and has had a seat on ALEC's Communications and Technology Task Force along side Comcast, AT&T, Facebook, Yahoo, and Yelp.

A corporate representative of Microsoft currently sits on WPC's board of directors. Throughout its history WPC has published posts and reports that specifically favor Microsoft, including on a 2004 European Union against Microsoft and a 2001 U.S. federal case alleging Microsoft was an illegal monopoly.

WPC has launched a "Technology & Telecom Project," where it publishes reports that support lowering taxes on telecoms corporations and oppose the FCC's regulations of the telecom industry. In September 2012, WPC President Dann Mead Smith and John Stephenson, director of ALEC's Communications and Technology Task Force, teamed up to write an op-ed in The Seattle Times claiming that FCC regulations were stopping "rural Washington's farmers, students, and small business owners" from receiving broadband access.

The Washington Policy Center has also led SPN's Tech/Telecom Policy Exchange, a monthly online publication providing updates on telecom policy from SPN and the stink tank network. The materials in the "exchange" often include articles and blog posts written by SPN affiliates and aligned organizations calling for the deregulation of the telecom industry, advocating against municipal broadband, and pushing for tax cuts that would benefit telecom and tech corporations.

Their August 2013's exchange included information pointed against FCC regulations and another group of posts focused on "keeping the internet free of taxes," despite the budget difficulties many states face and how many brick and mortar small businesses have been crushed by online merchants like Amazon that are not required to impose state sales taxes in general.November/December 2013's exchange reveals that WPC leads monthly group conference calls on the issue, and again includes posts against FCC regulations on telecom corporations.

Just as lobbyists for corporations like Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, and AT&T vote behind closed doors with lawmakers on "model bills" at ALEC, corporate executives from Comcast and Time Warner Cable recently presented at a closed-door session at the State Policy Network's September 2013 conference in Oklahoma City. The session, titled Technology: A Freedom Frontier, focused on limiting democratic regulation of the telecommunications industry.

The panel was moderated by WPC President Dann Mead Smith and speakers included Susan Patten (VP of Government Affairs at Time Warner Cable), Mike Rose (Senior Director of External Affairs at Comcast), Matt Tooley (Senior Director of Broadband Technology at the National Cable and Telecommunications Association), and John Stephenson (ALEC's Communications and Technology Task Force Director). Additionally, according to SPN's conference website, representatives from the Kochs' Americans for Prosperity, the Franklin Center for Government Accountability, and several other SPN affiliates were in that session.

Other Stink Tanks Get in on the Action

WPC is not the only SPN stink tank active on telecom issues. Over the years, several SPN affiliates have pushed policies that would benefit the network's big telecom corporate funders, including:

  • Colorado's Independent Institute strongly opposed Colorado's Telecommunications Modernization Act in 2012, which would eliminate subsidies to telecom corporations, expand rural broadband service,and phase out phone fees. Not surprisingly, ALEC member CenturyLink opposed the bill.
  • Missouri's Show-Me Institute has called for regulatory reform to allow statewide franchises for cable companies.
  • The Georgia Public Policy Foundation has supported rolling back several regulations on telecom corporations including eliminating utility commission jurisdiction over consumer issues and filing requirements that helps keep prices and costs fair for consumers. GPPF has also called for removing sales taxes on telecom corporations' investments.
  • North Carolina's John Locke Foundation has consistently called for removing taxes on telecom corporations, claiming it would lead to lower costs.
  • Maryland's Free State Foundation, an associate member of SPN, receives "nearly all of its funding from telecommunications companies and trade groups," including AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon, according to a report by Communications Daily. The group focuses on telecommunications issues, and regularly calls for the deregulation of FCC and lowering taxes on telecom corporations.
Total Scope of Telecom Funding Remains Unknown

It is unclear how much big telecom corporations have funneled into the stink tanks network. Based off a document of SPN's 2010 funders CMD has uncovered, AT&T contributed between $25,000 to $99,000 to SPN in 2010, while Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon all contributed between $5,000 and $25,000 each in that year. Last year both Comcast and Time Warner Cable were sponsors of SPN's September 2013 conference in Oklahoma City.

Although SPN and its affiliated think tanks are not required to disclose their donors, a list of 2010 corporate and individual contributors of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, one of SPN's Texas affiliates and one of the largest SPN stink tanks in the country, provides insight into the big telecom funding behind the stink tanks network. In 2010 alone, that Texas stink tank received funding from AT&T, Verizon, and Time Warner Cable totaling at least $133,950.


Reprinted with permission from PRWatch.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...