NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label Sen Tom Harkin D IA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sen Tom Harkin D IA. Show all posts

22 September 2014

IOWA IS KEY TO DEMOCRATS HOLDING THE SENATE, PLEASE SUPPORT BOLD PROGESSIVE BRUCE BRALEY 21SEP14

REP BRUCE BRALEY D IA is in a very tight race for the US Senate seat from Iowa. The PCCC / BoldProgressives.org is supporting him because he is a Progressive Democrat. His victory in the Iowa election is vital to the Democratic Party keeping control of the Senate, protecting us from the extreme right wing agenda of the koch brothers /corporate America republican controlled House. If you can please donate to Bruce Braley's campaign (I did, $5.00), and if you are in Iowa please consider volunteering for his campaign. From the PCCC / Progressive Change Campaign Committee



Huge news out of Iowa: Two polls this past week showed Bruce Braley, the populist progressive who's running to replace Senator Tom Harkin, edging out his right-wing opponent.
This is big. His Tea Party opponent -- the one who ran infamous ads about castrating pigs -- got a lot of help from the Koch Brothers and special interests this summer. She spent much of the summer narrowly ahead.
Here's what one political analyst said about this race on ABC's This Week:
"If you ask me what race on Election Night will determine who takes the Senate, whether the Democrats keep it or the Republicans take it, Iowa is it. And if the Republicans take Iowa, they're taking the Senate back."
Can you chip in $3 to help bold progressive Bruce Braley build on his narrow lead in the polls -- and prevent a Republican takeover? Donate here.
Bruce Braley is exactly who should be replacing Tom Harkin in the Senate. Progressive Sen. Tom Harkin told supporters this past week:
"If you want to thank me for my service, there is really only one way I want you to do that. Make sure that this Senate seat remains in good, fighting, progressive hands with Congressman Bruce Braley."
Elizabeth Warren endorsed Bruce Braley in an email to PCCC members, saying, "Bruce Braley led the Populist Caucus in the House of Representatives – and is focused on economic fairness, investing in education, and addressing our retirement crisis."
Please chip in $3 to help Bruce Braley keep his lead and defend against corporate money and attacks in the coming weeks.
Thanks for being a bold progressive.
-- Keith Rouda, PCCC organizer

21 November 2013

Tell Senate Democrats: It's time to reform the filibuster.& Harry Reid To Meet With Filibuster Reform Advocates 21&20NOV13

WE the people are tired of and disgusted with the gop / tea-bagger obstructionism in the US Senate and in Congress over all. The filibuster is being abused and the nation is suffering. Senators opposing a nomination or legislation should make their case on the floor of the Senate and to the American people. Unless they are willing to physically stay on the floor of the Senate and filibuster so that everyone knows who is filibustering what a vote should be held. Cowards use the "hold" to block nominations and legislation. It is time for Sen Reid D NV, the Majority leader, to invoke the nuclear option in the Senate. He has negotiated with the gop and tea-baggers long enough, they are intent on keeping Congress from working. Please sign this petition from Credo demanding Sen Reid invoke the nuclear option and get the Senate working again. Followed by comments by Sen Tom Harkin D IA on filibuster reform and an article from HuffPost....
The petition to Senate Democrats reads:
"If Republicans in the Senate won't allow an up-or-down vote on President Obama's nominees, use the 'nuclear option' to change the Senate rules to stop the Republicans' abuse of the filibuster. FOX News and the Republicans will go ballistic, but don't back down. If you stand up, we'll have your back."
Automatically add your name:

Since the beginning of the Obama administration, petulant Senate Republicans have made political obstructionism their primary policy priority. And their go-to tool for creating gridlock has been the filibuster.
Thus far, Democrats haven't seized the opportunity to rein in Republican filibuster abuse.
But with the recent filibuster of all three of President Obama's highly qualified nominees for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the fight to reform the filibuster is coming to a head.
It looks like Democrats might be ready to step up to the plate and meaningfully reform the filibuster. We just need to make sure they know that if they stand up, we’ll have their backs.
Tell Senate Democrats: It's time to reform the filibuster. Click here to automatically sign the petition.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is widely considered to be the second most important court in the country after the Supreme Court. And Republicans are obstructing the judicial nominations for reasons that have nothing to do with the individual qualifications of any of the nominees. Instead, Republicans are flatly objecting to filling the vacancies at all.
It's clear that the Republicans want the court to remain free of additional Obama nominees who might tilt the ideological balance of the court away from its current conservative orientation.
But allowing a minority of senators to stop the president from his constitutional duty of filling longstanding judicial vacancies, and allowing the minority in the Senate to do so for nakedly political reasons that have nothing to do with the fitness of the nominees, is contrary to how our system of government should work.
So now Sen. Reid is considering changing the Senate rules through a procedure known as the "nuclear option" to ensure presidential nominees for receive an up-or-down vote.
If the Republicans won't back down, Senate Democrats should take this first, long-overdue and much-needed step toward filibuster reform.
Tell Senate Democrats: It's time to reform the filibuster. Click the link below to automatically sign the petition:
http://act.credoaction.com/go/2778?t=5&akid=9498.179403.GUuk3Q
Thank you for speaking out. Your activism matters.
Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
Automatically add your name:
Sign the petition ►
Learn more about this campaign 

Here are a couple of excerpts from an NPR interview yesterday with Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) regarding the filibuster.  Harkin's the senator who thought $450K/year is NOT the income of the middle class and said so during the Bush tax cuts fiasco last year.

Harkin's been a senator for 28 years, is a realist and doesn't mince words:

"I'm not afraid of Democracy. I'm not afraid of majority rule as long as the minority has certain rights, the rights to offer amendments. Not the right to win those amendments, but the right to offer those amendments and to have a debate and a vote on those amendments. I've always felt that way. But I do not believe that the minority has some right to absolutely stop everything."

"The late Senator Robert F. Byrd. He actually said that, yes, the Senate can change the rules with a simple majority. He admitted that. And it shouldn't even be called a nuclear option. That's not - there's nothing nuclear about it. Now, here's what I say to people, Robert. Why is it so sacred that you have to have 67 votes to change a rule in the Senate?

Let's just say, for example, that one party elected 90 senators one time. Let's say they change the rule to say, from here on out, it takes 90 senators to change the rules. Would that be acceptable? If that's not, why is 67 acceptable? It should be that eventually 51 senators ought to be able to decide what we're going to do here."

"Well, because the way the rules, the way the Senate is set up, you can have basically one or two people filibustering and they don't even have to be here. They can put in a quorum call vote and go off and do different things. Cruz didn't have to do what he did. He was just doing it for showmanship."

"I think there's a dirty little secret in the United States Senate that we all know but most of the people in America don't know. A senator has his or her power not because of what we can do but because of what we can stop. And no senator wants to give that power up. We each have to give up that little bit of power for the good of the whole country."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=246409440
 
 Harry Reid To Meet With Filibuster Reform Advocates


WASHINGTON -- Filibuster reform advocates have been here before. A Senate bogged down in procedural gridlock drives Democratic leadership to threaten a change of rules, only to back away at the last minute when a group of Republicans offer a gentlemen's agreement. The agreement proves temporary, agitation sets in and the threats reemerge. Lather, blather, repeat.
So, as Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has once again raised the specter of upending the rules of the Senate in order to bring functionality to the chamber, there is no shortage of skepticism.
And yet, those around the majority leader insist that his determination is sincere this time. By way of evidence, one progressive activist sent The Huffington Post an invitation addressed by Reid's office to "supporters of filibuster reform." The invitation is for a Thursday event, where attendees can hear from Reid directly about "his thinking on changing the rules."
Such scheming usually doesn't happen unless political action is afoot. It appears that it is.
In an interview with The Huffington Post on Wednesday, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), one of the loudest champions of narrowing the filibuster, insisted that this wouldn't be yet another instance of the football being placed invitingly in front of Charlie Brown's foot. After a showdown this January resulted in a toothless set of procedural changes and another standoff this summer resulted in a fleeting pact between the parties, Democrats are beyond frustrated, the Oregon Democrat said.
"Members who hoped we could recreate the understanding and comity of the past -- which was to retain the ability to filibuster nominees with the understanding that it would only be used rarely based or related to a nominee's qualifications or if there was an exceptional concern -- now realize that that is impossible," Merkley said. "The new Republican strategy of blocking nominees solely based on the argument that they were nominated by this president has put a strike through the heart of that hope."
Aides on the Hill are equally adamant that this isn't some big bluff on Reid's part. One top aide told The Huffington Post that even if Republicans simply allowed for up-and-down votes on the president's three nominees to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the nexus of this current filibuster fight) it wouldn't dramatically alter the party's thinking.
"There is no indication that there is eagerness on our side that we could just take a few nominees and we will back off," the aide said.
Perhaps even more telling is that back-channel talks to avert the so-called "nuclear option" aren't happening at the level they were in standoffs past.
"There is nothing like that going on at this time," the aide said, when asked if the brokers of the last compromise –- Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) –- were trying to find a way around the impasse.
Whether Reid has the votes to actually move forward with rules reform is another question entirely. According to aides, the majority leader is personally whipping members and holding the number of votes he has close to the vest. He has been pitching a rule change that would allow for simple majority votes on executive nominees and district and circuit court judges. Supreme Court justices would still require a 60-vote threshold for approval under this plan, as would every bit of legislation.
Reid is planning to move fast regardless. An aide said a motion to reestablish the Senate rules is more likely to come this week than next month. After all, momentum is there. Grey beards of the Senate, such as Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), have expressed their support for changing the rules; something that was not a given in prior showdowns. In addition, some of the more prominent abortion-rights senators -- Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats of California -- have said they would be supportive of a rules change. Rules reform is something they have been hesitant to do in the past, out of fear it could open up the floodgates to anti-choice judges and legislation if Republicans retook the majority.
Merkley says fear of a future GOP majority is misplaced. For starters, he noted, those anti-choice judges have managed to get through the Senate during past Republican administrations even with the filibuster in place. More importantly, he argued, it would be naïve to think that a hypothetical Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), serving under a hypothetical Texan GOP President Rick Perry or Ted Cruz, wouldn't move swiftly to change the rules himself.
"I don't doubt that they would do it," he said.
The Huffington Post asked McConnell's spokesman, Don Stewart, if Merkley's point was legitimate.
He replied, "Sen. McConnell has said the opposite."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/20/harry-reid-filibuster-reform_n_4311940.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications 

25 July 2013

#Raisethewage & McDonalds Tells Workers To Budget By Getting A Second Job And Turning Off Their Heat 24&15JUL13

NOBODY can live on the current minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. It is wrong to keep people in poverty when corporations can afford to pay more just by reducing the obscene pay packages they now provide to their ceos and executive boards. Pres Obama called on Congress to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 in his State of the Union speech in Jan this year, but because so many members of Congress represent the interest of the rich and corporate masters who paid for their elections nothing has been done. This petition calls on Congress to boost the economy by passing the Fair Minimum Wage Act, introduced by Rep George Miller D CA and Sen Tom Harkin D IA and it is followed by Think Progress' article on mcdonald's budgeting advise to their employees.
 
Could you make ends meet if you earned $7.25 an hour? Probably not.

Four years ago today was the last time the federal minimum wage was raised. And it still doesn’t keep up with inflation or the rising cost of living. In fact, just recently McDonald’s (a company notorious for low wages) posted a “budget template” geared toward helping employees manage their finances and save. The only catch was that the budget assumed the employee had two jobs.1

Even McDonald’s admits the minimum wage is too low for workers to survive on.

Click here to sign our petition asking Congress to raise the minimum wage.
In his State of the Union address this year, President Obama signaled his support for raising the minimum wage. And in March, U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) introduced the Fair Minimum Wage Act. This bill would increase the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.

Workers need this raise—more than 4.4 million workers currently earn minimum wage in the United States. Our economy needs it, too. According to the Economic Policy Institute, raising the minimum wage to $10.10 would grow the economy and could create 140,000 new jobs over three years. Now it’s up to Congress to make it happen. And they need to hear from you.

Will you add your name to our petition asking Congress to raise the minimum wage?

go.aflcio.org/raise-the-wage

In solidarity,

Nicole Aro
Director of Digital Strategies, AFL-CIO


McDonalds Tells Workers To Budget By Getting A Second Job And Turning Off Their Heat

McDonalds has partnered with Visa to launch a website to help its low-wage workers making an average $8.25 an hour to budget. But while the site is clearly meant to illustrate that McDonalds workers should be able to live on their meager wages, it actually underscores exactly how hard it is for a low-paid fast food worker to get by.
The site includes a sample “budget journal” for McDonalds’ employees that offers a laughably inaccurate view of what it’s like to budget on a minimum wage job. Not only does the budget leave a spot open for “second job,” it also gives wholly unreasonable estimates for employees’ costs: $20 a month for health care, $0 for heating, and $600 a month for rent. It does not include any budgeted money for food or clothing.

Basically every facet of this budget is unachievable. For an uninsured person to independently buy health care, he or she must shell out on average $215 a month — just for an individual plan. While some full-time McDonald’s workers do qualify for the company’s $14 a week health plan, that offer caps coverage at $10,000 a year and is often insufficient. If that person wants to eat, “moderate” spending will run them $32 a week for themselves, and $867 a month to feed a family of four. And if a fast food worker is living in a city? Well, New York City rents just reached an average of $3,000 a month.
The sample budget is also available in Spanish. On another section of the site, it concludes, “You can have almost anything you want as long as you plan ahead and save for it.”
Neither McDonalds nor Visa returned requests for comment by the time of publication.
Last year, Bloomberg News found that it would take the average McDonalds employee one million hours of work to earn as much money as the company’s CEO. This immense wage disparity in the fast food industry has sparked a series of protests and walk-outs by low-wage workers working at fast food chains around the country — in New York, Chicago, Washington, and Seattle, to name a few cities, workers from chains including KFC, McDonalds, Burger King, and Taco Bell have spoken publicly about the need for serious wage increases across the industry.
(HT: Low Pay Is Not Okay)
Update
A McDonalds spokesperson provided this statement to ThinkProgress:
“In an effort to provide free, comprehensive money management tools, McDonald’s first used the Wealth Watchers International budgeting journal when this financial literacy program launched in 2008.
As part of this program, several resources were developed including a sample budgeting guide, an instructional video and a web resource center that had additional tools and information.
The samples that are on this site are generic examples and are intended to help provide a general outline of what an individual budget may look like.
Update
By Tuesday, it appears that McDonalds has quietly gone in and changed its sample budget slightly. It now includes $50 spending on heat — money taken from the monthly spending.

1
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/07/15/2300321/mcdonalds-buget-low-wage/

23 May 2013

Social Security news so good it will make you giddy, Tell Congress: Now is the time to expand Social Security, not cut it 23MAI13

THE people have been pushing back against Pres Obama's chained-cpi proposal for Social Security and Congress has heard us. Now there is actually a bill in the Senate, introduced by Sen Tom Harkin D IA,  S567, that will increase Social Security benefits, levy Social Security taxes on millionaires and billionaires at the same rate as the rest of us, and provide increased financial security for the program for several generations. Please sign the petition to Congress telling them to pass the Strengthening Social Security Act of 2013. AND keep on the lookout for any legislation containing Obama's chained-cpi scam, that is still out there and still a threat!
As the deficit shrinks, the chances of Congress striking a "grand bargain" and cutting Social Security are fading.

At the same time, populist politicians, grassroots activists, and numbers-based wonks are lining up behind a new idea: expanding Social Security benefits.

Please click here to sign the petition from Daily Kos and Social Security Works calling on Congress to expand Social Security benefits.

The vast majority of Americans think Social Security benefits should be increased, and the wealthy should pay more in taxes to do it. Now, people in power are starting to agree.

Red and purple state senators like Mark Begich (D-AK) and Tom Harkin (D-IA) have introduced bills that would expand Social Security benefits by as much as $800 per recipient, per year. They accomplish this by changing the way benefits are calculated and by finally making millionaires and billionaires pay the same rate of Social Security taxes the rest of us pay.

What's more, respected analysts like Ezra Klein and the New America Foundation have directly confronted the long-time consensus in Washington, D.C., by making the case for expanding Social Security benefits.

More than 100,000 people have already signed a petition from Social Security Works endorsing Sen. Harkin's bill.

This is all just the beginning. The tide has turned, and now we are on offense.

Please click here to sign the petition from Daily Kos and Social Security Works calling on Congress to expand Social Security benefits.

Keep fighting,
Joan McCarter, Daily Kos

28 March 2013

Action Alert: Keep Fighting, Senate votes against chained CPI & 5 Places Where You Should Never Give Your Social Security Number 28MAR13

THANK GOD for +Sen Bernie Sanders I VT, who, along with Sens +Tom Harkin D IA, +Mazie Hirono D HI and +Sheldon Whitehouse D RI got a non-binding resolution passed by the Senate on 22MAR13 rejecting tying Social Security benefit increases to chained CPI. They showed the moral courage and leadership the nation needs on this critical issue standing up for retirees and veterans and their survivors and have sent a clear message to +Pres Obama and the Congressional leadership that the budget will not be balanced on the backs of the people. Please click the link and tell Pres Obama to drop his Social Security chained cpi proposal! AND here is a good article from +Adam Levin about when NOT to give out your Social Security number, from +HuffPost Tech  

Senator-elect Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is interviewed by a Reuters reporter at Sanders' office in Burlington, Vermont November 28, 2006. Sanders, a 16-year veteran of the House of Representatives who swept 65 percent of the vote in Vermont running as an inde
attribution: REUTERS
Sanders wins on chained CPI, for now.
Sen. Bernie Sanders offered one of the more useful amendments to the budget passed by the Senate this weekend, an amendment to block cuts in benefits for Social Security and disabled veterans by means of a chained CPI.
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) joined Sanders in sponsoring the amendment, which passed by voice vote Friday night, putting the Senate on record against changing how cost-of-living increases are calculated in a way that would result in significant cuts. Sanders reacted to the vote:
“This is a strong signal that when push comes to shove the Senate is going to oppose any effort to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, disabled veterans and their survivors,” Sanders said after the vote.
The amendment, like the entire bill, isn't binding. But it is a statement from the whole Senate, and particularly the core group of liberal sponsors, that the president's offer of using Social Security and veterans benefits cuts to cut a grand bargain deal is not acceptable to them. According to Sanders, a typical 65-year-old retiree would lose more than $650 a year by their 75th birthday and more than $1,000 a year by their 85th under the chained CPI. It would also cut the benefits of more than 3.2 million disabled veterans receiving disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs, and more than 350,000 surviving spouses and children.

ORIGINALLY POSTED TO JOAN MCCARTER ON MON MAR 25, 2013 AT 09:33 AM PDT.

ALSO REPUBLISHED BY THE DEMOCRATIC WING OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTYIN SUPPORT OF LABOR AND UNIONSSOCIAL SECURITY DEFENDERS, AND DAILY KOS.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/25/1196829/-Senate-votes-against-chained-CPI#

5 Places Where You Should Never Give Your Social Security Number



Every time you go to a new doctor or dentist and they give you a clipboard brimming with documents to fill out and sign, notice how they always ask for your Social Security number? Do you dutifully give it up? Did you ever wonder if they really need it?
I once asked a doctor why he wanted it. His response: "I don't really know. I guess it's because we've always asked for it." (In actuality, most doctors ask in case your insurance doesn't pay the entire invoice and/or to fill out a death certificate if you die. Offer a next of kin who knows the number instead, and your phone number for billing issues.)
Almost every day somebody asks for your Social Security Number and, like the Grand Marshal of a parade throwing rose petals or candy to the crowd, you probably give it up without giving it a second thought -- because that's what you've always done.
So, the next time someone asks you for your Social Security number, reflect on this: In December, the Army announced that hackers stole the Social Security numbers of 36,000 visitors to Fort Monmouth in New Jersey, including intelligence officers. Cyber activists took control of the CIA's website. The private information, including some Social Security numbers, of celebrities and political leaders including FBI Director Robert Mueller and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were exposed.
The sensitive data of First Lady Michelle Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Attorney General Eric Holder, recently were posted on a website for the world to see.
Hackers even listened in on a phone call in which the FBI and Scotland Yard were discussing the criminal investigation against those very same hackers!
And these incidents are only the crumbs on top of the coffee cake when you consider that hackers and thieves have improperly accessed more than 600 million consumer files since 2004.
The moral to these horror stories is that if your Social Security number is stored on any computer anywhere, hackers will find a way to access it, or a compromised or disgruntled employee may well walk out the door with it. If your doctor, gym, or child's grade school claims otherwise, that their security systems can protect your private data better than the CIA, FBI and Scotland Yard, to quote Monty Python: "Run away!"
Your identity is your biggest asset, and your Social Security number is the key to your personal kingdom. With it an identity thief can wreak havoc, hijacking your old credit accounts, establishing new ones, buying cars and houses, committing crimes, even obtaining medical products and services while pretending to be you, endangering not just your credit and your reputation, but also your life.
Consumers whose Social Security numbers are exposed in a data breach are five times more likely to become fraud victims than those who aren't, according to the latest identity fraud report by Javelin Strategy & Research.
"Just say no," should be your motto here. For better or worse, you are the gatekeeper. The person most responsible for shielding your Social Security Number is you. Therefore, your mission is to limit, as best you can, the universe of those who gain access to it.
Here's a short list of companies and organizations that have absolutely no business requesting your Social Security number:
1. Anyone who calls or sends you an official-looking email, who texts you a link to any site or designates a number to call where you are asked to confirm your SSN. If they call, check the credit or debit card that is the subject of the communication, call the customer service number listed on the back, and ask for the security department. If they email or text, do the same, or go directly to the institution's website (provided you know who they are). Make sure you type the correct URL, and make sure that the page where you are asked to enter your information is secure. Only provide personal information if you're the one who controls the interaction.
2. Public schools: Your utility bill confirms your address. Your email and phone number give them channels to contact you in an emergency. Asking for your Social Security number is overkill.
3. Little League, summer camp and the like: For the same reasons as school, a Social Security number should never be required by these groups. If they ask for your child's birth certificate, show it to them, don't leave it with them unless they can prove they will protect it. And even then, can you really believe them? If you use credit to pay for the activity, the organization may need your Social Security number. If you pay for it upfront or with a direct debit to your bank account or credit card, they don't. Period.
4. Supermarkets: A frequent shopper card is neither a loan, nor a bank account. It's merely a tool grocery stores use to track your purchases, primarily for marketing purposes. Regardless, many supermarket chains request customers' Social Security numbers on their application forms. Refuse.
5. Anybody who approaches you on the street, whether it's a cellphone company salesman offering a free T-shirt or someone running a voter registration campaign: Never, ever give your SSN. If you want an ill-fitting T-shirt festooned with corporate logos, buy one. If you want to register to vote, go to your county board of elections in person.
This is the short list. There are plenty of other organizations that should never get your Social Security number, and if you know one that I've left out, please leave it in the comments.
Don't just hand it over your Social Security number to anyone. Once you realize how often you are asked for it, you may be surprised. It happens all the time. So, the next time someone does, as they inevitably will, here's how to handle it:
1. Take a minute and think. Maybe they ask for SSNs blindly, because everyone else does, or because that's how they've always done it. Maybe they actually need it. See if their reason sounds legitimate. (Update: For example, Credit.com's Credit Report Card does ask for your SSN in order to generate your credit score and credit report summary -- an industry standard -- but the information is fully encrypted with a bank level authentication process.)
2. Negotiate. There are many different ways to identify you without a Social Security number, including your driver's license or account number. Fight to use those instead.
3. If you must share your Social Security number, do so, but make sure the people taking it down have strong security measures in place to protect it. That said, you only have their assurance and frankly, in light of the mistakes people make and the sophistication level of hackers, who really knows if they can protect it?
If all this sounds like a giant pain in the neck, you're right. It is. In the midst of our busy lives, we shouldn't be the only ones concerned with protecting our most valuable identity asset, but it is what it is. Until somebody creates a Silver Bullet for identity theft, we are forced to take matters into our own hands.
Don't be passive; ask the companies and nonprofit groups with which you do business how they plan to protect you. Do they password protect and encrypt all the personal information they collect? Do they have strict controls on who has access to computers containing your Social Security number, and do they keep this sensitive data off laptops, tablets and hard drives that are easy to steal or lose?
Like the doctor I met, many companies collect Social Security numbers they don't need because they're operating on autopilot. They've always done it, and their colleagues at other companies do it, so the practice continues and spreads on the strength of simple, dumb inertia. I believe that we are smarter than that. By demanding that companies do a better job protecting our personal information, and refusing to hand out our Social Security numbers like candy at a parade, we can force them to get smarter, too. And if they don't think we're serious about this and the government doesn't finally force them off their Social Security number addiction, it is highly likely that the ultimate regulator of the American economic system, class action attorneys, will be knocking on their door

15 March 2013

TELL YOUR SENATORS: Tax Wall Street speculation 14MAR13

IT has been the right time to tax wall street ever since they found the money to increase the already obscene pay/compensation packages for ceo's and corporate board members. The majority of the American people expressed their support for taxing wall street with the reelection of Pres Obama. Now, finally, two Senators, Tom Harkin D IA and Sheldon Whitehouse D RI have introduced the Wall Street Speculation Tax because wall street traders are realizing huge profits on high volume speculative trading while the 99% still struggle with the recession, brought to us by , you guessed it, wall street speculators! Click the link to sign on supporting this tax and e mail your Senators at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

My e mails to Senators Warner and Kaine at the bottom of this post. From HuffPost.....
Air traffic controllers and pre-school teachers are being furloughed or laid off. Mental health programs, scientific research, Hurricane Sandy relief, and unemployment benefits are being slashed -- all thanks to the sequester.

Meanwhile, Wall Street speculators just had their best week ever. That's right: ever.

Working families shouldn't be forced to shoulder the burden of economic recovery. Wall Street's reckless behavior got us in this mess -- it's time they paid to clean it up and started creating real jobs for American workers.

Tell Congress: Pass the Wall Street Speculation Tax and put Americans back to work.

Here's how: A Wall Street speculation tax -- as small as three pennies on every $100 traded on Wall Street -- would raise $352 billion over 10 years. That's one-third of what the sequester is set to cut, and more than enough to put millions of middle-class Americans back to work right now.

And here's the good news: Sens. Tom Harkin and Sheldon Whitehouse have introduced a bill to do just that.

This isn't a radical idea. A tax on high-volume trading funded millions of jobs during the Great Depression, and set the stage for decades of economic growth. Today, six in 10 Americans support taxing Wall Street to pay for jobs programs. Even George W. Bush's FDIC appointee, Sheila Bair, supports the tax.

The American people and economists agree: it's time to tax Wall Street. Tell Congress to get it done.

Sign the petition to Tax Wall Street Speculation.

Thanks for all that you do.

-ML

Michael Langenmayr, Political Director
Democracy for America


Democracy for America relies on you and the people-power of more than one million members to fund the grassroots organizing and training that delivers progressive change on the issues that matter. Please Contribute Today and support our mission.
Paid for by Democracy for America, http://www.democracyforamerica.com/?t=3&akid=2880.629511.AsStEA and not authorized by any candidate. Contributions to Democracy for America are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.
MY E MAIL TO SENATORS MARK WARNER D VA AND TIM KAINE D VA
Senators Tom Harkin and Sheldon Whitehouse have introduced legislation, The Wall Street Speculation Tax, to tax the huge profits Wall Street speculators are realizing from high volume speculative trading. These are the same people who brought is the great recession of 2008, now they are profiting from it while the vast majority in the nation remain mired in the recession, dealing with high unemployment, underemployment, stagnant wages and funding cuts for vital social safety net programs. This isn't a radical idea. A tax on high-volume trading funded millions of jobs during the Great Depression, and set the stage for decades of economic growth. Today, six in 10 Americans support taxing Wall Street to pay for jobs programs. Even George W. Bush's FDIC appointee, Sheila Bair, supports the tax. I expect you to sponsor, support and vote for this legislation.

03 March 2011

Labor Fighting Quiet Anti-Unionization Measure In Congress While Eyes Remain On Wisconsin 3MAR11

AMERICANS seem to have forgotten how unions have improved the working conditions, wages and benefits for all of us. Weekends, vacations, minimum wage, worker safety, health benefits, pensions, all are because of the negotiating power of unions. Too many believe the the propaganda of the gop, tea-baggers and corporate America that unions are responsible for the economic decline of America, but you only need to look across our southern border, to Mexico, to see what our working conditions and pay and lives would be like if it weren't for unions in this country. Most of the gop and the tea-baggers wouldn't mind turning America into a Third World country for the benefit of their corporate masters. This proposed law brings us just a step closer to meeting that goal. From HuffPost....
WASHINGTON -- While labor activists continue to stage a high-stakes campaign against the budget bill from Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) that would strip collective bargaining rights from that state's public employees, union backers are feverishly working to derail what they describe as an equally troubling federal proposal with a clear route to passage.
In recent days, union officials have ramped up lobbying efforts to block or remove language in the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill that would make it drastically harder for rail or aviation workers to unionize.
Sponsored by House Transportation Chairman John Mica (R-Fla.) -- a major recipient of campaign contributions from the airline industry, totaling more than $620,000 in his career -- the controversial provision states if an eligible voter fails to vote for union representation, he or she will be tallied as an active vote against representation.
Such a policy, which puts an extra burden on union organizers to round up all voters, rather than a simple majority, existed up until last July, when the federal National Mediation Board, which adjudicates labor-management disputes, ruled that absent votes ought not be counted against unionization. Labor officials hailed that decision as one of their signature victories last year, and the proposal to strip it away has sparked an equally emotional reaction.
"This was the one advancement that you had seen in organizing rights and here they have launched an all-out effort in the House to go after unions again," said Shane Larson, the legislative director for the Communications Workers of America. "Currently, this is the biggest issue federally right now in terms of organizing rights. There is nothing else that is on the table."
Critics of expanded union rights appreciate the decision's significance, too. The NMB's July ruling was quickly followed by attempts to undo it, including a Congressional Review Act proposed by Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) that would have called for a formal evaluation of the decision.
Isakson's review effort fell short, but Mica's provision, introduced through normal legislative order, seems much harder to disrupt.
The provision was passed by voice vote during markup at the House Transportation Committee on Feb. 16. Rep. Jerry Costello (D-Ill.) offered an amendment shortly thereafter to strip it from the final language, later telling The Huffington Post that he saw it as a clear effort "on the part of Republican leadership in the House to bust unions," but his amendment fell one vote shy of passage. The Transportation portion of the FAA reauthorization bill, with Mica's language included, ultimately passed out of committee, 34 to 25.
Two additional House committees -- Science and Ways and Means -- have input in the final legislative language, but according to House officials, neither has jurisdictional authority to revise Mica's provision.
"Once this comes to the floor," said one of those officials, "it will pass."
With that in mind, union operatives have turned their sights to the Senate, where a different version of the FAA reauthorization bill passed in mid-February. Sens. Jay Rockeller (D-W.V.) and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) are being petitioned especially heavily to strip Mica's provision when the two congressional chambers meet to merge their respective bills.
An aide to Rockefeller, who chairs the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, said he supports the new NMB rule, and that position "has not and will not change." Harkin, who chairs the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, told labor leaders to "rest assured" that he would "vigorously oppose any effort to include these dangerous provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act conference report."
Costello, the Illinois congressman, predicted that the measure would not pass the Senate. "And if it does," he added, "I would doubt the White House would sign the bill with the provision in it. I think it's a showstopper."
Such public resolve, however, is somewhat at odds with blunt political calculations. While Harkin and others may be insisting that Mica's provision be exorcised from the bill, in private, aides question whether the appetite is there to hold the line.
"Now that it is in the bill and it is going to conference, the dynamics have changed," acknowledged one top Democratic Senate aide. "Senator Harkin would of course vehemently say it shouldn't be in there. But the question is, will people vote down the entire bill over it?"
While last year's rule change was a cherished breakthrough for the labor community, the practical impact has not been as widely felt as anticipated, Democratic aides noted. One aide opposed to Mica's provision said unions have actually had a lower success rate since the NMB's ruling, winning only nine of 17 elections. "The new rule, in and of itself, will not cause an avalanche of unionism," the aide added, in an effort to downplay conservative critiques.
The numbers can cut both ways. When pressed about Democratic criticism of the congressman's provision, Mica spokesman Justin Harclerode said that reverting back to the old ways wouldn't be all that drastic. "The aviation industry was already heavily unionized before the rule change," he said.
Yet it's hard not to see the broader symbolism in this under-the-radar legislative fight. Republicans are fully invested in rolling back both the incremental gains and the longstanding rights that unions enjoy. And while the primary theater has recently been at the state level, labor officials and allied lawmakers are bracing themselves for similar high-stakes showdowns in Washington.
"I expect this is only the beginning," Harkin said. "I think we'll see a lot of amendments this year -- probably on every bill we consider -- that will chip away at the basic rights and protections that help middle class working families get by. Like Governor Walker, advocates will describe these amendments as budget savers or pro-growth, but make no mistake, those are not their real goals. The real goal is to weaken the voice of American workers, and continue to push the same, trickle-down economic theory that has led us to unprecedented levels of inequality and instability."