USW@Work - National College Players Association - United ...

CAPITOL LETTERSCAPITOL LETTERSThe inside scoop on what's going down in D.C.More tax breaks for the richIn those dark days after Christmas,when all those bills for gifts startedrolling in, the Congressional BudgetOffice (CBO) offered this bit of goodnews for the rich: Bush's tax cuts havemade it easier for them to stockpile theirwealth. The nonpartisan CBO reportedthat federal tax rates declined mostsharply for families earning more than $1million. In contrast, the CBO found thattax rates for middle-income people edgedup in 2004. If that doesn't make you feelall warm and fuzzy, a report by the directorof the Center for Labor MarketStudies at Northeastern University might.Director Andrew Sum noted that fiveWall Street firms planned to distribute$36 to $44 billion (yes, with a "b") inholiday bonuses. The nation's 93 millionworking stiffs saw no such year-end tip.In fact, over the past six years, their combinedreal annual earnings rose a total of$15.4 billion. So over six years, 93 millionworking Americans shared less thanhalf of what 173,000 Wall Streetersreceived as bonuses this year alone. Notcounting their whopping tax cuts.SEC fattens fat cats'Twas the Friday before Christmas,when all through the House, not a creaturewas stirring, not even a corporatelobby-louse. Executives hung golf bagson chimneys with care; in hopes theSecurities and Exchange Commissionwould soon give them a share. Whenwhat to their wondering eyes shouldappear, but a miniature SEC press releasewithout notice or public vote. The SECgift was a change to its rule for reportingexecutive pay. Top dogs would not berequired to report the total value of stockoption grants in one year. Instead, theycould spread the value over several years'reports, a scheme that will make thewindfalls appear smaller. HappyChristmas to all CEOs and to all a fatterchecking account.The check is in the mail. . .Well, maybe your tax rebate check wasin the mail. But now Bush claims he canopen your mail — without a warrant — ifhe thinks there are tough circumstances— like maybe he wants that check backto help pay off the monumental nationaldebt he created by cutting the taxes ofmillionaires. Bush awarded himself thepower to open mail without a warrant justby saying he could do it in a statement heattached to a new piece of postal legislationin December. Federal law requiresgovernment agents to persuade a judge toissue a warrant to allow them to openfirst-class letters. Agents could alwaysbypass this requirement if they believed aticking package contained a bomb. Inless-tense cases, agents must explain theirconcerns to a judge, who considers citizens'rights to privacy and free speechwhen mulling whether to grant therequest. Bush claims he doesn't have tobother with that judge-smudge stuff. Mailstill will be delivered through rain or hail,sleet or dark of night, but Bush may rip itopen first.Checks that shouldn't be mailedA small number of Colorado teachersare demanding that the state's teachersunion put checks in the mail constantly.And they've taken their case all the wayto the U.S. Supreme Court, which heardarguments in January. In Colorado, teachersdon't have to join the union, but theymust pay a fee to cover the value of bargainingthe union dues for them. Thenon-union teachers are permitted to forbidthat any part of their fees be used forpolitical activity by the union. So twice ayear, the union mails the non-unionteachers letters asking if they want thatportion of their money back. That's notgood enough for the non-union teachers,who account for only four percent of thestate's 80,000 instructors. The non-unionteachers, supported by the state ofColorado and the Bush administration,want the union to be forced to specificallyseek permission from each non-unionteacher before money is spent on a politicalcause. This dispute could affect politicalactivity by unions everywhere. TheColorado Supreme Court backed theteacher's union, but what's the chanceBush's stacked Supreme Court will?Decider or flip-flopper?Despite being "the Decider" and acowboy-hat-wearing Texan, PresidentBush has demonstrated some difficultylately sticking to his guns. You mighteven say he flip-flopped, a trait hedescribed as a fatal flaw in hisDemocratic Presidential opponent, JohnKerry. First there was that whole "staythe course" reversal, and now he'srescinded his contention that he didn'tneed judicial approval for domestic surveillance.Americans heard Bush assert forthree years that the county needed to"stay the course" in Iraq. His administrationsaid those seeking troop withdrawalwanted to cut and run when "stay thecourse" was essential. There was theAug. 30, 2006 speech Bush made to theUtah Air National Guard when he said,"We will stay the course. We will helpthis young Iraqi democracy succeed." Ayear earlier, on Aug. 4, during a speech athis Texas ranch, Bush said, "We will staythe course. We will complete the job inIraq." A year before that, during a pressconference at the White House on April13, he said, "And, yet, we must stay thecourse because the end result is in ournation's interest." And four months beforethat, on Dec. 15, 2003, during anotherWhite House press conference, Bushsaid, "We will stay the course until thejob is done." Then, suddenly, in an interviewin October 2006, he said, "Well,hey, listen, we've never been stay thecourse."Then, in January, Bush announcedthat he'd no longer listen to American'stelephone calls without a judge's permission.He'd insisted that as the Presidenthe didn't need judicial review. But afterbeing sued by civil rights groups andafter Democrats took control ofCongress, he copped a plea.USW@Work • winter 2007 39