Tag: paid sick leave
Fed Nominee Moore: Unemployment Insurance Is ‘Paid Vacation’

Fed Nominee Moore: Unemployment Insurance Is ‘Paid Vacation’

Trump on Friday announced that he nominated a conservative think tank fellow, who has criticized everything from paid sick leave to unemployment insurance, to a position on the Federal Reserve Board — a powerful position that has say over monetary policy in the United States.

The nominee, Stephen Moore, is a regular on Fox News, where he spouts crazy economic theories including that unemployment insurance amounts to “paid vacation” for job seekers.

“Extending unemployment benefits is actually bad for the economy,” Moore, a Fox News contributor, said on air in 2014. “It encourages people to stay out of the work force, it’s like a paid vacation for people and it’s actually a tax on employers.”

Anyone who’s been unemployed knows that unemployment insurance is anything but “paid vacation.” Benefits are never as much as the salary a laid off worker was making before their job was terminated. And that insurance allows laid off workers to afford basic necessities of living while they search for a new job — which is a full-time job in and of itself.

But that’s not the only wild comment on economic policy Moore has made.

Also in 2014, Moore said giving full-time workers paid sick leave is “very dangerous.

“Somebody gets sick we feel bad about it, or if they get injured we feel bad about it. But the question is, should the burden of paying for that be on the backs of small businesses?” Moore said on a Fox News appearance.

God forbid people are able to stay home when they are ill.

Trump nominated Moore — a Trump supporter who worked on Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign — to the position after seeing one of Moore’s columns in the Wall Street Journal, according to Bloomberg News. Moore, like Trump, blamed the Federal Reserve for a slower economic growth rate than Trump predicted — a claim respected economists say is complete bunk.

“It is my pleasure to announce that @StephenMoore, a very respected Economist, will be nominated to serve on the Fed Board,” Trump tweeted Friday afternoon. “I have known Steve for a long time – and have no doubt he will be an outstanding choice!”

Moore, however, is anything but a respected economist.

He’s just another Fox News talking head who Trump decided to give a powerful position in government.

Published with permission of The American Independent.

Elizabeth Warren Forcefully Challenges Trump’s Labor Nominee

Elizabeth Warren Forcefully Challenges Trump’s Labor Nominee

Reprinted with permission form AlterNet.

Elizabeth Warren has set the table for Andrew Puzder, the burger chain executive and Secretary of Labor nominee, with a blistering 28-page letter outlining the likely line of Democratic questioning in this Thursday’s confirmation hearings.

Warren’s letter widens the attack on Puzder beyond his record as CEO of CKE, a privately held company that owns the Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s fast-food chains, to a broader indictment of Trump policies for the American workforce. While Warren cites Puzder’s much-quoted preference for robots over human workers, the Massachusetts senator also challenges Trump’s likely efforts to weaken the federal overtime, paid sick leave, and minimum wage rules, as well as regulation of retirement advisers and the ongoing investigation of Wells Fargo’s fraudulent sales activities.

While Trump built his presidential campaign on defense of American workers, Warren’s letter illustrates several ways Puzder’s nomination will pit the reality against the rhetoric.

Fiduciary Duty

Warren will challenge Puzder to clarify a Feb. 3 Trump memorandum on the so-called Fiduciary Duty rule requiring retirement advisers to act in their clients’ best interest. The rule, promulgated by the Obama administration after years of public comment, is set to go into effect April 8.

The Obama regulation is already having a positive effect, Warren points out in the letter.

“Major financial institutions such as Fidelity, Charles Schwab, BlackRock, and others have announced they are slashing fees for their funds,” she writes. Bank of America and Merrill Lynch say they will no longer offer investment advisory services on a commission basis—an incentive to put the salesperson’s interests ahead of the retiree’s.

Warren wants Puzder to disclose who is behind the effort to delay or rescind the Fiduciary Duty regulation. She notes that CKE’s retirement plan was “riddled with high-fee investments and low participation rates.”

Sexual Harassment

Citing a Capital and Main study finding Carl’s and Hardee’s have been hit by more federal discrimination lawsuits than any other national burger chains, Warren asks Puzder if he will keep an updated 2016 Obama anti-discrimination regulation that protects workers against a sexually hostile work environment, and discrimination based on pregnancy and transgender status.

Mandatory Overtime Pay

Warren notes that 22 percent of Americans work for federal contractors. In return for government contracts, those companies have to comply with laws protecting workers, including mandatory overtime. Puzder opposed the Obama administration’s overtime rule, which requires federal contractors to pay overtime to anyone making less than $47,500 a year.

Warren cited the video testimony of Laura McDonald, a manager at Carl’s Jr. from 1998 to 2012, who says the chain made it impossible for her to do her job unless she worked “off the clock.”

Warren wants to know if Puzder will advise Trump to keep or dump mandatory overtime pay, which she says helps boost the wages of 4.2 million workers.

Federal Minimum Wage

Thanks to another Obama regulation, federal contractors have to pay a minimum wage of $10.10 per hour, giving a wage boost to some 200,000 workers. Will Puzder advise Trump to dump or keep the executive order on the federal minimum wage?

With Puzder’s nomination, Senate Democrats face the same daunting challenge they did with other Trump Cabinet choices: persuading at least three Senate Republicans to break ranks. In the confirmation of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, Democrats got two GOP converts: senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who are now being lobbied by Puzder supporters, according to The Hill.

Jefferson Morley is AlterNet’s Washington correspondent.

IMAGE: U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) shows company documents to Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf during his testimony before a Senate Banking Committee hearing on the firm’s sales practices on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., September 20, 2016. REUTERS/Gary Cameron

5 Things ‘Pro-Lifers’ Would Support If They Were ‘Pro-Mom’

5 Things ‘Pro-Lifers’ Would Support If They Were ‘Pro-Mom’

You probably missed an Easter miracle.

While conservatives were learning that the business community doesn’t support their effort to stop gay people from being able to spend money freely, both conservatives and liberals were celebrating a Supreme Court decision. And — even more miraculously — it was a decision about pregnancy and women’s rights.

In Young v. UPS, the majority “lightened the burden for women who sue their employers under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), the federal law that bars employers from discriminating against pregnant workers,” according to George Washington University School of Law’s Naomi Schoenbaum.

Schoenbaum calls the shared right/left glee over the ruling an example of the bipartisan “Care Caucus” that has historically come together to promote women’s rights and support families.

Thus far, the caucus is embarrassingly small — and horribly ineffective.

The abysmal way America deals with pregnancy, childbirth and child rearing is a national disgrace. And it presents a real opportunity for liberals, who can only make the situation better.

It’s beyond a cliché to suggest that it’s a little hypocritical for a party that supports the death penalty, augurs toward war and opposes universal health care to call itself “pro-life.”

But it’s a strategy — making all politics moral — that works.

Thanks to cultural grandstanding on issues including “life,” Republicans are extremely popular with workers who haven’t pursued higher education, and who — coincidentally —  happen to be the exact Americans most brutalized by conservative economics.

Liberals, on the other hand, tend to lean away from moralizing and rarely point out that no country in the advanced world makes it harder for new families than America.

The left has a real opportunity to show its concern for children and parents by exposing the simple fact that opposing reproductive rights is more about controlling people’s bodies than reducing abortions — since abortion rates are higher in countries that criminalize the procedure.

Here are five ways Democrats can prove they’re the “pro-family” party and force conservatives to come along with them.

1. Let pregnant women enroll in insurance plans at any time.

This is an easy one. Groups opposed to reproductive rights set up “Crisis Pregnancy” outlets that resemble clinics that offer abortions in order to dissuade pregnant women from ending their pregnancies. They offer bad science and manipulative moralizing. But why aren’t we offering the pregnant what they really need: health insurance?

In March, 50 House Democrats signed a letter calling on the Secretary of Health and Human Services to reclassify pregnancy as a “qualifying life event.” Why didn’t Republicans sign that letter or send one of their own?

2. Establish humane parental leave and sick-leave policies.

“What do Papua New Guinea, Oman, and the United States of America have in common?” asked Margaret Talbot in The New Yorker. Her answer: “They are the only three countries in the world with no paid-maternity-leave law.”

If you want to encourage healthy families, you can at least be as generous to new mothers as Iran, which offers them 12 weeks’ leave at two-thirds of their salary.

And it isn’t as if family responsibilities end after a few months.

That’s why Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) introduced legislation that would provide seven paid sick days — that could be used to care for yourself or your family — to all Americans. Surprisingly, it passed the Senate — with the help of several blue-state Republicans who are up for re-election in 2016. But will the House even vote on it?

3. Establish universal pre-K.

“In pretty much every other developed country, government acts aggressively to meet [child care] needs — by subsidizing or directly providing early child care, for example, and by guaranteeing that parents can take time off, with pay, to care for newborns and sick relatives, as the Huffington Post‘s Jonathan Cohn notes.

Conservatives tend to argue that government support for social programs create dependency (because that’s a much more palatable argument than saying, “We don’t want government to do anything worthy because it makes it harder to cut taxes for the rich). But our lack of support for parents may explain why the labor participation rate for American women lags behind that of Sweden, Denmark, Portugal, Finland, Switzerland, Austria, Canada, Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, United Kingdom, Spain, New Zealand, Luxembourg and Australia.

In reality, the right doesn’t mind dependency, as long as it’s dependency on corporations. The kind of support parents get in most advanced countries is only provided to Americans by large businesses that recognize that it keeps parents in the workforce.

And there’s another conservative argument for universal pre-K, argues The Washington Post‘s Emily Badger: “If you don’t want to spend a lot on incarceration or welfare or Medicaid, you should spend money on preschool.”

4. Give parents free money.

Conservative reformers — known by some as Decepticons — have been proposing ways to give tax breaks to parents. Unfortunately these plans generally scant the people who need them most — poor parents.

But there’s a simpler way to do this: Give parents money.

Several countries do it — and nearly all of them have higher labor participation rates for women. “The benefits of using a straightforward child allowance are immense,” noted Matt Bruenig of Demos. “It produces a monthly benefit check that can be relied upon no matter what, instead of the annual lump sums you tend to get with tax credits. People can receive it whether they file their taxes or not (those with low or no income may not file taxes).”

With new evidence that poverty is literally bad for kids’ brains, Americans who offer no solutions to poor families while America has one of the highest poverty rates in the free world have no right to call themselves “pro-family.”

Besides, we already have Republicans on record as supporting free money for children — as long as they are children of the richest .2 percent.

5. Stop trying to repeal Obamacare — and expand Medicaid instead.

Democrats have done a not-so-great job at selling the fantastic benefits for new mothers in the Affordable Care Act. Not only does the law expand coverage and end discrimination against the uterus as a pre-existing condition, it also offers “preventive screenings and other services for pregnant women at no additional cost to the patient.”

Additional benefits for new mothers include folic acid supplements, smoking cessation counseling and drug counseling through Medicaid, and funding for a variety of new initiatives to research post-partum depression and experiment with home visits for new parents.

These improvements, along with contraception at no cost, undergird the argument that the  passage of Obamacare was the greatest “pro-life” victory ever. None of the sketchy Republican replacements for the law even attempt to replicate these benefits to new families.

For decades, Republicans have been holding the moral high ground on the issue of reproductive rights by arguing on religious and theoretical grounds. It’s time to shame those who persist in conspiring to make life harder for new parents who lack basic resources.

Liberals won when they stood up for paid sick leave in the Senate — and they’ll keep winning so long as they keep standing up for families.

Photo: Jennifer Lantigua via Flickr

Populist Proposals Win In 2014

Populist Proposals Win In 2014

There’s no denying that Democrats took a drubbing at the polls in 2014. Running cautious campaigns and shying away from Obamacare, Wall Street regulation, the anti-fracking movement, immigration reform and Obama himself — was not a winning strategy.

While the Democrats had a poor showing, populist and progressive ideas surged. Even in red states, pollsters find support for big progressive policy changes (such as living-wage laws, Medicare for all, a national infrastructure jobs program, expanded Social Security benefits and free higher education) that would re-establish a vibrant middle-class America. While voters were tossing Democrats aside in this past election, bigger majorities of the same electorate leapt at the chance to say “YES” to an array of unabashedly populist ballot initiatives:

Minimum wage. Even though the crimson-red states of Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska and South Dakota elected GOP Senate candidates, voters rejected the low-wage policies of the Republicans and their corporate backers by approving minimum-wage increases. San Francisco voters also raised their wage floor to $15 an hour, and Oakland went to $12.25. In addition, non-binding referenda calling for raises to $10 or more were approved by 65 percent of the voters in Illinois and by 13 Wisconsin cities and counties, where a whopping 70 to 83 percent of voters OK’d the increases.

Fracking. While ExxonMobil, Halliburton and dozens of huge energy corporations are in a nationwide fracking frenzy — running roughshod over local citizens in the furious rush for fast profits — locals have begun pushing back against the gross pollution, health problems, infrastructure damage and even earthquakes caused by the inherently destructive and intrusive fracking process. Asserting their human and civic rights, local coalitions have, in the last few years, won several referendum fights to ban fracking in their communities.

This year’s election saw four more victories added to the list. Bans were passed in Athens, Ohio (with 78 percent of the vote), California’s Mendocino County (67 percent) and San Benito County (57 percent) and even in Denton, Texas (59 percent).

Corporate money. In dozens of communities in five states, people went to the election polls and confirmed what opinion polls consistently report: The overwhelming majority of Americans want corporate money out of our elections. In the midst of the most money-soaked midterm election in global history, multipartisan majorities said “enough!” They voted for initiatives that said (1) only humans have constitutional rights; (2) money is not speech; and (3) “We the People” want to pass a 28th Amendment overturning the Supreme Court’s corrosive Citizens United edict.

Ironically, even as the Koch-financed governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, pulled off a re-election victory, 12 local communities (including his home county of Milwaukee) voted between 70 and 80 percent for local initiatives that call for an amendment to overturn the Court’s terrible decision. Similar majorities were amassed in statewide in Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts and Ohio. As the national director of the Move to Amend Campaign put it: “The leaders of both parties need to realize that their voters are clamoring for this amendment, and we are only going to get louder.”

Paid sick leave. Poverty is sickening enough, but millions of people trying to live on poverty-level wages face a truly sickening choice when they fall ill: Stay at home and lose a few days’ pay, or go to work sick, possibly spreading the illness to co-workers and customers. This year, there were four big victories for paid sick leave: Massachusetts (59 to 41 percent), Oakland, California (81 to 19 percent), Montclair, New Jersey (74 to 26 percent) and Trenton, New Jersey (86 to 14 percent).

Conservation. Three major conservation initiatives passed this year: Alaskans voted to prohibit future mining projects that would endanger wild salmon habitats; 75 percent of Florida voters approved a measure to dedicate $1 billion a year in real estate taxes to the protection of water in the endangered Everglades and other areas; and New Jerseyans OK’d an initiative that requires $2 billion in corporate tax revenue be spent on land conservation.

Marijuana. This year both Alaskans and Oregonians voted for full legalization, while Washington DC voted to decriminalize marijuana. And the U.S. territory of Guam approved marijuana use for medicinal purposes.

The day after the election, President Obama said: “To the two-thirds of voters that chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you.” Fine. But will he and the other Democratic leaders make the giant leap from “hearing” to doing? Taking bold, populist actions makes working stiffs and average Americans excited about voting. We need more leaders to champion the populist cause.

To find out more about Jim Hightower, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Web page at www.creators.com.

Photo: pbarcas via Flickr