AZ BlueMeanie

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

What the … When John McCain was vetting Mitt Romney for vice president, Romney turned over 23 years of tax returns. This year the American people are vetting Romney for president, and Romney has turned over one full year of his taxes. Ezra Klein writes, If Romney is nominated, 2012 will be about taxes – Wonkblog:

So let’s be clear: Romney hasn’t released his “taxes.” He has released a single tax return from a year in which he was already running for president for a second time. As Gov. George Romney — Mitt Romney’s father— said when he released 12 years of his taxes in 1968, “One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show.” We don’t know all that much more about the taxes Romney has paid today than we did yesterday.

But even if this one year is a fluke, even if it was done just for show, the outline of the story is clear enough: Romney is a very rich man who pays a very low marginal tax rate. In the past, it’s possible that more agressive tax engineering drove his rate even lower. It’s possible that more use was made of loopholes, and offshore accounts, and tax shelters. But even without all that, we know that Romney paid an effective tax rate of 13.9 percent in 2010.

* * *

His taxes also contextualize what he would do as president. Romney’s tax return shows that the effective rates paid by the richest Americans are often pretty low. Romney’s tax proposals would reduce those rates further. And the cost of those proposals — more than $6 trillion when all is said and done — would be offset through cuts to domestic programs. Romney is saying, in effect, that people like him should pay less to finance the government, and low-income Americans and seniors — the two groups that depend on government programs — should be asked to cut back instead. Many Americans are likely to see that as unfair.

Steve Benen points out that Romney's 2010 tax return raises more questions than it answers. Political Animal – What we’ve learned from Romney’s returns:

Mitt Romney’s campaign, as promised, released the former governor’s 2010 tax returns, as well as an estimate for his 2011 returns, and we’re starting to get a sense of why the Republican candidate wasn’t eager to share these details.

Mitt Romney offered a partial snapshot of his vast personal fortune late Monday, disclosing income of $21.7 million in 2010 and $20.9 million last year — virtually all of it profits, dividends or interest from investments.

None came from wages, the primary source of income for most Americans. Instead, Romney and his wife, Ann, collected millions in capital gains from a profusion of investments, as well as stock dividends and interest payments. 

By any fair estimate, over $42 million in income over two years isn’t bad for a guy who jokes about being “unemployed.” Indeed, Romney would be in the top 1% based solely on the income he makes in one week. [He makes in one day what the average wage earner makes in one year.]

Romney said last week that his rate was “closer to 15%,” but as it turns out, despite his vast wealth, he actually only paid a 13.9% rate last year — lower than his political rivals who aren’t nearly as wealthy, and lower than most middle-class American workers.

And what about those overseas investments?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Time once again for The Farley Report from Rep. Steve Farley (D-Tucson):

Things don't always happen the way you want them to. We in Tucson know that all too well.

But as we move forward — even from terrible events — in a spirit of love and hope and empathy, and join together in our community as we have especially since January 8, 2011, we have shown we can rise above anything and be a beacon unto the nation. 

As my family and I watched the video on Sunday of Gabby telling us that she would resign her seat, we cried. We feel like she is a member of our family. My daughters have joined me at Giffords events — and asked pertinent policy questions — for years and years, and Gabby has always been our hero. 

I know, as we all do, that Gabby is capable of doing anything she wants. Even though we so powerfully wanted her to keep representing us in Congress and take up her office once more, she has made the obvious right decision: to focus on her recovery. 

We want her in office, but above all, we want her well. And once she is well, I know that she will lead us once again, in a bigger and better capacity, and even the sky will no longer be the limit for where she can go.

Many of you have emailed me since Sunday to urge me to consider a run for her seat to carry forward Gabby's legacy, and I will tell you that if Gabby asks me, I will run, and I will ask for your help so that we can win together. If she asks another person to run, I will support that person and I will ask for your help so that we can win together.

Meanwhile, there is a lot of work to be done at the Capitol, and I remain committed to help change the Arizona Legislature this November as the new State Senator for the new District 9. If that changes, you will be among the first to know. 

Today at the Capitol I hosted Arizona's first Distracted Driving Summit, organized by Shelly Camp and her students from Payson High School, and attended by 150 teenagers from high schools around the state. It gave me a huge infusion of hope for our future.

One of my favorite things to do is to share with high school students an inside view on how our government works, and how they can play a part. As I told them this morning, the future of our democracy depends upon their active engagement in public policy as involved citizens. 

They made appointments with legislators of all parties to advocate for bans on driving while texting (HB2512 from Steve Urie (R-Gilbert)), cellphone use by teen drivers (SB1056 from John McComish (R-Ahwatukee) and HB2311 from me), and distracted driving in general (HB2312 from me). 

Some of the best moments came as I stood with some of the students, pointed out legislators on the plaza as they walked by, and watched as they tried out their best elevator speeches about the bills. The students were really pumped up for this chance to make their case to the Senators and Representatives, and I definitely get the sense that their feeling of empowerment will not leave them as they seek to improve our state in the years to come.

Yesterday, I introduced a bill to further empower citizen lobbyists like these students by reducing the power of large corporate lobbyists to influence legislation — HB2665, the ALEC Accountability Act of 2012, which I first described to you in the December Farley Report. 

Right now at the capitol, a back-door system of lobbyist-funded scholarships, not regulated or usually disclosed to the public, fund lawmaker participation in American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) conferences that promote an ideological agenda. This system also actively provides fancy accommodations, upscale dining and entertainment "networking" opportunities in cities around the country. 

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I warned you about this back in November. Foreclosuregate Update: 50 State AG settlement to let the banksters of Wall Street off with a slap on the wrist.

Now that warning is coming to fruition. The Washington Post reports $25B deal with banks over deceptive foreclosure practices sent to AGs as settlement nears:

The nation’s five largest mortgage lenders have agreed to overhaul their industry after deceptive foreclosure practices drove homeowners out of their homes, government officials said Monday.

A draft settlement between the banks and U.S. states has been sent to state officials for review.

Those who lost their homes to foreclosure are unlikely to get their homes back or benefit much financially from the settlement, which could be as high [little] as $25 billion. About 750,000 Americans — about half of the households who might be eligible for assistance under the deal — will likely receive checks for about $1,800.

* * *

[The settlement would only apply to privately held mortgages issued between 2008 and 2011, not those held by government-controlled Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Fannie and Freddie own about half of all U.S. mortgages, roughly about 31 million U.S. home loans.

As part of the deal, about 1 million homeowners could also get the principal amount of their mortgages written down by an average of $20,000. One in four homeowners with a mortgage — or roughly 11 million people — owe more than their home is worth. These so-called “underwater” borrowers have little chance at refinancing.]

* * *

[Under the deal:

— $17 billion would go toward reducing the principal that struggling homeowners owe on their mortgages.

— $5 billion would be placed in a reserve account for various state and federal programs; a portion of that money would cover the $1,800 checks sent to those homeowners affected by the deceptive practices.

— $3 billion would to help homeowners refinance at 5.25 percent.]

* * *

Five major banks — Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citibank and Ally Financial — and U.S. state attorneys general could adopt the agreement within weeks, according to two officials briefed on the discussions. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the agreement publicly.

* * *

Nearly 8 million Americans have faced foreclosure since the housing bubble burst. In some cases, companies that process mortgages failed to verify the information on foreclosure documents. The worst practices, known collectively as “robo-signing,” included employees signing documents they hadn’t read or using fake signatures to sign off on foreclosures. [Criminal fraud]

President Barack Obama is expected to tout the settlement in his State of the Union address Tuesday.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

It would be funny if it were not so sad. Just how out of touch with reality are the D.C. media villagers and Beltway bloviators?

During last nights "Survivor – GOP Presidential Primary" debate, Willard "Mittens" Romney was asked about his immigration policy, and he said that illegal immigrants would "self-deport." The media villagers all seemed to think that this was a new term that Romney had invented. As we here in Arizona all know, they are wrong.

Recalled former Sen. Russell Pearce has long promoted the anti-immigrant agenda of the Federation of Americans for immigration Reform (FAIR). Pearce has frequently said his goal with immigration laws is "attrition through enforcement," enforcing laws against illegal immigrants to encourage them to self-deport. This is hardly new to Romney. It is the established GOP position on immigration.

What it does reveal is that Willard "Mittens" Romney has gone all Russell Pearce extremist on immigration. Steve Benen reports at the Political Animal – ‘Self-deportation’:

Last night, Adam Smith, the political editor at the Tampa Bay Times, asked the former governor a good question: “You say you don’t want to go and round up people and deport them, but you also say that they would have to go back to their home countries and then apply for citizenship. So, if you don’t deport them, how do you send them home?”

Romney replied, “Well, the answer is self-deportation.”

And what, exactly, does that mean? Adam Serwer explained that the point is to make life so miserable for these immigrants that they simply leave on their own.

This is the right-wing’s answer to the question of how you deport eleven million unauthorized immigrants: You don’t. You force them to “deport themselves.” Although immigration reform advocates would prefer a solution that involves a path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants already here, Romney and his top immigration advisers believe they can remove millions of people through heavy-handed enforcement that makes life for unauthorized immigrants intolerable. This approach is notable for its complete lack of discretion and flexibility. Unauthorized immigrant parents with citizen children who need to go to school? Americans who are married to an undocumented immigrant who needs medical treatment? “Self-deportation” hits them all with the same mailed fist. […]

[M]ake no mistake, when Romney is discussing “self-deportation,” he’s talking about creating a United States where parents are afraid to register their kids for school or get them immunized because they might be asked for proof of citizenship. He’s talking about the type of country where local police can demand your immigration status based on mere suspicion that you don’t belong around here. “Self-deportation” is just a cleaner, less cruel-sounding way of endorsing harsh, coercive government policies in order to make life for unauthorized immigrants so unbearable that they have no choice but to find some way to leave. 

On immigration, it’s fair to say Romney is the most right-wing candidate of the modern political era.

Ahem, Steve, come visit us in Arizona. I'll introduce you around.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Arizona has often been the test lab for right-wing legislation (see ALEC and the Goldwater Institute). Arizona was among the first states to adopt a "Right to Work" provision in its Constitution (1946) (a Right to Work law guarantees that no person can be compelled, as a condition of employment, to join or not to join, or to pay dues to a labor union).

In reality it should be called a "free-rider" provision — employees working under a union collective bargaining agreement with the employer receive all the benefits of the collective bargaining agreement without having to be a union member or to contribute one dime to the union for administration of the collective bargaining ageement.

• Federal law has banned forced unionism since 1963 (National Labor Relations Board v. General Motors, 1963)
• Federal law prevents non-members from paying union dues, requiring them only to pay the cost of administering their contract (Communication Workers of America v. Beck et al, 1988)

The only difference between federal law (Taft-Hartley Act, as amended) and what "right to work" laws provide is that non-members pay nothing. It is not about benefiting workers, but about taking revenue away from the unions.

The state of Indiana is currently embroiled in a fight over a "right to work" bill advanced by former Bush Budget Director (the genius (sic) who helped destroy our economy), Gov. Mitch Daniels. On Monday, the bill passed out of the Senate and led to a walk out by House Democrats. Indiana Senate approves ‘right to work,’ House Democrats leave floor | The Indianapolis Star:

House Democrats remained behind closed doors late Monday, angry that they were blocked from offering more amendments to the controversial “right to work” bill.

This latest breakdown in the House came shortly after the Senate voted 28-22 for its version of the bill, Senate Bill 269.

* * *

Moments after the vote rejecting the referendum was cast, House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, asked if there were “further motions to amend.”

He repeated those words and just as a Democrat was speaking up, Bosma gaveled the bill closed, meaning that no further amendments could be offered it was now eligible for a final vote, likely tomorrow.

Democrats quickly said they needed to caucus — and left the floor.

The question now is when — or whether — Democrats will return.

More importantly – there is still such a thing as pro-labor Republicans in Indiana:

Nine Republicans joined all 13 Democrats in the Senate to vote against the bill.

They are Sens. Vaneta Becker, R-Evansville; Richard Bray, R-Martinsville; Ed Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso; Johnny Nugent, R-Lawrenceburg; Brent Steele, R-Bedford; Jim Tomes, R-Wadesville; Brent Waltz, R-Greenwood; and John Waterman, R-Shelburn.