Tag Archives: 99%

Stand with Walmart employees on Black Friday: do not shop at Walmart

Posted on by


image: nohelp

Robert Reich: Why You Shouldn’t Shop at Walmart on Friday

A half century ago America’s largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today’s dollars, including health and pension benefits.

Today, America’s largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart’s employees work less than 28 hours per week and don’t qualify for benefits.

There are many reasons for the difference – including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.

But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.

…

Walmart earned $16 billion last year (it just reported a 9 percent increase in earnings in the third quarter of 2012, to $3.6 billion), the lion’s share of which went instead to Walmart’s shareholders — including the family of its founder, Sam Walton, who earned on their Walmart stock more than the combined earnings of the bottom 40 percent of American workers.

Is this about to change? Despite decades of failed unionization attempts, Walmart workers are planning to strike or conduct some other form of protest outside at least 1,000 locations across the United States this Friday – so-called “Black Friday,” the biggest shopping day in America when the Christmas holiday buying season begins.

…

But if retail workers got a raise, would consumers have to pay higher prices to make up for it? A new study by the think tank Demos reports that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.

And, in the end, retailers would benefit. According to the study, the cost of the wage increases to major retailers would be $20.8 billion — about one percent of the sector’s $2.17 trillion in total annual sales. But the study also estimates the increased purchasing power of lower-wage workers as a result of the pay raises would generate $4 billion to $5 billion in additional retail sales.

Continue reading….


changewalmart: From ArtistsVsWalmart.Tumblr.com


via: christopherstreet

Walmart’s employees aren’t compensated with a living wage or benefits, so we — the taxpayers — pick up the tab for what their greedy owners won’t pay for: food, shelter, medical care, etc.

This situation has worked out really well for CEO Michael Duke, upper management, and the Walton children for decades — but it hasn’t worked out so great for the rest of us.

What’s wrong with America? Walmart ethics.

Class War: The things self-satisfied millionaires tell each other vs. Reality

Posted on by

Jonathan Chait says the hidden camera video that went viral yesterday exposes Mitt Romney “as a far more sinister character than I had imagined. Here is the sneering plutocrat, fully in thrall to a series of pernicious myths that are at the heart of the mania that has seized his party. He believes that market incomes in the United States are a perfect reflection of merit. Far from seeing his own privileged upbringing as the private-school educated son of an auto executive-turned-governor as an obvious refutation of that belief, Romney cites his own life, preposterously, as a confirmation of it…”

“The revelations in this video come to me as a genuine shock. I have never hated Romney. I presumed his ideological makeover since he set out to run for president was largely phony, even if he was now committed to carry through with it, and to whatever extent he’d come to believe his own lines, he was oblivious or naïve about the damage he would inflict upon the poor, sick, and vulnerable. It seems unavoidable now to conclude that Romney’s embrace of Paul Ryanism is born of actual contempt for the looters and moochers, a class war on behalf of his own class.”

###

There’s inequality all right, but it’s certainly not being felt by the one percent who secretly deride half of America for being lazy, shiftless bums.

motherjones – Mitt gave us an occasion to dust off our old inequality charts. We love dusting off our old inequality charts.

###

think-progress –  the bottom 95 percent of Americans have $1.48 in debt for every $1 in earnings. The top 5 percent, meanwhile, have 64 cents in debt for every $1 in earnings.

Check out the 9 other charts you need to see on income inequality

Rachel Maddow and David Corn: Sneering Plutocrat caught on tape!

Posted on by


…

Here is a link to some of those videos that Maddow is talking about: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UChMTCCC6dzR-VkgTDWo7H_A/videos?flow=grid&view=0 (thanks John Roach!)

###

Steve Benen reports that last night, the Republican candidate delivered a brief statement, hoping to quell the controversy:

“…the full transcript of his comments is available, but the key part of the statement is the fact that Romney simply endorsed everything seen in the clip. He conceded his recorded comments were “not elegantly stated,” and were delivered “off the cuff,” but nevertheless recommitted himself to the underlying sentiment.

“As a reporter asked, “Governor, are all of the things you said in the video things you believe? Are those core convictions?” Romney walked off the stage.”

Stockholm Syndrome victims for Romney!

Posted on by


via: tosdoh


Reference

We’re currently living “the cookie joke” — income inequality is all about political power

Posted on by

Stan Sorscher argues that Americans are currently living “the cookie joke” — because income inequality is all about political power:

“A CEO, a Tea Party member and public employee sit at a table, with 12 cookies on a plate. The CEO grabs 11 cookies and tells the Tea Party member, “You better watch him. He wants your cookie.” The CEO took 11 out of 12 cookies. This isn’t a question of what’s fair. The CEO has the economic power to take 11 cookies, and he does.

“I found a conservative blog that explained this point of view. The CEO deserved 11 cookies. Without the CEO, the 12 cookies would never have been baked. No one would have anything without the CEO. Not only did the CEO deserve 11 of the 12 cookies, but if we somehow had 15 cookies, the CEO would deserve 14. If the CEO made 24 cookies in China, he should get 23. The Tea Party member and the public employee should thank the CEO for their one cookie. The conservative blogger acknowledged that his interpretation wasn’t funny.

“[...] By shoveling 93% of new income to the top 1%, we are currently living the cookie joke in full measure. This isn’t working. If trickle-down policies could ever work, then our figurative cookie-bakers would already have hired millions of new employees. They didn’t. It hasn’t worked for the last 35 years.

“It doesn’t work.

“Well… it doesn’t work for 99% of us. Stiglitz puts it this way, “We’ve been shaping our society to create people who are more selfish.” Increasingly, policies are created by the richest 1%, and for the richest 1%. Their interests are placed first, through globalization, privatization, deregulation and insanely expensive political campaigns.

“Meanwhile, 99% of us are put at risk. We risk losing our jobs, our economic security, our homes, health care, education for our children, and economic opportunities.

“As always [the rich] seem to be the winners from the policies that they advocated and that imposed such high costs on others.”

“This is bad for democracy, bad for our future as a nation, bad for our ability to solve serious problems on national and international levels, bad for the environment and the planet, and just plain bad.

“We could just as well shape society to restore balance to our social, political and economic life. We start with a rehabilitation of the Social Contract. We need each other to prosper. That is,our neighbors must prosper for us to prosper.

“We need to restore trust in institutions of civil society. That includes government.”

It’s no coincidence that the GOP / one percent want the good old reliable conservative voter base to keep buying into the Republican ‘ideal’ of less government, smaller government, government can’t be trusted, government is baaad, the only good government is currently drowning in a bathtub. And it’s funny because as the rabble expect less of government, and as they elect politicians who promise them less government (and who, when elected, actually give them government that truly doesn’t work, as promised), somehow the rich wind up with more for themselves – from government, in the form of policies, tax laws, and benefits. And the rich get even richer while the rest of us get poorer.

If conservative voters opened their eyes, they’d see the elite don’t use “boot straps” to get ahead. They’re using government.

via: christopherstreet

Mitt Romney: A person should “get as much education as they can afford”

Posted on by

“I want to make sure that we keep America a place of opportunity, where everyone has a fair shot. They get as much education as they can afford…” — Mitt Romney on Wednesday, advocating for a class-based society of higher education, based on the wealth a person was born into as opposed to an individual’s talent and intelligence.

New America: The math genius who’s poor shouldn’t go to college, but should spend his/her life shining the shoes of people like Romney’s sons (or Mitt and Marie Antoinette themselves) who are born with trust funds and inheritances. Because, let’s be honest, who among us couldn’t “afford college” without financial help from programs or services like student loans, scholarships, and grants? Not all of us can borrow money for college from our parents.

And what a great way to enslave entire generations into a minimum wage existence — to the great advantage of corporations and the one percent.

May Day protests: banks feel victimized, “like elk defending themselves from attacking wolves”

Posted on by

Just pathetic:

Organizers and protesters around the world will come together to commemorate International Workers Day tomorrow, and they are taking on familiar targets. Large protest actions are planned in more than 115 American cities, where activists will continue the anti-Wall Street message started by the 99 Percent Movement last fall. The action will again center in New York, where protesters have identified 99 targets in Manhattan, including large Wall Street banks like JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America.

[...] Though the New York-based banks offered no specifics on how they plan to deal with the protests, one security adviser made the laughable comparison that Wall Street banks — the same ones whose errors include triggering the financial crisis and wrongfully foreclosing on thousands of Americans — were innocent elk defending themselves against attacking wolves, Bloomberg reports.

[...] It’s no secret why the banks view the 99 Percent Movement so negatively — the movement took Wall Street’s excesses and abuses to the mainstream, refocusing the national discussion on rising income inequality, exploding student debt, and fraudulent banking practices.

Continue: Wall Street Banks Coordinate To Fight May Day Protests, Compare Themselves To Elk Hunted By Wolves

Right. These guys are victims.

Stephen King: Tax Me, for F@%&’s Sake!

Posted on by

“I guess some of this mad right-wing love comes from the idea that in America, anyone can become a Rich Guy if he just works hard and saves his pennies. Mitt Romney has said, in effect, “I’m rich and I don’t apologize for it.” Nobody wants you to, Mitt. What some of us want—those who aren’t blinded by a lot of bullshit persiflage thrown up to mask the idea that rich folks want to keep their damn money—is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America without America. That you were fortunate enough to be born in a country where upward mobility is possible (a subject upon which Barack Obama can speak with the authority of experience), but where the channels making such upward mobility possible are being increasingly clogged. That it’s not fair to ask the middle class to assume a disproportionate amount of the tax burden. Not fair? It’s un-f—king-American, is what it is. I don’t want you to apologize for being rich; I want you to acknowledge that in America, we all should have to pay our fair share. That our civics classes never taught us that being American means that—sorry, kiddies—you’re on your own. That those who have received much must be obligated to pay—not to give, not to “cut a check and shut up,” in Gov. Christie’s words, but to pay—in the same proportion. That’s called stepping up and not whining about it. That’s called patriotism, a word the Tea Partiers love to throw around as long as it doesn’t cost their beloved rich folks any money.” – Stephen King: Tax Me, for F@%&’s Sake! – The Daily Beast | via: randomactsofchaos

Fortune 500 CEOs made 380 times more than average workers in 2011

Posted on by

Let’s not forget that these CEOs also pay a lower percentage of federal tax on their income than the average worker. I’m certain they earn 380 times more than the average worker for very good reasons. They work that much harder, or they’re that much more productive. Right? It certainly couldn’t be something like the rich and powerful gaming the political system for fun and profit.

Think Progress reports,

According to the latest edition of the AFL-CIO’s Executive Pay Watch report, the gap between CEO pay and worker pay expanded last year. In 2011, CEOs in the Fortune 500 made an average of $12 million, about 380 times what the average worker makes…

[...]  Meanwhile, workers saw their pay increase by just 2.8 percent last year. Already, most of the gains of the nascent economic recovery have been going to the richest Americans (just as they have for recent economic expansions). In 2010, the richest 1 percent captured 93 percent of the nation’s income gains.

The AFL-CIO is calling for regulators to implement a rule included in the Dodd-Frank financial reform law that requires companies to disclose their CEO-to-worker pay ratio. “Astronomical CEO pay is based on the false idea that the success of a corporation is due to one CEO genius. In reality, all employees create value, and CEO pay levels should be more in line with the rest of their company’s employee pay structure.

Read: Average Fortune 500 CEO Now Paid 380 Times As Much As The Average Worker 

If you agree with the Republican Party that these guys and their corporations should be deregulated even more (like chicken slaughter houses), that they should receive even more tax cuts that would be paid for with austerity measures for the rest of us, vote GOP! They might create a job one day.

Important reminder for the patriots

Posted on by

Austerity cuts for all of us will help pay for more tax cuts for the wealthy.

Do your part — vote Republican!

Morning Bunker Report: Thursday 4.12.2012

Posted on by

————————————-WHAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY STANDS FOR TODAY

At a campaign town hall event on Tuesday West declared that he’s “heard” that up to 80 House Democrats are members of the Communist Party. However, he would not name any specific people. West also got in a verbal shot against President Obama, declaring that Obama is too scared to debate him: “I really wish that, standing here before you, was Allen West and President Obama,” West said. “We could have a simple discussion. But that ain’t ever gonna happen.” “Why not?” an audience member asked. “Cuz he was too scared!” West responded in a mocking voice. This is just the latest in a long line of provocative statements that West has made, which have helped to build up his notoriety — and his campaign coffers. In addition, Sarah Palin and Herman Cain have each suggested in recent days that West should be the Vice Presidential nominee on the 2012 Republican ticket. [TPM]

Mitt Romney stumbles over ‘war on women’ – Romney, this week, came up with a counterpoint: 92 percent of the jobs lost in the recession belonged to women. It’s Obama who has waged the true anti-women war, by taking away their livelihoods with his misguided economic policies. [...] Asked to expand on how the president’s policies hurt women in particular, his staff couldn’t answer. Asked if Romney supported the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, which makes it easier for workers’ to sue over gender-based pay disparities, they again were unsure. Two hours later, a spokeswoman clarified that Romney “supports pay equity and is not looking to change current law” — after Ledbetter herself sent out a statement attacking the Republican candidate. Democrats, meanwhile, appear gleeful that Romney has not only engaged on the issue but adopted the “war on women” phrase. “So, can we keep this back and forth over whose policies are better for women going please,” tweeted Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse.

  • Romney’s claim is so misleading, in fact, that even the rabidly conservative and factually-challenged Daily Caller debunked it.
  • On Wednesday, the [Romney] campaign sent out statements from Republican Reps. Mary Bono Mack of California and Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, blaming women’s jobs losses on Obama’s policies. But both women voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Act as well as the proposed Paycheck Fairness Act. [HuffPo]

Why is this recovery different from all other recoveries? Because American workers have lost all their bargaining power… There have been two fundamental alterations in the U.S. economy since Ronald Reagan was president, however. First, American multinational corporations now locate much of their production abroad. Second, with the rate of private-sector unionization down to a microscopic 6.9 percent, workers have no power to bargain for higher pay. Employers can serenely blow them off — and judging by the data, that’s exactly what employers are doing. This recovery differs from its predecessors because it is concentrated among the affluent, and almost entirely among the very rich. Until we address the imbalance of power in the U.S. economy, and until Americans regain the clout that their parents and grandparents had to compel employers to share their revenue more equitably, the difference between our recoveries and our recessions will grow harder to discern. [Washington Post]

Bush: Don’t call them ‘rich’ – Bush spoke Tuesday at a tax-policy conference in New York hosted by his presidential institute. “If you raise taxes on the so-called rich you’re really raising taxes on the job creators,” he explained. So if you want “private-sector growth” then the best thing to do “is to leave capital in the treasuries of the job creators,” Bush said. We thought those folks were called “rich” because, well, they are. But that, apparently, is not the proper term. They are the “job creators.”So President Obama’s deplorable class warfare rhetoric pits the so-called poor and middle classes against the job creator class. And don’t try to sneak around that by calling them wealthy, big-wigs, plutocrats, oligarchs, fat-cats, tycoons or robber barons. They are the true working class, working 24-7 to create jobs for you and other ingrates.

George Zimmerman’s Mugshot — Zimmerman was taken into custody last night at the Seminole County jail in Sanford. Zimmerman’s attorney Mark O’Mara said his client will plead not guilty and asked that people not jump to conclusions about his guilt. [...] Rev Al Sharpton, the civil rights leader who appeared at several rallies around the country with Martin’s parents, said it was not a time to celebrate. “There’s no victory here, there’s no winners here, they’ve lost their son,” he said at a press conference in Washington after Corey had spoken. “This is not about gloating, it’s about pursuing justice. We have not won anything. All we’ve done is establish we must have the right to justice and redress in this country.” [The Guardian]

———————————————————–——PRESIDENT OBAMA / DEMOCRATS

Obama calls Ronald Reagan a ‘wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior’ – He described for the audience the actions of one of his predecessors in the Oval Office, a president who “gave a speech where he talked about a letter he had received from a wealthy executive who paid lower tax rates than his secretary, and wanted to come to Washington and tell Congress why that was wrong. So this president gave another speech where he said it was ‘crazy’—that’s a quote—that certain tax loopholes make it possible for multimillionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary.” “That wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior,” he said, “was Ronald Reagan.” Reagan, said the president, believed that everyone in the U.S. should pay their fair share, a position that would “disqualify him from the Republican primaries these days.” He even suggested changing the name from the “Buffet Rule” to the “Reagan Rule” if that would make it a little easier for Republicans to bear.

Memories from the GOP campaign trail: from BarackObama.com TV:

Top 50 Things Accomplished by President Barack Obama – 1. Passed Health Care Reform: After five presidents over a century failed to create universal health insurance, signed the Affordable Care Act (2010). It will cover 32 million uninsured Americans beginning in 2014 and mandates a suite of experimental measures to cut health care cost growth, the number one cause of America’s long-term fiscal problems. 2. Passed the Stimulus: Signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to spur economic growth amid greatest recession since the Great Depression. Weeks after stimulus went into effect, unemployment claims began to subside. Twelve months later, the private sector began producing more jobs than it was losing, and it has continued to do so for twenty-three straight months, creating a total of nearly 3.7 million new private-sector jobs….

Study: As wealth grows, so does greed and selfishness

Posted on by

Unfortunately, this would explain a lot. What it doesn’t explain is rightwing Christians who support this behavior with their politics and, particularly, Christian leaders who justify it. I’m sure we’re all familiar with those sections in the Gospels that celebrate gluttony and greed.

How Wealth Reduces Compassion: Scientific American

But why would wealth and status decrease our feelings of compassion for others? After all, it seems more likely that having few resources would lead to selfishness. Piff and his colleagues suspect that the answer may have something to do with how wealth and abundance give us a sense of freedom and independence from others. The less we have to rely on others, the less we may care about their feelings. This leads us towards being more self-focused. Another reason has to do with our attitudes towards greed. Like Gordon Gekko, upper-class people may be more likely to endorse the idea that “greed is good.” Piff and his colleagues found that wealthier people are more likely to agree with statements that greed is justified, beneficial, and morally defensible. These attitudes ended up predicting participants’ likelihood of engaging in unethical behavior.

Given the growing income inequality in the United States, the relationship between wealth and compassion has important implications. Those who hold most of the power in this country, political and otherwise, tend to come from privileged backgrounds. If social class influences how much we care about others, then the most powerful among us may be the least likely to make decisions that help the needy and the poor. They may also be the most likely to engage in unethical behavior. Keltner and Piff recently speculated in the New York Times about how their research helps explain why Goldman Sachs and other high-powered financial corporations are breeding grounds for greedy behavior. Although greed is a universal human emotion, it may have the strongest pull over those of us who already have the most.

So when we wonder, “When will the one percent feel they have enough money?” Now we know the answer: NEVER.  When Romney says he’s not concerned about the very poor, he means it. We also know the one percent will continue to take more than their share as long as we allow it. Why wouldn’t they?

Related: 

Morning Bunker Report: Tuesday 4.10.2012

Posted on by

————————————-WHAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY STANDS FOR TODAY

Robertson tells man ‘you are the boss’ in marriage – Televangelist Pat Robertson once again added to his list of controversial statements Monday, telling a man that he is “the boss” of the family when a conflict arises between him and his wife over money given to church. On the latest episode of The 700 Club, Robertson responded to a male viewer’s letter about his wife demanding the couple not give more in tithes to their church because of their difficult financial situation. Tithes are the money Christians give from their income to their church as a religious obligation. “You know big man, you are the boss,” he said. “I know people don’t want to hear that, but you are the high priest of your family and you are the man of the house.” [...] Robertson added: “You need to push forward and your wife will come along. But if you’re vacillating and she pulls you back, you’re not much of a leader. You’re supposed to be a leader, you supposed to be the high priest. You supposed to intercede for your family before the Lord. And, as they say, ‘Man up.’”

Joe Arpaio Wonders If GOP Candidates Are In On Conspiracy To Hide Obama’s Birth Certificate – Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio is disturbed that the Republican presidential candidates haven’t supported his quixotic effort to get to the bottom of President Obama’s birth certificate, and is begining to wonder if they’re part of the cover up. [...] APRAIO: I’ve had presidential candidates visit me in my office. I’ve talked to every one of them. … I don’t see anybody talking about this. I don’t see any senators talking about it. But when they mention me, they seem to forget my name. So isn’t that interesting? On both sides of the fence, they don’t want to talk about it. … How come everybody’s hiding this? [...] But Arpaio’s political star may have fallen along with his legal one. Arpaio is now on the verge of losing his badge thanks to accusations from the Department of Justice that his department systemically profiles based on race and has mishandled hundreds of sex crimes cases.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) argued yesterday that the female members in his caucus agree with him that the GOP’s “war on women” is just “a manufactured issue.” [...] “There is no issue. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe from Maine I think would be the first to say — and Lisa Murkowski from Alaska — ‘we don’t see any evidence of this.’” The Senate is out this week, but McConnell may way want to pay a little closer attention to what members of his caucus are actually saying. In this case, McConnell specifically mentioned five Republican senators — all of whom are women, and three of whom have raised serious concerns about what their party is up to. [...] McConnell seems comfortable speaking for all of these women, and ascribing beliefs to them. But if McConnell stopped telling us what these senators think and started listening to what they actually think, he might learn something important. [MaddowBlog]

———————————————————–——PRESIDENT OBAMA / DEMOCRATS

Obama will talk about taxes in Florida on Tuesday when he delivers a speech in support of the “Buffett Rule,” a measure to insure a 30 percent tax on income over $1 million earned by wealthy Americans. Vice President Joe Biden will travel to the battleground state of New Hampshire on Thursday also to discuss taxes. The Obama campaign sees the issue as a weak point for Romney, a former private equity executive and ex-governor of Massachusetts. “Middle class families are taking it on the chin right now and they don’t see others doing their fair share,” Wisconsin Democratic congresswoman Tammy Baldwin said in a conference call set up by the Obama campaign. On April 16, the Senate will take up the “Buffett Rule” although it is unlikely to be approved as Democrats lack the 60 votes needed to bring the issue to a full vote. [Reuters]

Dick Durbin, Senate Dem Leader, Hammers Romney Over Swiss Bank Account – Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) slammed presumed GOP nominee Mitt Romney for using a Swiss bank account and refusing to release more years of tax returns. “When is the last time a presidential candidate had a Swiss bank? I think the answer is never,” Durbin said on a conference call organized by the Obama campaign. The number two Democrat in the Senate said he asked billionaire investor Warren Buffett if he’d ever owned an an account in the tax friendly nation.” “‘Nope,’” Durbin said, quoting Buffett , “‘there are plenty of good banks in the United States.’” Durbin said there are only two reasons to hold a Swiss bank account: “Number one, you believe the Swiss Franc is a stronger currency than the United States Dollar. And that apparently was the decision the Romney family made during the Bush presidency.” “And secondly, you want to hide something, you want to conceal something,” He said. “It is impossible for him to explain or defend owning a Swiss bank account.”

Rep. Baldwin calls for House to vote on ‘Buffett Rule’ tax for millionaires – Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) on Monday urged leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives to bring her legislation to the floor to enact the so-called Buffett Rule. [...] Republicans have condemned the proposed rule as class warfare and it is unlikely to pass in the GOP-led House of Representatives. Nearly all House Republicans have sworn to fight any and all tax increases. But Baldwin said the American people “deserve to know where their Representatives stand” on this “critical” issue. “Our current tax code has been influenced by powerful special interests and includes loopholes and special provisions that allow approximately a quarter of all millionaires to pay lower effective tax rates than millions of middle class families,” she explained. Approximately 94,500 millionaires pay a lower effective tax rate than millions of families earning less than $100,000, according to the Congressional Research Service (PDF). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has announced that the Senate will vote on the legislation on April 16, tax day.

NEA Wants $1.5 Trillion From Closed Corporate Tax Loopholes To Fund Popular Education Programs – The National Education Association is ramping up a public information campaign to build support for closing big corporate tax loopholes and directing the revenue toward key education initiatives. The push comes weeks after the Obama administration released a framework for corporate tax reforms that would be revenue neutral, suggesting a schism between the powerful union and the White House. But in a Monday interview, NEA President Dennis Van Roekel applauded Obama’s record on education and said his group’s push is meant to raise awareness of one of many ways to finance more federal investment in education. “One reason to look at corporate taxes is because it is so huge,” Van Roekel said, citing the Center for Tax Justice, which concludes (PDF) that closing seven specific corporate tax loopholes could raise nearly $1.5 trillion over 10 years. NEA proposes using the money to raise the maximum Pell grant award to cover half the average cost of public higher education, fund Title I spending on students from low-income families and other initiatives.

Obama announces opposition to Minnesota same sex marriage ban – “While the President does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the record is clear that the President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same sex couples,” Kristin Sosanie, Obama’s Minnesota Communications Director, said in a statement. “That’s what the Minnesota ballot initiative would do – it would single out and discriminate against committed gay and lesbian couples – and that’s why the President does not support it.” The statement is nearly identical to another statement by the Obama campaign regarding efforts in the New Hampshire legislature to repeal the state’s same sex marriage law. That effort ended unsuccessfully in late March. [...] “The amendment does not represent the values Minnesotans hold dear – that marriage is about love and commitment, and that freedom means freedom for everyone,” Minnesotans United for All Families said in a statement. “We’re happy that President Obama and Minnesotans from all walks of life see this amendment for what it is – a government exclusion to a group of people simply because of who they are.”