Posts Tagged ‘AFP’

Americans for Prosperity has a letter from several national conservative leaders on the Democrats’ and Obama’s “bailout budget”.

National Conservative Leaders Speak Out on Obama’s “Bailout Budget”

A message from the following conservative leaders, representing the broader conservative movement:

Edwin Meese, former Attorney General
Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform
David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union
Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity
David McIntosh, former U.S. Representative from Indiana
Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America
Alfred S. Regnery, publisher of The American Spectator

Obama’s Bailout Budget will Bankrupt Americans as it bails out government and special interests, adding $10,000 per family per year to the national debt for the next ten years.

The unprecedented massive spending in the budget proposed by President Barack Obama is simply a bailout for government and special interests. The National Energy Tax and other tax hikes take resources out of the hands of struggling working Americans to finance this bailout. In order to pay for this spending spree, the government will cause irresponsible increases in the deficit, bankrupt the country, and place crushing financial burdens on future generations.

• The president claims that Republicans with “short memories” caused the current debt problems, but in reality he plans to quadruple George W. Bush’s single largest deficit — the record-breaking 2008 deficit — in his first year. The proposed budget will add nearly $1,000,000,000,000 to the national debt every year for the next 10 years, or about $10,000 per family per year.

• The president’s spending measures are too much even for the freewheeling Senate Democrats, 12 of whom declared in a letter to the Budget Committee that “the deficits projected by CBO are simply not acceptable.”

• The Administration raises revenue for this orgy of spending through a series of new taxes, including a National Energy Tax which will impose a “light switch” tax of $3,128 a year on every American household – the same Americans whose taxes Obama promised to cut in the 2008 presidential campaign.

The Obama Administration is happy to present the middle class with the bill for a massive spending program designed to cover the government’s past irresponsibility and benefit key Democratic constituencies. While the President always focuses his rhetoric on the “failed” ideas of the Bush Administration, he doubles down on the exact kind of fiscal irresponsibility that led to the current downturn.

George Bush set records with a onerous deficit that surpassed $400,000,000,000, but Obama easily outdoes him in bankrupting the country with an initial planned deficit of $1,850,000,000,000 — roughly $6100 per man, woman, and child in the nation. Every budget through the next decade calls for deficits double Bush’s biggest deficit. This massive bout of overspending will finance Obama’s wildly expensive pet projects, but at tremendous costs to future generations.

Read Full Post »

Americans for Prosperity is reporting on a New York Times article stating that California Democratic Representative Maxine Waters helped to funnel funds from TARP to OneUnited, a California bank where her husband served on the board and owns $250k in bank stock.

Americans for Prosperity Outraged by Rep. Waters’ Misuse of Taxpayer Dollars to Further Personal Agenda

For Immediate Release: Thursday, March 12, 2009

Contact: Mary Ellen Burke, (202) 349-5880

Americans for Prosperity Outraged by Rep. Waters’ Misuse of Taxpayer Dollars to Further Personal Agenda

WASHINGTON- Today, NYTimes.com reported that Representative Maxine Waters, a California Democrat, used her political influence to pressure U. S. Treasury officials to grant $50 million in bank bailout funds to OneUnited—a bank for which her husband served on the Board of Directors and owned at least $250,000 worth of stock in the institution.

As a result, OneUnited received a cash infusion of $12 million last December through the Treasury’s bank bailout effort, the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

In regards to Rep. Waters’ personal connection to the funding, Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity released the following statement:

“Rep. Maxine Waters allegedly steering funds to her husband’s bank is an example of the kind of abuse you get with massive government bailouts of industries. When trillions of dollars are being spent with little accountability, it’s far too easy for millions to be abused for political purposes. We need a return to real fiscal discipline and an end to the wasteful and abusive spending of our children’s future.”

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org

Read Full Post »

Americans for Prosperity has a very good article that describes how States that force unionization do poorer than right-to-work States.  Statistics are included.

Right to Work and Productivity: The Numbers

Americans for Prosperity believes in defending workers’ right to a secret ballot. However, union organizers and liberals want to take this right away. This would make it easier for union bosses to pressure workers into joining unions. Their contention is that unions make states and workers more prosperous.

Are they right? Let’s take a look at the issue and some data.

An article by Robert Reich, President Clinton’s Secretary of Labor, discusses two key points through which to view liberals intentions on this issue.

1) The only way to get the economy back on track is to boost the purchasing power of the middle class by expanding unions so workers get higher wages.

2) Create a Utopian view of life in 1955 (1/3 of workers belonged to unions and wages were high) and says now because less that 8 percent of the private sector is union, wages are low & impossible to form unions.

Conservative Perspective on Forced Unionization:
* It is a myth that government can make people rich by propping up wages. If you force wages to be artificially high you are going to force companies out of business.
* You will also make other people unemployed.
* You price people out of the labor market.
* These are the policies that extended the Great Depression.
* People today understand that unions aren’t beneficial.
* It would be great to see unions work with companies to make them better and more profitable—they offer no value and shouldn’t be able to force people to join.
* They should find a way to appeal to workers where they would actually want to join.
* Powerful union makes it hard to fire employees and discourage businesses from investing.
* Union companies have to invest in more equipment to get more out of each worker since wages are so high.
* Productivity growth has actually been slightly HIGHER in the right-to-work states on average than the union shop states, showing that the workplace restrictions imposed by unions may be counterproductive.

Right-to-work States Outperform,1997-2007

Productivity Growth Job Growth Economic Growth
Right-to-work 18.6% 17.6% 41.6%
Union shop 17.3% 8.9% 33.5%

Private Sector, Real chained 200 dollars.
Sources: GDP by state from U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and state employment from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

The following chart compares economic growth in the ten states with the greatest percentage of the private sector workforce in unions to the ten states with the lowest percentage

The ten most heavily unionized states saw 29.2% job growth and a 45.3% increase in GDP. The ten states with the lowest union concentration had substantially better economic performance: a 36% increase in private sector jobs and a 69.9% increase in GDP.

States that have allowed this freedom experienced tremendous growth as business move their operations to states that promote a friendly business environment.

Right to work states have had more than double the population growth of union shop states since 1990. The right to work states saw, on average, a 65.5% increase in GDP over the 16 year period while states with union shops laws only experienced an average of a 45% increase. The wages of workers in right to work states rose an average of 23% in right to work states while in union shop states average wages only rose 15%.

III. Research that EFCA is bad for business

Top line summary of the research: Studies have found that:

1) Real GDP was depressed by about $3.5 trillion dollars from 1947 to 2000 due to unions. If you added the decrease in real wages paid to employees, the total impact rises to more than $50 trillion.

2) From 2001 to 2006, the economies of states where unionizing is more difficult outperformed more than union-friendly states in total economic growth, job growth, gross state product, and per-capita disposable income.

* One study found that union-produced “deadweight” loss to the US economy of 0.91% of GDP in 1980 and 0.34% of GDP in 2000 (noting that the effect on GDP declined as union membership declined).

* The study also found a shortfall in real GDP of about $3.5 trillion dollars from 1947 to 2000 due to unions. If you added the decrease in real wages paid to employees as a result of unions to the impact on the country’s GDP, the total impact of unions for the period 1947 to 2000 exceeded $50 trillion.

[source: Richard K. Vedder, Ph.D. & Lowell E. Gallaway, Ph.D., “Do Unions Help the Economy? The Economic Effects of Labor Unions Revisited,” National Legal and Policy Center and The John M. Olin Institute for Employment Practice and Policy (2002), ]

* The Michigan-based Mackinac Center for Public Policy – using data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis – compared union-heavy Michigan to less unionized states with right-to-work laws. The report found that:

– Michigans average annual growth in real gross state product (the market value of all goods and services produced in a state) was only 1.8 percent from 1977 to 1999. Right-to-work states, with much lower levels of unionization, saw their real gross state product growth rate almost double Michigans rate at 3.4 percent.

– Michigans average annual employment growth was only 1.5 percent from 1970 to 2000, whereas right-to-work states grew by 2.9 percent.

– Michigans manufacturing growth actually declined during this time period by 0.3 percent whereas right-to-work states saw an increase in manufacturing job growth by 1.5 percent.

– The overall poverty rate for right-to-work states dropped by 6.7 percent from 1969 to 2000, while Michigans poverty rate increased by 0.6 percent.

Low State Unemployment Rates / Dec 2008: Preliminary Figures

U.S. National Average¦ 7.2

State Rate Right To Work (see list below)

Wyoming …….. 3.4 Right To Work
North Dakota …. 3.5 Right To Work
South Dakota 3.9 Right To Work
Nebraska …… 4.0 Right To Work
Utah ……………..4.3 Right To Work
Iowa ……………..4.6 Right To Work
New Hampshire 4.6
New Mexico 4.9
Oklahoma ……… 4.9 Right To Work
West Virginia ……4.9
Kansas ………….. 5.2 Right To Work
Montana ………… 5.4
Virginia ……………5.4 Right To Work
Hawaii …………….5.5
Maryland …………5.8
Louisiana ………… 5.9 Right To Work
Texas …………….. 6.0 Right To Work
Colorado 6.1
Arkansas 6.2 Right To Work
Delaware 6.2
Wisconsin 6.2
Vermont 6.4
Idaho 6.4 Right To Work
Alabama 6.7 Right To Work
Pennsylvania 6.7
Arizona 6.9 Right To Work
Massachusetts 6.9
Minnesota 6.9
Maine 7.0
New York 7.0
Connecticut 7.1
New Jersey 7.1
Washington 7.1

(source: Regional and State Employment and Unemployment Summary, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 01/27/09; Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics;

Right to work states

* According to the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, there are 22 “right to work” states:

Of the 22 “right to work” states, 15 had unemployment rates below the national average in December 2008; 7 had unemployment rates higher than the December national average

1. Alabama
2. Arizona
3. Arkansas
4. Florida 8.1 (December Unemployment Rate)
5. Georgia 8.1 (December Unemployment Rate)
6. Idaho
7. Iowa
8. Kansas
9. Louisiana
10. Mississippi 8.0 (December Unemployment Rate
11. Nebraska
12. Nevada 9.1 (December Unemployment Rate)
13. North Carolina 8.7 (December Unemployment Rate)
14. North Dakota
15. Oklahoma
16. South Carolina 9.5 (December Unemployment Rate)
17. South Dakota
18. Tennessee 7.9 (December Unemployment Rate)
19. Texas
20. Utah
21. Virginia
22. Wyoming.

[source: National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, “Employees in Right to Work States,” http://www.nrtw.org/d/rtwempl.htm – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, established in 1968, is a “nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by abuses of compulsory unionism.”]

Read Full Post »