Resistance is futile, happy shoppers and happy employees. But not yet; let's get to tonight's substance first.
Two weeks ago, Colorado's assistant Senate Minority Leader came to Maine to discuss with Mainers the terrific damage done to his state over 13 years. Last week, the Maine Senate President herself did the honors, speaking as part of the Maine Distinguished Fellows Program at the University of Maine. Senator Beth Edmonds of Freeport hit the audience's sweet spot with her opening salvo: "TaBOR threatens educational funding while giving the minority of elected officials veto power over the majority of elected officials, and I oppose it most vehemently. If you care about women and education, you will vote against it."
Nothin' but net, and you can read Jesse Davis's play-by-play here
http://www.mainecampus.com/.... "A similar bill was passed in Colorado in 1992. Since then, the state's rank in funding higher education has dropped from 34th to 47th, although economic growth in the area has increased. It was eventually suspended for harming local economies," he writes.
"I would like to see TABOR become as big of an issue to students as the 'No on 1' campaign," Edmonds told her listeners.
We may presume that TABOR proponent Mary Adams would not.
Google unearthed for us today an article from the Denver Post's November 3, 2005, edition, which told us of a conference call conducted by Grover Norquist of Washington, D.C. in the wake (no pun intended) of Colorado's vote to suspend TABOR for five years. Tis no surprise to find Grover entangled in the roots of this particular rose bush - great image, Hart - but there in the Post's reporting is a voice from way back East...
To set the scene, Colorado's Republican Governor Bill Owens led a bipartisan statewide effort to suspend the TABOR noose, much to the chagrin of others in his party. It ended Owens's relationship with Grover, for example. Grover "said that Owens will lose national stature for abandoning the fiscal conservative agenda, and that will help protect TABOR moves elsewhere," wrote Jim Hughes here http://www.pacificresearch.org/....
So Grover convened a conference call of TABORites across the nation to commiserate. Joe Stengel, the Colorado Senate Minority Leader was down in the dumps. "It frankly will eliminate TABOR," he said. "TABOR's as good as dead."
Which didn't thrill our familiar voice from way back East. According to Hughes's report, "Maine tax-limit activist Mary Adams asked Stengel and other movement allies in Colorado to avoid undermining the larger national cause as they mourn Tuesday's loss in Colorado."
" `If you're going to be saying that TABOR is gutted, or dead in Colorado, how in the world are we going to refute the Democrats (in Maine), who began today, because of this vote, to say that TABOR has been rejected and hasn't worked in Colorado?' she said. `As you frame these answers, please be considerate of the other states who are now going to try to carry this load. We've now got to move forward'."
Oh, Mary. Mary, where were these new friends of yours when you ran for governor in 1996? How many of them sent a check or two? Even a little one? Hm. Just something to think about.
TABORites wanted advice, Hughes writes, and they got it: "Be ready for media opposition and scare tactics such as threats that college tuition will go sky high."
Scare tactics indeed. Ask the students of the University of Colorado at Boulder if scare tactics built their Wolf Law Building when the legislature wouldn't. Answer: Nope, they had to the damn thing themselves in 2004 when "the law school faced accreditation loss because of lousy facilities [and] student leaders voted to double student fees to pay for a new law school and four other buildings." Scare tactics. Shameful.
Let's break it down. UC-Boulder diplomas were about to become worthless without accreditation. Colorado lawmakers knew it but wouldn't undo the damage of TABOR. Thanks, TABOR. So the students were forced to raise their own money and save their own university from oblivion. Is that one of the "greatest generation's" many lessons to young Americans? Bet it's one they'll carry with them.
Denver Post columnist Jim Spencer has the story here, Mary: http://www.denverpost.com/.... There aren't any scare tactics in the story, just as there aren't any framed portraits of lawmakers in the new Wolf Law Building. They didn't send a dime.
Good thing Senator Edmonds is giving the students at the University of Maine some advance warning.
Edmonds's public service appointment wasn't the only voice of reason from Maine in today's in-box. Southwest Harbor economist John Buell writes in today's Bangor Daily News that "reduces the art of fiscal management to a simple formula and in the process deprives these same citizens of fundamental democratic rights." His scare-tactic-free column is found here, Mary: http://www.bangornews.com/....
I like economists, because their data-based analyses make for easy reading and lead to simple conclusions. Here's Buell's: "TABOR would only make us a less democratic community. It addresses symptoms rather than root causes and will end up making the patient worse."
See what I mean? You could cut diamonds with that hard edge.
By the way, speaking of conference-call convener Grover Norquist, is he the real father of the ugly baby we've been bouncing on our knees for these months? He claimed so in June at the breakfast of the American Prospect in Washington. In response to a question from Mark Schmitt of the New America Foundation, Grover mentioned "two suggestions" that he's offered to deal with spending that are, in his opinion, "sheer genius," as reported here http://www.prospect.org/.... "The first is term-limit the Appropriations Committee. Deal with spending ... some people go, let's pass a constitutional amendment to deal with spending. Oh, I see, you have two-thirds of both houses and three-quarters of the state legislatures ready to do something? If you have that, we wouldn't be where we are. So you don't. Quit telling me about a constitutional amendment. Having an annual vote on a constitutional amendment is fine as an educational device, fine. Nothing wrong with that, that's a good idea. I get a vote every year on a two-thirds majority to raise taxes. Do we win? No. What are we doing? We're marking votes. We're seeing where everybody is and we're getting our team used to seeing this."
Our team? So the efforts to get ballot measures this year is a hit-and-miss learning experience? Catch lessons this time, gauge support, then narrow the field and march your petitions across softer ground next time? Grover even tells Schmitt that his "team" is expanding its scope beyond the strictures of tax issues, the bread-and-butter of his organization, Americans for Tax Reform.
"We work on all the tax issues, but ... we're expanding into property rights now. We have six issues, shareholder associations, property rights alliance ... I think there's probably a list of them there actually ... and property rights is an increasingly important one," he says.
But the Washington Monthly is one of a growing chorus of folks asking whether Grover's star is fading. In a great context item in the March 2005 edition, Daniel Frankling and A.G. Newmyer III survey the landscape for Grover, reminding readers that he "once famously boasted that he hoped to `reduce [government] to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub'."
"Anti-tax groups such as ATR, the Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity, and FreedomWorks seem to have feet-on-the-desk privileges in the White House and Republican Congress," they write here http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/.... "Another Republican Hoosier lawmaker complained to The Indianapolis Star, `I knew it [ATR's no-tax pledge] was like a marriage when I signed it, but now I want a divorce'."
But, they say, "Lost among press stories heralding the Republicans' victories in the presidential and congressional elections, however, is evidence that the tide may be turning. Voters in November rejected every tax-limitation measure on state ballots, including a Maine property tax initiative that was the most ambitious of its kind in 20 years."
"TABOR has completely warped Colorado politics ever since. One of the original supporters was a little-known state representative from Aurora named Bill Owens. Six years later, Owens was elected to be Colorado's first Republican governor in 24 years. It wasn't long before national Republicans began to notice. National Review named him `America's Best Governor' in 2002 and admiringly listed his government-cutting bona fides. Anti-tax advocates began touting TABOR as a national model and Owens as a potential presidential candidate for 2008."
"But while Colorado has been terrific for TABOR, TABOR has been a nightmare for Colorado, and for Colorado Republicans in particular. The state budget was fine as long as the state's economy was growing, and bills could be pushed into the following year. Once things slowed down, retrenchment became a serious business just as health care and education expenses began to shoot upwards. Thanks to TABOR, the state can't increase its spending on roads and other expenditures it's been putting off. Now, Gov. Owens himself has proposed a ballot measure to curtail some of the law's limits."
Mmm. Next thing you know, Colorado's business community will be withholding campaign checks from Republicans.
"For businesses to be successful, you need roads and you need higher education, both of which have gotten worse under TABOR and will continue to get worse," says Tom Clark of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, who notes that higher education has shrunk from 25 percent of the state budget in 1995 to about 10 percent today. "I'm a Republican," Clark says, "but I made the decision not to give any money to the state party."
Wow. And that was a year ago, before we knew who Jack Abramoff was, and before we knew who helped Jack Abramoff launder casino money en route to Ralph Reed, former wunderkind of the Christian Coalition and soon-to-be washed up Georgia politician. What a year it's been.
Moving from print magazines to radio, we find an almost-sparkling gem on National Public Radio this week. Given the extraordinary quality of NPR reporting on almost every issue it addresses, the fact that reporter Jeff Brady missed the one name connecting several named entities in yesterday morning's report here http://www.npr.org/... was all the more disappointing.
Brady, who is based in Denver and covers issues across the American West, was dispatched to cover the "takings" initiatives that sprang like dandelions in a pasture this spring and summer. Despite the matter's complexity, Brady did a good job of encapsulating it in a few minutes' reporting, with the aid of Boise, Idaho, City Councilwoman Elaine Clegg. "Gosh, if this thing passes, maybe that coal-fired plant is going to get built next to your house, because we won't be able to pay that company enough money to keep them from building it," Clegg told Brady.
Clegg explained, correctly, that the initiative represents a "bait-and-switch" on the part of its proponents, who used "eminent domain" language as the bait. "They're baiting you with eminent domain, telling you that this is going to fix eminent domain. And then they're switching in regulatory takings, and actually getting you to vote for that, when you might not if you really knew what it was about."
She noted too that "the media have compounded the problem. Recent articles in Nevada and California referred only to the eminent-domain provision of the initiatives, with no mention of the so-called `regulatory takings' sections."
But when Brady addressed the question of who is behind the initiatives, he came within a hair's breadth of finding the answer. Read his finding and catch the ball yourself: "The initiative got on the Idaho ballot with money from small government groups -- more than $330,000, according to the most recent campaign-finance reports. Those same groups -- the Fund for Democracy; America at It's Best and Americans for Limited Government -- have spent millions supporting the initiatives in the West."
So close, Jeff, so close. Check Fund for Democracy's business address, then check the business address for the Americans for Limited Government Foundation, and then ask yourself why they are the same address, and then - here's the kicker - check a New York City directory for the home address of Howie Rich. Omigosh! They're the same!
And Jeff, I'll bet you a dollar that if you look at the business records of America At Its Best, you'd find some other information leading you to him, either a business address, or a name or a telephone number, something. I'm speculating, Jeff, but oh, I got a feelin'.
Heck, I bet Laird Maxwell would tell you straight-out if you ask him; Laird doesn't hide much for long. (Well, there WAS that business of the telephone messages on the night before the election that one year.)
I won't even get into Laird's answer to your bait-and-switch question. Really, it's so colorless compared to his usual commentary that it makes me wonder if the weather was bad that day, or maybe he didn't feel well.
Before we wrap our note tonight, we oughta pay some attention to this front-page item found in today's edition of The Hill, the newspaper distributed on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. and available online. It appears that the ghost of the Sam Walton wants you to register to vote. And would you like a buggy or a basket, while you're at it?
What? What does "the nation's largest employer" (ahem - but maybe not so much the biggest provider of health insurance bennies to the cash registerers, shall we say?) have to do with grassroots electoral politics?
I had to ask. Alexander Bolton had to tell me here http://www.thehill.com/.... Wallyworld is "planning to launch a voter registration and education campaign this fall targeted at its 1.3 million employees in an effort to combat growing criticism from Democrats and labor unions," Bolton writes. "By doing so, the world's largest retailer is striding into the national political arena, which until this election cycle it has taken pains to avoid."
(!) Pardon me, I think that noodle had a bone in it. I'll be all right after a little water, thank you. "Pains to avoid," he said.
"Wal-Mart's voter registration and education programs could be among the biggest in the country," Bolton advises. "The company's decision appears to be a response to several high-profile Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and four 2008 Democratic presidential hopefuls, who participated in a labor-organized anti-Wal-Mart campaign this summer."
Aha, so Wal-Mart is going to campaign against Democratic candidates, then? Is that the logical conclusion? After all, they're stinging at the participation of Democrats in Wake Up Wal-Mart events, including "Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.), New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack" and "Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.), Sen. Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Ned Lamont, Rep. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), and Rep. Ben Cardin (Md.)."
Well, I'm just quoting. I know Joe's now a "petitioning Democrat" whatever that means. Hey, now that he's thrown in with the not-Democrat segment of the populace, will he end his participation with Wake Up Wal-Mart too?
Bolton quotes "a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll published Friday [that] showed that 52 percent of Americans said companies like Wal-Mart `should be reviewed and regulated more' over its health and pension benefits. In the poll, 45 percent of the respondents rated Wal-Mart positively while 31 percent did not."
This gets clearer and clearer. Americans don't trust Wal-Mart and question its commitment to its employees, so Americans are ignorant and must have a "voter education program," beginning with Wal-Mart's 18,000 employees in Iowa. Which is home of the one of the first-in-the-nation primaries. Of course.
Why is my temple throbbing? Why am I remembering that Macintosh commercial from 1984? (Literally, from 1984 and from "1984".) The grainy gray head telling we grainy and gray drones how we'll live and think... o, I feel swimmyheaded.
Wal-Mart tells its employees in an August letter, "We would never suggest to you how to vote, but we have an obligation to tell you when politicians are saying something about your company that isn't true. We urge you to talk with your friends, your family and your neighbors about the good Wal-Mart does."
Now read those lines aloud to yourself, in the voice of that detached head from the "1984" commercial. Spooky, innit? Let me channel a voice for you: "You will not concern yourself with the New York strip on my plate; you will find your biscuit and gravy filling and satisfying. You will thank your God on Sunday that you have a job, but you will not take longer than 15 minutes to make this prayer, so you can return to your station. You will remember to smile, be pleasant, and ask the customer if he or she found `everything all right'. You will report any union organizing activity to your customer service manager, for these organizers want you to lose your job and great benefits. You are a happy employee, because you are a valued member of the team."
Whoa. Stare into the abyss long enough and...
Wonder who'll get the directive next? Bolton's got the scoop. "Wal-Mart also sent letters to staff in other presidential primary states such as New Hampshire and South Carolina, said Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com." Primary states. You will comply, no?