Rick Perry's Texas "Economic Boon" A Big Lie? Low Wage Jobs With No Benefits!

The Texas Unmiracle

As expected, Rick Perry, the governor of Texas, has announced that he is running for president. And we already know what his campaign will be about: faith in miracles.

Some of these miracles will involve things that you’re liable to read in the Bible. But if he wins the Republican nomination, his campaign will probably center on a more secular theme: the alleged economic miracle in Texas, which, it’s often asserted, sailed through the Great Recession almost unscathed thanks to conservative economic policies. And Mr. Perry will claim that he can restore prosperity to America by applying the same policies at a national level.

So what you need to know is that the Texas miracle is a myth, and more broadly that Texan experience offers no useful lessons on how to restore national full employment.

It’s true that Texas entered recession a bit later than the rest of America, mainly because the state’s still energy-heavy economy was buoyed by high oil prices through the first half of 2008. Also, Texas was spared the worst of the housing crisis, partly because it turns out to have surprisingly strict regulation of mortgage lending.

Despite all that, however, from mid-2008 onward unemployment soared in Texas, just as it did almost everywhere else.

In June 2011, the Texas unemployment rate was 8.2 percent. That was less than unemployment in collapsed-bubble states like California and Florida, but it was slightly higher than the unemployment rate in New York, and significantly higher than the rate in Massachusetts. By the way, one in four Texans lacks health insurance, the highest proportion in the nation, thanks largely to the state’s small-government approach. Meanwhile, Massachusetts has near-universal coverage thanks to health reform very similar to the “job-killing” Affordable Care Act.

So where does the notion of a Texas miracle come from? Mainly from widespread misunderstanding of the economic effects of population growth.

For this much is true about Texas: It has, for many decades, had much faster population growth than the rest of America — about twice as fast since 1990. Several factors underlie this rapid population growth: a high birth rate, immigration from Mexico, and inward migration of Americans from other states, who are attracted to Texas by its warm weather and low cost of living, low housing costs in particular.

And just to be clear, there’s nothing wrong with a low cost of living. In particular, there’s a good case to be made that zoning policies in many states unnecessarily restrict the supply of housing, and that this is one area where Texas does in fact do something right.

But what does population growth have to do with job growth? Well, the high rate of population growth translates into above-average job growth through a couple of channels. Many of the people moving to Texas — retirees in search of warm winters, middle-class Mexicans in search of a safer life — bring purchasing power that leads to greater local employment. At the same time, the rapid growth in the Texas work force keeps wages low — almost 10 percent of Texan workers earn the minimum wage or less, well above the national average — and these low wages give corporations an incentive to move production to the Lone Star State.

So Texas tends, in good years and bad, to have higher job growth than the rest of America. But it needs lots of new jobs just to keep up with its rising population — and as those unemployment comparisons show, recent employment growth has fallen well short of what’s needed.

If this picture doesn’t look very much like the glowing portrait Texas boosters like to paint, there’s a reason: the glowing portrait is false.

Still, does Texas job growth point the way to faster job growth in the nation as a whole? No.

What Texas shows is that a state offering cheap labor and, less important, weak regulation can attract jobs from other states. I believe that the appropriate response to this insight is “Well, duh.” The point is that arguing from this experience that depressing wages and dismantling regulation in America as a whole would create more jobs — which is, whatever Mr. Perry may say, what Perrynomics amounts to in practice — involves a fallacy of composition: every state can’t lure jobs away from every other state.

In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs — because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem.

So when Mr. Perry presents himself as the candidate who knows how to create jobs, don’t believe him. His prescriptions for job creation would work about as well in practice as his prayer-based attempt to end Texas’s crippling drought.



Is Rick Perry's jobs 'miracle' a lie?

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose campaign bus is plastered with the slogan "Get America Working Again," is making his record on jobs the centerpiece of his run for the Republican presidential nomination. As proof that he's the GOP candidate best positioned to beat President Obama, he points to the so-called "Texas miracle" — Perry's state has added, not lost, jobs in the faltering economy. But critics say Perry's claims are "overblown," and that others, including President Obama, also deserve credit for Texas' good fortune. Is Perry overstating the "Texas miracle" and his role in it?

The jobs "miracle" didn't happen: "The Texas miracle is a myth," says Paul Krugman in The New York Times. The oil-producing state entered the recession late, largely because it benefited from high oil prices in 2008. After that "unemployment soared in Texas, just as it did almost everywhere else." In June 2011, Texas' unemployment rate, at 8.2 percent, was higher than New York's and Massachusetts', and "one in four Texans lack health insurance, the highest proportion in the nation...."
"The Texas unmiracle"

Perry did create fertile ground for job growth: California has lots of oil, too, says Jeffrey Folks at The American Thinker, yet its economy is "in the Dumpster" while Texas prospers. Why the difference? Texas has no income tax, so working adults and retirees want to live there. And as governor, "Rick Perry helped to create a tax and regulatory environment" that helped businesses flourish. Too bad Obama didn't adopt Perry's policies at a national level.
"Obama and the Perry miracle"

The "Texas miracle" is more complicated than Perry admits: Rick Perry can take credit for a 2003 law capping malpractice awards, says Ezra Klein at The Washington Post, which attracted 20,000 physicians to Texas. But, for the most part, Texas didn't create jobs — it siphoned them from other states by offering sub-par wages and loose business regulations, which is hardly a solution nationwide. And many of Texas' new jobs came from government spending aided by $6.4 billion in Obama stimulus spending, but you won't hear that in Perry's stump speech.
"Breaking down Rick Perry's 'Texas miracle'"


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, NY Times, The Week, Youtube, Google Maps

Rick Perry Revealed: He Created Low Wage Jobs With No Benefits!

Today Michelle Bachmann & Ron Paul Were Big Winners In The 2011 Ames Iowa GOP Straw Poll. Pres. Obama's Re-election Campaign Staff Members Are Probably Somewhere Smiling Right About Now. As It Relates To Mitt Romney: His Flip Flopping & Bad Jobs Record Will Cost Him Republican Votes. Rick Perry? More Than 1 Million Jobs For Texans Were Created On Perry's Watch. Low Wage Or Below Federal Minimum Wage Jobs With NO Benefits! VOTE OBAMA IN 2012 & REHIRE PELOSI!













Top 10 Things Texas Gov. Rick Perry Doesn’t Want You To Know About Him


With widespread discontent on the right over their current presidential field, all eyes are trained on a likely new entrant: Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R).

Perry, who has been elected governor three times and served for more than 10 years, enjoys bona fides from social conservatives and Tea Party-types alike. Glenn Beck even described Perry as a man he was so enamored with that he wanted to “French kiss.”

However, as conservatives fawn over their newest presidential hopeful, it’s worth taking a closer examination at his record as governor. On issues across the board, from Perry’s support for dropping out of Social Security and Medicaid to his state’s abysmal pollution levels and his proposal that Texas secede from the United States, the Republican governor has amassed a record of far-right extremism.


Think Progress has assembled the top ten hits from Perry’s tenure as governor:

(1) PERRY ALLOWED THE EXECUTION OF A LIKELY INNOCENT MAN, THEN IMPEDED AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER: In 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Huntsville, Texas after being convicted of arson and the murder of his three children. Even after significant evidence emerged showing that arson had not caused the fire (thus exonerating Willingham), Perry refused to grant a stay of execution. Five years after Willingham was executed, a report from a Texas Forensic Science Commission investigator found that the fire could not have been arson. As the commission prepared to hear testimony from the investigator in October 2009, Perry quickly fired and replaced three of its members, forcing an indefinite delay in the hearing.


(2) PERRY WANTS TO REPEAL THE 16th AND 17th AMENDMENTS, ENDING DIRECT ELECTION OF U.S. SENATORS AND THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX: In his 2010 book Fed Up!, Perry called the 16th and 17th Amendments “mistaken” and said they resulted from “a fit of populist rage.” The 16th Amendment allows the federal government to collect income taxes, which is the single biggest source of revenue, accounting for 45 percent of all receipts. The 17th Amendment took electing U.S. senators out of the hands of political insiders and allowed the American public to decide their representation instead. If Perry had his way, the federal government would be stripped of its current ability to fund highway construction projects, food inspectors, and the military, and the American public would not even be permitted to elect their own senators.


(3) PERRY PROPOSED LETTING STATES DROP OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICAID: Despite the programs’ importance and popularity, Perry has argued that states like Texas should be allowed to opt out of Social Security and Medicaid. Were Perry to have his way on Social Security, “the entire system would collapse under the weight of too many Social Security beneficiaries who had not paid into the system,” notes Ian Millhiser. On Medicaid, in addition to stripping 3.6 million low-income Texans of their health care, Perry’s proposal would actually hurt, not help, the state’s budget deficit. This is because, as Igor Volsky writes, opting out of Medicaid would take “billions out of the state economy that goes on to support hospitals and other providers,” while forcing hospitals “to swallow the costs of caring for uninsured individuals who will continue to use the emergency room as their primary source of care.”


(4) TEXAS IS THE COUNTRY’S BIGGEST POLLUTER, BUT PERRY SUED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE STATE’S AIR QUALITY STANDARDS: Texas is the biggest polluter in the country, leading the nation in carbon dioxide emissions. However, when the EPA published its “disapproval” of the state’s air quality standards for falling short of the Clean Air Act’s requirements, Perry sued the federal government to challenge the ruling. Perry’s environmental record doesn’t end there. He is a global warming denier who called the 2010 BP oil spill an “act of God” while speaking at a trade association funded by BP.


(5) PERRY DESIGNATED AS “EMERGENCY LEGISLATION” A BILL REQUIRING ALL WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS TO HAVE SONOGRAMS FIRST: In January, Perry proposed requiring all women seeking abortions to have a sonogram at least 24 hours before the procedure. Under the bill, doctors would be required to “tell a woman the size of her fetus’ limbs and organs, even if she does not want to know.” Before a woman is permitted to have an abortion, physicians are also forced to provide an image of the fetus and make the woman listen to the sound of its heartbeat. Perry designated his proposal as “emergency legislation,” allowing the bill to be rushed through the legislature. He signed it into law last month.


(6) PERRY GUTTED CHILDCARE SERVICES EVEN AS TEXAS CHILDHOOD POVERTY HIT 25 PERCENT: Facing a $27 billion budget deficit this year, Perry decided to gut child support services, despite a report from the Center for Public Policy Priorities that found nearly one in four Texas children lived beneath the poverty line. Instead of raising revenue like California, a state facing a similarly sized deficit, Perry scaled back more than $10 billion of child support over two years. As Think Progress’ Pat Garofalo noted, these cuts were proposed despite Texas’ possession of a $8.2 billion rainy day fund.


(7) PERRY WAS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF TEXAS’S ANTI-SODOMY LAWS: Perry was a strong proponent of Texas’s anti-sodomy law that was struck down in 2003 by the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas. Calling the law “appropriate,” Perry dismissed the Court decision as the result of “nine oligarchs in robes.” Even after being struck down, Perry supported the Texas legislature’s refusal to remove the law from its books.


(8) PERRY IS A STIMULUS HYPOCRITE WHO LOUDLY CRITICIZED FEDERAL RECOVERY MONEY BUT USED IT TO BALANCE HIS STATE’S BUDGET: As the nation struggled to avoid economic collapse in 2009, Perry was a vocal critic of Congress’s recovery package, even advocating that Texas reject the money because “we can take care of ourselves.” Months later, after Perry was able to balance the state’s budget only with the aid of billions in federal stimulus dollars, Perry again repeated that he would reject federal funding, arguing that the government “spends money they don’t have.” Five months later, Perry again took advantage of federal funding to issue $2 billion in bonds for highway improvements in Texas. Even so, the state faces a $27 billion budget deficit.


(9) PERRY SAID THAT TEXAS MIGHT HAVE TO SECEDE FROM THE UNITED STATES: One hundred and fifty years ago, Texas and other southern states seceded from the Union, resulting in a bloody Civil War. 148 years later, Perry floated the idea that Texas may again have to secede because of a federal government that “continues to thumb their nose at the American people.” Perry was roundly criticized for his proposal, yet he repeated his threat the next month on Fox News, telling host Neil Cavuto, “If Washington continues to force these programs on the states, if Washington continues to disregard the tenth amendment, who knows what happens.”




(10) DESPITE HAVING THE WORST UNINSURED RATE IN THE COUNTRY, PERRY CLAIMS THAT TEXAS HAS “THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE COUNTRY” : On Bill Bennett’s radio show last year, Perry claimed that “Texas has the best health care in the country.” In reality, Texas has the highest rate of uninsured residents of any state. More than one in four Texans lack coverage; the national average is just 15.4 percent. As such, there are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states. Despite Texas’s low coverage rates, the state has some of the most restrictive Medicaid eligibility thresholds, and Perry has even proposed dropping out of the program. Texas also has an inordinately high percentage of impoverished children, yet Perry opposed expanding the successful State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).





Rick Perry's Texas jobs boom: The whole story

Texas has created a lot of jobs over the 10 years that Rick Perry's been governor -- there's no doubt about it.

Perry, who is formally launching his presidential candidacy on Saturday, is making his state's economic prowess a centerpiece of his campaign. Already he's been bragging about his state being the "epicenter of job growth."

Texas has gained more than 1 million net new jobs in the decade Perry has led the state. And it's been going strong since the recession ended.

"We are home to fewer than one in 10 Americans ... but four in 10 new American jobs are in our state," he told a conference of state legislators from around the nation this week.

But that doesn't mean that all is well with employment in the Lone Star State. Texas leads the nation in minimum-wage jobs, and many positions don't offer health benefits. Also, steep budget cuts are expected to result in the loss of more than 100,000 jobs.

Perhaps most importantly, Texas can't create jobs fast enough to keep up with its rapidly growing population. Since 2007, the state's number of working-age residents expanded by 6.6%, nearly twice the national average.

Factoring in that population growth means Texas would need to create another 629,000 jobs, or 5.6% more positions, just to reach its pre-recession employment level, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

"They have a long way to go before they get back to a positive place," said Doug Hall, director of the Economic Analysis and Research Network, an institute project.

Still, Texas has been adding jobs at a rapid clip since the recession's end in 2009. The state has created nearly 297,000 net new positions since June of that year, representing a major chunk of the nation's 715,000 gain, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Of course, Texas enjoys advantages that have nothing to do with having Perry at the helm. Rich in natural resources, the state has been benefiting from the high price of oil and the expanded interest in natural gas exploration. Energy employment has soared by 16.8% over the past year alone.

While the energy sector is driving much of the recent jobs expansion, nearly all industries are doing well, said Jim Gaines, research economist at The Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University.

Construction jobs, for instance, have grown by 5.4% in the past year, according to the center. Employment in professional services is up 4.5% and in the hospitality business by 3%. Only the government and information technology sectors have seen drops, of 1.4% and 5%, respectively.

"Texas has fared better than most of the nation," said Terry Clower, who directs the Center for Economic Development and Research at the University of North Texas. "Private sector job creation has been pretty strong compared to most other states."

The secret, according to Perry, is low taxes, predictable regulation, a fair legal system, and a skilled workforce. And he's been sharing it with companies around the country, hoping to lure them to his state. Some are heeding his siren call, lured by the state's low cost of doing business, as well as Texas Enterprise Fund, which has awarded companies $440 million to relocate since it was created in 2003.

Texas, however, still faces many challenges on the jobs front. Many of the positions that have been created are on the lower end of the pay scale. Some 550,000 workers last year were paid at or below the federal minimum wage of $7.25, more than double the number making those wages in 2008, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That's 9.5% of Texas' hourly workforce, which gives it the highest percentage of minimum-wage hourly workers in the nation -- a dubious title it shares with Mississippi.

"We have created jobs, but they are not jobs with good wages and benefits," said F. Scott McCown, executive director, Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for low-income residents.

Going forward, the Lone Star State will have to work even harder to create jobs. That's because Perry signed a budget in May that slashes $15 billion in government spending over the next two years. Also, the federal stimulus funds that poured into the state since 2009 have largely dried up.

The state budget cuts alone could result in the loss of more than 100,000 jobs, many of them in the public sector, Clower said. Thousands of teachers are already feeling the impact of more than $5 billion in cuts to education funding.

The state's rapidly expanding population has been both a blessing and a curse. While it has spurred the creation of jobs to service the new residents, it has also kept the state's unemployment rate higher than one would expect for a place that's adding so many positions. Texas' unemployment rate is 8.2% -- lower than the nation's, but higher than 25 other states.

Unless Perry can push job creation into overdrive, the rate is likely to stay high, economists say.

"Our labor force is growing substantially faster than we can grow jobs," Gaines said.


View Larger Map


Sources: AP, CNN, Fox News, Politico, Think Progress, Youtube, Google Maps

Anthony Foxx Woos Charlotte's Gay Voters: 2011 Re-election Bid & Campaign Promises

Mayor Anthony Foxx Meets With Charlotte's Gay Community


Mayor Anthony Foxx became the first sitting Charlotte mayor to hold a public meeting with the gay community Wednesday night.

"I have the real pleasure of serving 720,000 people who live in this city," Foxx said. "Every single person has a unique background."

Several community members who attended the talk at the Lesbian & Gay Community Center called it a huge step toward acceptance and equality for a city that has long kept its gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender residents at a distance.

"There is still this wide swath of conservatism in Charlotte," said Richard Thomas, chairman of the Mecklenburg Gay & Lesbian Political Action Committee. "The opportunity is phenomenal to now open that dialogue so that we can start change."

Many in the community are still angry with former Mayor Pat McCrory, who refused to send a routine welcome letter to greet attendees of the annual dinner for the Carolinas chapter of the Human Rights Campaign, a major gay rights advocacy group.

In 1995, former Mayor Richard Vinroot voiced his opposition to a city gay rights festival stating, "I don't wish to see us raise the level of exposure of the gay and lesbian movement in this city."

Teresa Davis, who moderated the mayor's discussion, drew a large round of applause when she held up a framed copy of the letter Foxx wrote welcoming the estimated 10,000 attendees at the Pride Charlotte festival in July.

The mayor covered multiple topics, including public safety, bullying in schools, and anti-discrimination policies.

Matt Comer, editor of Qnotes, a LGBT community newspaper, said the city still has a long way to go before members of the community feel included.

He and others peppered the mayor for much of the nearly two-hour conversation with questions and statements about why the city has yet to add benefits for domestic partners, like the county has done.

They pressed him to hold a public debate on the issue so that they, as voters, would know who they could support in November.

"At the end of the day it needs to be talked about. When is it going to be talked about?" said Riley Murray, 40, who lives in northwest Charlotte. "You're supposed to be our voice."

Foxx gave no firm commitments on bringing the issue to City Council or requesting a study. He said the city must consider that its budget is hundreds of millions less than it was a year earlier.

"I'm not going to sit here and say I'm going to support same-sex benefits without knowing the financial impacts," he said.

The council has debated the issue before in 2003, but City Attorney Mac McCarley said state law doesn't give clear approval for the benefits.

But a recent report from the UNC School of Government wrote that state law appears to give local governments authority to offer the benefits, though it hasn't been tested in court.

Last year, the Mecklenburg commissioners voted to offer domestic partner benefits to county workers in same-sex relationships in 2011. But it wasn't easy. Debate was heated and a public uproar ensued after Commissioner Bill James referred to fellow commissioner Vilma Leake's son as "a homo" after she discussed his death from AIDS as a reason to support the measure.




Gay Voters' Support For Republicans Nearly Doubled From 2008


Republicans made significant inroads among gay and lesbian voters in the midterm elections, with national exit polls for the House races showing that the GOP captured 31 percent of the vote of this group this year, compared to 19 percent in 2008.

The change from the last midterm elections in 2006 was not quite as large but an increase nevertheless. In 2006, 24 percent supported Republicans. Democrats' share of the gay vote rose from 75 percent in 2006 to 80 percent in 2008 and then dropped to 68 percent in 2010. Each year, approximately 3 percent of voters identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual.

"I have been very concerned over these last two years that the connection between the gay rights community and the Democratic Party is in danger of being broken, because I think expectations were set so high as a result of the 2008 election, and people are extremely disappointed," said Richard Socarides, a former assistant to President Clinton and senior White House adviser on gay rights.

Socarides said that the gay community recognizes President Obama has many pressing issues to juggle, but there's nevertheless frustration on his LGBT strategy.

"The president articulated in the early summer of 2009, when he had that event at the White House on the 40th anniversary of [the] Stonewall [rebellion] and had a couple of hundred people in the White House -- he said, essentially, give me two terms, and at the end of eight years, I will have accomplished for you what I said I would," said Socarides. "I think that some people come out of that as, we're not prepared to wait. And some people thought it was a bad strategy because they thought it was going to get harder not easier. You didn't have to be a rocket scientist to see this change coming in Congress a long time ago. So, I think that we as Democrats have a lot of explaining to do."

More conservatives have been speaking out in favor of gay rights as the issue becomes more mainstream amongst the general public, and Republicans perhaps sense some vulnerability and dissatisfaction with Democrats.

Of course, one of the central figures pushing for marriage equality is conservative attorney Ted Olson who, along with David Boies, argued the case seeking to overturn California's Prop. 8, which bans same-sex marriage. Former Republican National Committee chair Ken Mehlman made headlines recently when he came out as a gay man and signed on to help raise money for the marriage equality fight.

The Log Cabin Republicans have also been taking on a more visible role, bringing the suit arguing that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is unconstitutional. R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, is proud of the fact that 12 of the 17 candidates the group endorsed went on to win their races. He said he believes that the reason Republicans performed better with the gay community in this election is because of the focus on the economy rather than social issues.

"Yes, Don't Ask, Don't Tell should be repealed, so we can have open service," said Cooper. "But if people can't pay their bills or there is concern about their investments, then there could be some overriding points there."

"We want Republicans who respect individual liberty and individual responsibility and champion that as conservatives," he added. "So that's the ideal, right? But knowing there are members of the party that don't fall under that definition -- or, as I like to say, we're working on them -- our guidance was, during this campaign cycle, if you have nothing nice to say about the gay community, say nothing at all. Just shut up. And talk about issues that do affect all Americans, like the economy. Everyone needs a job -- doesn't matter if you're gay or straight."

Darlene Nipper, deputy executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, agreed that the struggling economy and larger political trends likely played a major role.

"There is enormous fear and frustration among people all across the nation, and a factor is a rocky, stalled economy and high unemployment rate," said Nipper. "When the party in power doesn't seem to be making it better, some people make their anger known at the ballot box. Is that the case here? It's tough to know for sure without people actually saying why they voted the way they did."

Socarides also said that some people who identify as gay may have been "voting more on economic issues rather than rights issues."

Among Republican elected officials, there has so far been basically no activity. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) attended a fundraising event for the Log Cabin Republicans in September, but received flack from the religious right for doing so. Besides this move, Republicans have shown little interest in making gay rights a major part of their agenda, and one of the few Republicans supporting the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) -- Rep. Charles Djou (Hawaii) -- lost his seat on Tuesday.

Cooper, who had just returned from meetings on Capitol Hill before speaking with The Huffington Post on Thursday, had more hope for progress. He said that Republican leadership staff had told him the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would likely be taken up during the lame-duck session in the House, although the calendar had not yet been set. He added that his group was pitching ENDA -- which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity -- to Republicans as a "pro-jobs piece of legislation."

"No one should be denied access to employment," said Cooper, "and that is a conservative talking point. I think we may have some opportunity there to gain some potential support or votes we haven't had in the past. And of course it helps we have some folks who are already in Congress, who are incumbent, who will help message that."

In the next Congress, he said the Log Cabin Republicans would be pushing a tax equity bill, to be introduced by Republican members. He also expected more Republicans and conservative Democrats to support the 2011 defense authorization bill -- which contains a provision to repeal DADT -- when it comes up, since the Pentagon will soon be finishing its review of the implications of open service for gays and lesbians.

UPDATE,

2:33 p.m.: Several readers have written in to point out that the sample size of gay, lesbian and bisexual voters for this poll was small. Liz Goodwin of The Upshot spoke with Hunter College Professor Ken Sherrill, who studies the gay electorate and said that after reviewing the full data, there was "a disproportionate drop in Democratic support among LGB voters compared to Hispanic, black, and young voters." "Though the sample size is still very small and thus there's a large margin of error, Sherrill now says the drop may be attributed to 'dissatisfaction with the pace of change on LGB rights over the past two years,'" added Goodwin.




Gay Voters Angry At Democrats Could Sway 2010 Election


Kate Coatar is seriously considering voting for Green Party candidates instead of Democrats, whom she normally supports. James Wyatt won't cast a ballot at all because he no longer trusts anyone to fight for causes important to him.

If Democratic candidates are counting on long-standing support from gay voters to help stave off big losses on Nov. 2, they could be in for a surprise.

Across the country, activists say gay voters are angry – at the lack of progress on issues from eliminating employment discrimination to uncertainty over serving in the military to the economy – and some are choosing to sit out this election or look for other candidates.

President Barack Obama's hometown of Chicago, with its large, politically and socially active gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, offers a snapshot of what some are calling the "enthusiasm gap" between voters who came out strong for Obama and other Democrats in 2008 and re-energized Republican base voters, including tea party enthusiasts who say they are primed to storm the polls.

It didn't help that the controversy over the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays erupted less than two weeks before the election, when a judge overturned it, then Obama's justice department decided to fight the judge's decision. On Thursday, the Defense Department declared that "don't ask, don't tell" is official policy but set up a new system that could make it tougher to get thrown out of the military for being openly gay.

"It's all talk and nothing's happening, and I'm just over it," said Coatar, 62, a church business manager who said she's as concerned about health care and homelessness as about gay issues. "I don't know who to vote for and the election is a week away."

Wyatt, 35, a maintenance worker at the Center on Halsted, a community center serving Chicago's GLBT community, said politicians only court gay voters at election time.

"Once they're elected, they're not fighting for things like civil unions or same-sex marriage or ending 'don't ask, don't tell' because they're hot-button issues," said Wyatt, who usually supports Democrats. "We're just used as a piggyback for them to get into office. It's absurd."

Whether or not that's the case, Wyatt isn't the only one who feels that way.

And in places like Cook County, Ill., where the gay population represents about 7 percent of voters, that could mean the difference between victory and defeat in some races, said Rick Garcia, director of public policy for Equality Illinois. One of those races is a much-watched and close battle for Obama's old Senate seat between Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and Republican Mark Kirk.

"If (candidates) can mobilize the gay community and get them out to vote, it could make all the difference in the world in some of these key races," said Garcia.

But volunteers who've been calling the 18,000 or so members of Equality Illinois to urge them to vote have been getting an earful. Many members say they won't vote or will vote against incumbents, regardless of their party affiliation or stance on gay issues.

This year's election is a stark contrast to 2008, when the gay community turned out in droves to elect Obama and help Democrats regain control of Congress.

"People were clamoring and very excited about the change that then-candidate Obama promised America," Garcia said. "Now I see lethargy at best and disgust at worst."

He said gains won under Obama, including in fighting housing discrimination, have not filtered out to many in the gay community because "the big issues have not appeared to change at all."

"But change takes time; sometimes it takes a lot of time. A lot of folks just don't understand that," said Garcia. "I am older and more seasoned, but most people are very disturbed with the administration ... and they're the hard ones to get out to vote.

"The message is huge: Don't take us for granted."

Tracy Baim, publisher of Windy City Times, Chicago's oldest and largest GLBT newspaper, and author of the new book "Obama and the Gays," said disappointment is showing up in another way: Some are refusing to donate money to candidates until they see progress, although it's difficult to gauge how much that has affected fundraising.

A message left Friday with the Democratic National Committee seeking comment was not immediately returned.

But many gay organizations are working hard to get voters to the polls, fearing they could face setbacks if Republicans retake control of Congress. Baim said Democrats and Obama still enjoy widespread support in some parts of the gay community, particularly among African-Americans and Latinos, and she believes the majority still will vote.

"People are disappointed but understand that this really is the best hope for significant change over the next several years," she said. "But at the same time, the anger is very real."

Robin McGehee, co-founder and director of the national gay-rights organization GetEQUAL calls the mood among gay voters a "disappointment canyon" but said they have no choice but to go to the polls.

She, however, is refusing to donate to or volunteer for any candidate this year. And members of her group are protesting wherever Obama appears on the campaign trail.

"We can't not take advantage of the right to vote, but that doesn't mean we can't vote smartly," said McGehee, of Fresno, Calif. "If I was a leader in the Democratic Party, I would be worried.

"Either we're important enough to fight for our equality or we're worth losing," she said. "Right now we're being treated like we're worth losing."








View Larger Map


Sources: Charmeck.org, Huffington Post, McClatchy Newspapers, WCNC, Google Maps

Obama Announces 2-Year Tax Cut & 13-Month Unemployment Extension Deal

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Obama Announces Tentative Pact On Bush Tax Cuts


President Obama announced late Monday afternoon that the White House and Democratic and Republican lawmakers have worked out a "framework" to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans for two years.

He said that while the agreement "was not perfect" it represented "an essential step" for the country's economic recovery.

It was not immediately clear whether there was wide agreement on the proposal, however, which included elements sure to anger both left and right. Top Democrats in Congress have warned such a deal would be too generous to the wealthy, and House Democratic leadership aides told CBS News immediately after the announcement that House Democrats have not signed off on any deal.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT, said following the announcement that he would "do whatever is necessary to stop a deal that extends tax cuts for the top earners." In a statement, House Majority Leader Harry Reid's office said, "Now that the President has outlined his proposal, Senator Reid plans on discussing it with his caucus tomorrow."

Mr. Obama and most Democrats wanted the Bush-era tax cuts extended only for couples making less than $250,000 per year and individuals making less than $200,000. Republicans wanted the cuts permanently extended for all Americans, and if the tentative deal goes through they will have gotten their wish, at least temporarily.

But the plan also includes concessions to Democrats, including the extension of unemployment insurance benefits for an additional 13 months.

Mr. Obama said that while he strongly prefers not to extend the cuts for all, he had no choice but to agree to do so temporarily because Senate Republicans blocked efforts to extend the cuts for all but the top two percent in votes over the weekend.

"What is abundantly clear is that Republicans will block a permanent tax cut for the middle class unless they also get a permanent tax cut for the wealthiest Americans regardless of the cost or impact on the deficit," he said, stating that a permanent extension of all the cuts would cost $700 billion.

GOP opposition meant all Americans were at risk of having their taxes increased, he said, a risk he found unacceptable.

"Without a willingness to give on both sides, there's no reason to believe that this stalemate won't continue well into next year," he said.

"I know there's some people in my own party and in the other party who would rather prolong this battle even if we can't reach a compromise," he added. "But I'm not willing to let working families across this country become collateral damage for political warfare here in Washington...So as sympathetic as I am to those who prefer a fight over compromise, as much as the political wisdom may dictate fighting over solving problems, it would be the wrong thing to do."

The plan includes a one-year employee cut in payroll, or Social Security, taxes that would reduce employee contributions from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent. The payroll tax cut, which is designed to spur hiring, replaces the "Making Work Pay" tax credit in the stimulus bill, which Mr. Obama had wanted extended for another year. Under the plan the payroll tax would be reduced from 12.4 percent to 10.4 percent overall, since employers pay in 6.2 percent as well.

The White House says that for a family of four making $75,000 per year, the payroll tax cut means a reduction of $1,500 in yearly taxes. An administration officials says this "will have more than twice the economic impact next year as a one-year extension of Making Work Pay." The cut also will be more noticed than the "Making Work Pay" tax credit from the stimulus package, which many Americans did not realize they had received.

The agreement temporarily sets the estate tax, which was zero this year, at 35 percent on estate transactions of more than $5 million. (Mr. Obama made clear in his remarks that he opposed that part of the agreement.)

It also maintains the earned income tax credit for low-income families, the child tax credit and the American opportunity tax credit for college.


Sources: CBS News, CNN, MSNBC

Tax Cut Deal To Include Unemployment Benefits Extension: Gop & Dems Compromise

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

U.S. Senators Say Deal Likely On Extending Tax Cuts, Jobless Benefits


Top U.S. Senators from both parties indicated Sunday that a deal was likely soon on temporarily extending Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans, along with unemployment benefits that have expired.

However, Republican senators made clear they are unlikely to budge in their opposition to other Democratic priorities in the final weeks of the lame-duck session of Congress that ends in early January.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, told the NBC program "Meet the Press" he was "optimistic" about an agreement on the tax rates and jobless benefits, but added there likely wasn't time for the Senate to ratify a new nuclear arms treaty with Russia or complete work on a major defense bill that includes repeal of the "don't ask, don' tell" policy banning openly gay and lesbian soldiers.

Democrats, stymied by the ability of Senate Republicans to filibuster their agenda, shot back with angry words.

"I hope Americans will understand how craven and empty and hollow and contradictory the Republican position is," veteran Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, told CNN.

The posturing and rhetoric reflects the changed political equation in Washington in the aftermath of the November congressional elections described by President Barack Obama as a "shellacking" for Democrats, with Republican recapturing control of the House and narrowing the Democratic majority in the Senate.

Congressional Democrats have tried but failed to push through their preferred proposals in the lame-duck session, while they still have majorities in both chambers.

The House approved Obama's proposal to extend the Bush tax cuts only for people earning up to $200,000 a year as individuals or $250,000 a year for families, with income above those levels increasing to levels from the 1990s. In the Senate, Republicans on Saturday successfully blocked debate on the proposal, as well as a similar one that the income threshold for higher tax rates at anything over $1 million.

Democrats contend the nation must prevent working-class Americans from facing higher taxes, as promised by Obama in his 2008 election campaign, but can't afford the extra hundreds of billions of dollars it would cost to maintain the tax cuts for the wealthy. Republicans argue that the economy remains too fragile to allow anyone's taxes to increase.

For now, compromise appears to include a temporary extension of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, probably for a year or two, while Congress works on a long-term plan to reduce the nation's debt.

"I've said that neither side has the votes to get what they want, so I think we're going to have to kick it over for two years," Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah told CNN's "State of the Union" program, adding that the deal also will have to include extending unemployment benefits, as demanded by Democrats. "If you want to go beyond that then I think things break down."

On the same program, Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon called for a one-year extension of the tax cuts for everyone to buy time for Congress to work out a total tax overhaul. He said the key was to get a deal quickly and move forward.

"This is a town driven by a culture of procrastination," Wyden said. "If you don't force fast action, what you'll end up doing is just kicking the can down the road, and the only thing those jobless Americans will be is a kicked can."

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the chamber's second ranking Democrat, told the CBS program "Face the Nation" that the tax cut and jobless benefits issues must be linked.

"The notion that we would give tax cuts to those making over $1 million a year, which is the Republican position, and then turn our backs on 2 million Americans who will lose unemployment benefits before Christmas, 127,000 in the state of Illinois, is unconscionable," Durbin said.

On the same program, Republican Sen. Jon Kyl acknowledged that an agreement would include both the extended tax cuts and the unemployment benefits.

"There are other items that both the president and Republicans would like to see a part of this package as well," Kyl said. "As one of the six negotiators, I can tell you there have been a lot of discussions about a lot of the other elements as well. But at least in theory I think an agreement could be reached in the relatively near future."

Asked if Congress could break at the end of the year without acting on the measures, requiring a restart of the process when the new Congress convenes in early January, Hatch told CNN: "I don't think we can. I think that would be disastrous."

Kyl echoed that on CBS, saying: "It's almost Christmas Eve. I don't think anybody thinks that we can leave this thing hanging."

Or as Durbin put it: "There's nothing that motivates members of Congress more than the thought of a recess or going home."

The biggest challenge for Democrats may be getting their House caucus to accept a compromise, a senior Democratic aide told CNN on Sunday.

According to the source, House Democratic leaders met Saturday night with Vice President Joe Biden, White House Chief of Staff Pete Rouse, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and White House budget chief Jack Lew to discuss the negotiations, while House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid visited the White House to meet with Obama.

"There's going to be a deal," the senior Democratic aide said on condition of not being identified by name, adding: "the folks who are going to have the toughest time agreeing to that are House Democrats."

McConnell and the rest of the Senate Republican caucus have refused to consider any other issues until Congress acts on the tax-cut extension and spending authorization plans for the rest of the fiscal year.

That leaves little time for more proposals being pushed by Democrats, McConnell said on NBC. In particular, he questioned if the Senate would have time to take up a major defense authorization bill that includes the "don't ask, don't tell" repeal, and the New START treaty with Russia that resumes mutual inspections of nuclear arsenals and limits the number of warheads.

The START treaty has some GOP support, including former Secretaries of State George Schultz, Henry Kissinger and Colin Powell, as well as the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana.

Lugar told CNN's "State of the Union" that "the votes are there" to ratify the treaty now in the Senate, if it can be brought up for a vote. However, Kyl told reporters that "I don't think we're going to have time to do the treaty in the lame-duck session."

On NBC, McConnell offered a limited view of possible compromises with Obama and Democratic leaders, saying: "To the extent that the president wants to do things that I and my members are comfortable with, we want to do that for the country."

Kerry responded on NBC that the Republicans were using their filibuster power to hold Democratic proposals hostage.

"What we've seen is a Republican Party that's absolutely prepared to deny unemployment insurance to people who have been laid off, who can't pay their bills, who want to, you know, put food on the table for their families," Kerry said. "They (Republicans) have said, "No, we're willing to hold that hostage so we can give the wealthiest people in the country a bonus tax cut."

He called such politics hypocritical, and said of McConnell: "All he talked about was if they could do something that makes (them) comfortable. That's not how you compromise. They need to have a little discomfort, just as we have a little discomfort."


Sources: CNN, MSNBC

North Carolina's High Poverty Rates & Rising Unemployment Claims

North Carolina Employment Security Commission Backs Off On Collecting Overpayments Of Jobless Benefits


The North Carolina Employment Security Commission said Thursday that it will work with the federal government in hopes of allowing thousands of unemployed North Carolina residents keep $28 million in jobless benefits that was mistakenly paid to them earlier this year.

A computer programming error led to overpayments to about 38,000 people receiving a second year of benefits, ESC officials said. The mistakes occurred in checks issued from January through mid-May, when an internal audit caught the problem.

The agency began sending letters to people last week to inform them of the errors and to detail how much they might owe. ESC Deputy Chairman David Clegg said many of the people receiving letters would end up owing nothing, and about 15 percent were underpaid and would be eligible to receive more money.

Many unemployed residents, however, were incensed when the ESC began cutting their weekly benefit checks in half to recoup the money mistakenly paid out earlier.

Raleigh resident Tammy Lee said the ESC stopped sending her benefit checks altogether.

"I had no warning that I was getting nothing," said Lee, who was laid off from her sales job in February 2009. "I'm in a constant state of panic."

Clegg said officials had to address the issue while the people affected were still receiving benefits.

Lee said she became even more upset this week when the ESC sent her two letters: One said she was no longer eligible for benefits while the second said she remains eligible.

"When you say you have these letters, they don't even want to talk to you. They transfer you," she said.

ESC officials issued a statement late Thursday, saying they had worked out a plan with Gov. Beverly Perdue and U.S. Department of Labor Assistant Secretary Jane Oates to waive repayment of the overpayments, if possible.

ESC Chairwoman Lynn Holmes plans to issue an order waiving repayment, and she will ask Perdue to issue a similar executive order, if required by the federal government.

All claims still need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to determine if they're eligible for a waiver, the statement said.

ESC officials declined to answer questions about the plan, including how the state would repay the $28 million owed to the government and whether the money already taken from people's benefits checks would be returned.

"I sincerely apologize for the confusion and inconvenience caused to our citizens over this issue,” Holmes said in the statement. “I could have done a better job communicating this error, and the resolution of the error, to our beneficiaries. I have instructed the ESC staff to work diligently to correct this problem and make sure every claim is handled fairly and accurately.”

The agency plans to keep its phone lines open late and to provide better information to people who have questions about the issue, officials said.

Officials are still investigating to determine the source of the error that led to the overpayments. The technicalities of unemployment extensions granted by Congress and the heavy volume of people in the system contributed to the problem, Clegg said.

"I'm angry. I think somebody needs to be held accountable for this," Lee said. "I kind of feel like I'm a hamster in one of those wheels that I can't get off."




North Carolina Much Poorer Since Recession


The N.C. Justice Center has dissected new census data and found poverty rose sharply in every region of North Carolina in 2009, highlighting the widespread impact of the Recession.

The information released today from the U.S. Census "offers the first glimpse of the impact of the recession on North Carolina’s families and shows even sharper increases in poverty and child poverty than anticipated," the Justice Center reported.

“North Carolina’s families are struggling to get by in this economic downturn and this is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Louisa Warren, a Senior Policy Advocate at the center. “The Great Recession has pushed more than 168,000 North Carolina families into poverty just from 2008, a startling increase that will put pressure on our public systems as they work to support struggling families.”

The Census’ American Community Survey recorded a large jump in poverty in North Carolina, from 14.3 percent in 2007 to 16.3 percent in 2009. That puts nearly 1.5 million North Carolinians officially in poverty, or making at or below $22,050 annually for a family of four.

Similar to overall poverty, child poverty in North Carolina surged to 22.2 percent in 2009 from 19.2 percent in 2007. More than one in five children in North Carolina are now poor.

Further demonstrating the profound impact of the Great Recession, deep poverty—those living below half the poverty rate—has also risen considerably in North Carolina.

In 2009, 7.1 percent of North Carolinians were living in deep poverty, making at or below $11,025 annually to support a family of four, up from 6 percent in 2007. In 2009, an estimated 643,429 North Carolinians were in deep poverty, representing significant distress for North Carolina.

According to the Justice Center, even these numbers may understate the problem. the center noted that "the census data released today were collected in the 12 month period around December 2008 when Unemployment remained low relative to its levels in the latter half of 2009. Today’s data is therefore just a first look at the recession’s impact."

As a result of rising Unemployment rates, median household income in North Carolina dropped to $43,674 in 2009, down from $46,210 in 2007.

Median household income varied across the state and the country. Robeson County had the lowest (among those for which data is available) median household income at $24,788 and many of the counties with high unemployment additionally experienced low median household income: Surry County’s median household income was $33,159 while Burke County’s median household income was $35,004.

Urban counties continued to experience the highest median household income: Wake County’s median household income, the highest in the state, was at $63,609 in 2009 and Mecklenburg County’s median household income was at $52,881.

North Carolina’s median household income remained lower than some of its Southern neighbors and Virgnia, Georgia, and Florida all had higher median household incomes in 2009.
View Larger Map


Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, WRAL, Google Maps