Red state workers need the Employee Free Choice Act

Writing in his blog Perrspectives, Jon Perr makes a strong case that red state workers are most in need of the controversial Employee Free Choice Act. Many of us who live in right-to-work states know that such laws bring low wages and unsafe working conditions. It is very important that we contact our U.S. Senators and urge them to support the Employee Free Choice Act. See link to full article with graphics www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000648.htm

In Washington this week, the Senate will take up the Employee Free Choice Act. Passed by the House 241-185 in March, EFCA would make it much easier for unions to organize. Predictably, red state Republican Senators backed by an alliance of business groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce will likely prevent the measure from coming to a vote. Which is too bad. After all, from wages and benefits to job opportunities and collective bargaining rights, it is red state workers who need EFCA most.

First a little background. The decline of the American manufacturing sector combined with increased intimidation from employers have shriveled the unionized workforce to 9% (down from its 1950's high of 30%). The Employee Free Choice Act, as the Center for American Progress details, was designed to help American workers organize to improve stagnant wages and protect diminishing health and pension benefits in an ever more hostile bargaining environment:

"Under current law, an employer can insist on a secret-ballot election," even after a majority of employees express their desire to organize. The proposed law "would give employees at a workplace the right to unionize as soon as a majority signed cards saying they wanted to do so"...Employees "often feel intimidated by their employers during unionization drives and so are fearful of losing their jobs." Employers illegally fire employees for union activity in "more than one-quarter of all organizing efforts." Approximately half of employers illegally threaten to close or relocate the business if workers elect to form a union.

And as Perrspectives has previously detailed, working conditions and wages are worst in precisely those red states that elected George W. Bush.

For example, a December 2005 report by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts showed that Americans' working conditions in general closely follow the 2004 electoral map. The report's work Environment Index(WEI) rated the quality of Americans' working lives by a weighting of three factors: job opportunities, job quality, and job fairness. The top five states were Delaware, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Vermont and Iowa, the bottom five were South Carolina, Utah, Arkansas Texas and Louisiana.

There are no surprises among the worst performing states in the Work Environment Index. Virtually all below the Mason-Dixon line, the WEI laggards feature dismal pay and an outwardly hostile environment towards union organizing, workers' rights and collective bargaining. Red America is the home of the so-called Right-to-Work(RTW) states. These "right to work" states prohibit workers from being required to join a trade union as a condition of employment. A leader in the Right-to-Work movement, Bush's home state of Texas was ranked 50th, with the percentage of workers with health and pension benefits running a full 10% below the top WEI performers:

But working conditions aren't the only area where denizens of the Republican heartland suffer relative to their blue state brethren. As Perrspectives detailed in January, minimum wage levels also vary significantly from state to state.

Unsurprisingly, many of the "bluest" states lead the way in exceeding both the previous ($5.15 an hour) and recently passed ($7.25) federal requirements, with Washington, Oregon, California, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut mandating wages as high as $7.93. Only one of the 21 states (New Hampshire) mired at $5.15 an hour did not vote for George W. Bush in 2004. But in the debate over the Employee Free Choice Act, the woes of red state workers will have no impact on their elected representatives.

President Bush, of course has vowed to veto the bill. The Senate Republican Conference touts an op-ed piece by Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, which blasts EFCA while lauding his state's dismal economic performance. Shelby comically proclaims "Alabama workers have partnered with business and together they have created a vibrant economy."

And to think his fellow Republican Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called the bill "Orwellian."

www.perrspectives.com/blog/

Energy costs are primary cause of higher food prices -not ethanol

Attaining energy independence is possibly the most critical issue facing the United States and yet many would prefer to bash some of the more promising methods for reducing the need for foreign oil.

Expanded use of nuclear power, ethanol and biofuels are all facing criticism from those who would like to maintain the status quo of dependence on oil or prefer unrealistic strategies such as reliance upon solar and wind power to meet our energy needs. Increased use of corn for ethanol is being blamed for higher food prices, but as Grain Net http://www.grainnet.com/ points out the primary cause of our larger grocery bills is rising energy costs.

Ethanol critics and many in the media charge that the rising price of corn due to growing ethanol demand is the major culprit for moderately rising consumer food prices.

Conspicuously absent from the discussion is the chief reason for increasing food costs: escalating energy costs.

According to a new analysis of food, energy and corn prices conducted by John Urbanchuk of LECG, LLC, "rising energy prices had a more significant impact on food prices than did corn."
In fact, rising energy prices have twice the impact on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for food than does the price of corn, according to the report.

"Energy costs have a much greater impact on consumer food costs as they impact every single food product on the shelf," said Urbanchuk.

"Energy is required to produce, process, package and ship each food item.

"Conversely, corn prices impact just a small segment of the food market as not all products rely on corn for production.

"While it may be more sensational to lay the blame for rising food costs on corn prices, the facts don't support that conclusion.

"By a factor of two-to-one, energy prices are the chief factor determining what American families pay at the grocery store."

According to the study, "Increasing petroleum prices have about twice the impact on consumer food prices as equivalent increases in corn prices.

A 33 percent increase in crude oil prices - the equivalent of $1.00 per gallon over current levels of retail gasoline prices - would increase retail food prices measured by the CPI for food by 0.6 to 0.9 percent.

An equivalent increase in corn prices - about $1.00 per bushel over current levels - would increase consumer food prices only 0.3 percent."

The report goes on to find, "Corn and energy prices both affect consumer food prices.
"However, since increases in corn prices are limited to a relatively small portion of the overall CPI for food, an increase in corn prices resulting from higher ethanol demand or a supply disruption such as a major drought is expected to have about half the impact of the same percentage increase in petroleum and energy prices."

"Critics of ethanol, including those in the animal feeding and oil industries, are engaging in baseless scare tactics to convince Americans that ethanol production will irreversibly increase their grocery bills," said Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen.

"While it is true increased ethanol production is creating a real market-driven price for corn, this report clearly presents the undeniable facts:

. Energy prices, not ethanol, are responsible for much of the increase in the price of food.

.Our industry is rapidly developing next generation cellulosic ethanol technology that will allow us to meet the growing demand for renewable fuels from wood chips, switch grass and other materials in addition to corn.

. Ultimately, the market will adjust and all those in the food, fuel and fiber industry will be able to prosper."

Much of the debate has been centered on the notion that the U.S. will not be able to produce enough corn to satisfy all markets, creating shortages and intensifying competition that will continuously drive the price of corn higher.

This claim misses some key facts.

Advancements in seed, farming and ethanol technologies are allowing American farmers to continue feeding the world while helping to fuel our nation.

"There is no conflict between food and fuel-we can produce both," said Ken McCauley, president of the National Corn Growers Association.

"Demand for corn is at unprecedented levels, and we fully expect unprecedented levels of supply as well.

"This spring U.S. corn growers planted the largest crop this country has seen since the 1940s," McCauley continued. "Given normal weather conditions this summer, we'll produce the largest corn crop in history, and that will allow us to readily satisfy demand for livestock feed, human food processing,exports and fuel ethanol."

For more information, call 202-289-3835

Complete text of the report

* KEYSTONE CENTER STUDY BACKS NUCLEAR ENERGY

A new report released by The Keystone Center suggests the safety of nuclear power and that concerns about security and disposal of waste can be effectively addressed. The following is a quote for a summary provided by the Nuclear Energy Institute http://www.nei.org/

The fact-finding group was comprised of 29 individuals, including representatives from environmental groups, state regulators, electric utility industry and consumer advocates. The group was brought together by The Keystone Center, a non-profit organization that facilitates cross-sector dialogues on pressing environment, energy and public health issues.
The group broadly agreed on issues detailed in the report that included:

Safety: The participants reviewed many factors, including improvements in plant equipment and human performance, organizational and risk insights gained through experience, the implications of aging materials and components, and institutional changes in safety oversight. They found that “on balance, commercial nuclear power plants in the U.S. are safer today,” that “increased centralization among utilities and plant operators has improved the ‘safety culture’ at nuclear power plants,” and that new reactors are likely to be advanced light-water reactors, “incorporating features that improve both safety and security.”

Climate Change: A number of different approaches have been debated or proposed, including an economy-wide cap and trade program for greenhouse (GHG) emissions, a sector-specific cap and trade approach and a carbon tax. Each confers different economic advantages to nuclear power in comparison to other electricity sources. The specific provisions of U.S. climate policy will affect exactly how much of an advantage nuclear power receives. Most importantly, the more stringent the policy (the greater the reductions required or the higher the tax), the greater the relative advantage bestowed on low-GHG generation sources like nuclear energy.
Used Nuclear Fuel Management: The group also broadly agreed on issues surrounding the ultimate disposal of used nuclear fuel. They agreed that:

· Ultimate disposal of the byproducts from nuclear fuel should take place in a deep underground geologic repository;

· desirable geologic repository characteristics are well understood; and

· Suitable geological environments for disposal exist throughout the world, including locations in the United States.

Furthermore, the group voiced its belief that until the federal government’s geologic repository is licensed for operation, older used nuclear fuel “can be stored safely and securely” on nuclear plant sites in either spent fuel pools or steel and concrete containers for extended periods of time. They also agreed that centralized interim storage is a reasonable alternative for managing used fuel from decommissioned plant sites and “could become cost-effective for operating reactors in the future.”

Recognizing that used fuel must be transported from the plant sites to centralized interim storage facilities and/or a geologic repository, the fact-finding group looked at the safety and security of used fuel transportation and found: “There is wide agreement among the group participants that transport of spent fuel and other high-level radioactive waste is highly regulated, and that it has been safely shipped in the past.” The group also noted that although transport security requires continued vigilance, “security requirements during transport have been enhanced in response to 9/11.”

Gene Taylor opposes amnesty for illegal aliens

Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) has released a statement expressing his strong opposition to the Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty plan. Taylor is a patriot and populist who cares about protecting American jobs and our national sovereignty. I have tremendous respect for Gene Taylor because of his willingness to fight for his constituents and working families across the nation.

As U.S. Representative from the hurricane ravaged fourth district of Mississippi, Taylor has dared to take on the powerful insurance industry. Taylor is currently working as a member of the House Armed Services Committee to make sure that our troops are protected by the most effective body armor. Another priority of Taylor on the Armed Services Committee is strengthening America's Navy which is so critical to our national defense.

As a long-time proponent of border security and opponent of "free trade" deals that sell out American workers, Taylor has credibility that many members of Congress lack when talking about the matter of illegal immigration.

I am reproducing Congressman Taylor's comments below:

Statement of U.S. Representative Gene Taylor (D-MS) on S.1348

I am firmly against the provisions in S. 1348 granting amnesty to illegal immigrants and will vote against any amnesty legislation if it is considered by the House of Representatives. The Senate has pulled the immigration reform bill from the floor for now, but it may come up again in the near future. President Bush has stated his support for the Senate legislation, since it contains many provisions of his temporary worker program. I have consistently opposed the President’s plan, as it basically amounts to an amnesty.

The last time our country granted amnesty to illegal immigrants was in 1986 during the Reagan Administration. Back then, it was claimed amnesty would bring an end to illegal immigration. With the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the nation today, the 1986 amnesty was clearly a failure. It would be foolish and irresponsible for Congress and our President to repeat this mistake and grant yet another amnesty.

Amnesty would only encourage employers to cut wages, eliminate benefits, and weaken workers’ rights and protections. We cannot reward the immigrants or the employers who have broken our laws. Amnesty for illegal workers would only encourage more to come here illegally.

Over the years I have voted to strengthen our borders from illegal immigration. Last year I voted in favor of legislation that would: construct 700 miles of new fencing along our border with Mexico, require the Department of Homeland Security to gain “operational security” along the border, install surveillance cameras and other sensors. I also voted to fund an additional 1,500 Border Patrol Agents, increasing the total to approximately 14,800 agents.

I support stronger sanctions against employers who hire illegal workers, especially those who have done so repeatedly. The Social Security Inspector General found that the 300 largest employers in the restaurant, service, and agriculture industries submitted 2,760,765 incorrect Social Security numbers over a three-year period. Despite the prevalence of worker misuse of Social Security numbers in these industries, the government has not required these businesses to be more diligent in their hiring practices.

I am working with my colleagues in Congress to expedite the process for employer’s to verify the legal status of workers. If we can do a background check before allowing a citizen to purchase a firearm, then we should be able to quickly determine whether a person is legal to work in the United States. Once a quick verification system is in place I support dramatically increasing the penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal workers.

While many service, restaurant, and agriculture employers are reducing their wages by hiring illegal workers, some manufacturing industries are reducing wages by relocating plants to foreign countries. Mississippi has lost dozens of textile, apparel, paper, and other manufacturing plants because our nation’s trade policies favor low-wage foreign workers and corporate stockholders at the expense of American workers. I strongly opposed NAFTA, the reduction of tariffs with Communist China, and other trade policies that have weakened our manufacturing base. A few years of cheaper products and corporate bonuses will not make up for the long-term damage to the American economy and American workers.

The U.S. trade policies have eliminated many jobs and hold down the wages of the jobs that remain. Now, the President and other advocates of immigration amnesty would endorse the practices of employers who hire illegal immigrants to displace American workers and further push down wages. Our government should not base its economic policy simply on helping businesses find cheap labor at home and abroad. Congress and the President should focus on rebuilding the American manufacturing base and rewarding the skills of American workers. That is the key to our nation’s prosperity and economic security.

http://www.house.gov/genetaylor

The Blue Dog Fiscal Accountability Package

Today, members of the fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition officially unveiled the “Blue Dog Fiscal Accountability Package,” three pieces of legislation that would further restore fiscal discipline to the federal government after years of budgetary mismanagement and irresponsible deficit spending.

The legislation builds on the progress already made by the institution of pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rules in the House of Representatives, a measure the Blue Dog Coalition successfully fought to have included in the first 100 hours of the 110th Congress. Blue Dog leaders touted today’s accountability package as an essential tool needed for Congress to further address the nation’s long-term fiscal challenges.

“After six years of reckless fiscal practices and irresponsible deficit spending, the Blue Dogs are firmly committed to restoring the fiscal integrity of our nation,” said Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Communications. “In order to do that, we must reinstitute statutory pay-as-you-go rules and commit to balancing our budget, just as most American families do. This Blue Dog endorsed legislation is a much needed next step to ensure that the Congress does just that.”

“Our national debt has increased $3 trillion in the past six years. There is no question that the fiscal recklessness and mismanagement of the past six years have jeopardized our country’s fiscal situation,” said Rep. Dennis Moore (D-KS), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Policy. “My fellow Blue Dogs and I have been successful in our fight for a return to a fiscally responsible budget process, but more progress must be made. That is why we are taking the lead on this important issue by putting forward a package to reinstitute critical budget enforcement tools that were instrumental in restoring fiscal discipline in the 1990s, make the budget process more transparent, and make a balanced budget the annual goal of our government.”

The first piece of legislation included in the “Blue Dog Fiscal Accountability Package” is the “Fiscal Honesty and Accountability Act,” led by Blue Dog member Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN). This bill strengthens the commitment of the Congress to fiscal responsibility and accountability by reinstituting statutory PAYGO rules and implementing multi-year discretionary spending caps. The bill would also close a loophole in the current law that has been used in recent years to add billions of dollars in routine spending by designating it “emergency” spending.

“Over the past six years Republicans’ reckless fiscal practices have led our country to record deficits and allowed our debt to increase by more than 60 percent,” said Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN) “We must act in a decisive manner now to stop such spending habits that will leave our children and grandchildren with insurmountable debt.”

The second piece of legislation, led by Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), is the “Balanced Budget Amendment,” which would provide for a Constitutional Amendment requiring Congress to balance the federal budget every year. The proposed legislation allows for flexibility during times of war, natural disaster or an economic downturn, by giving Congress the ability to waive the balanced budget requirement with a three-fifths vote in the House and Senate. The bill also prohibits cuts in Social Security benefits from ever being used in order to balance the budget.
“If New York families have to balance their checkbook, so should the federal government,” said Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). “The federal government’s spending habits are hurting our national security, by requiring us to borrow over 75% of our new debt, from countries such as China and Saudi Arabia. The deficit puts us at immediate risk from global political and economic problems, and I believe our children and grandchildren deserve more leadership and accountability.”

In order to provide for a more open and honest government, the third piece of legislation, the Blue Dog “Strengthening the Budget Process Resolution,” led by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC), Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-LA) and Rep. Charlie Wilson (D-OH), ensures that members of Congress have a sufficient amount of time to properly examine legislation to determine its actual cost implications. In order to further ensure transparency in the process, this resolution also requires that a full Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cost estimate accompany any bill or conference report that comes to the House floor.

“For the last six years President Bush and the Republicans in Congress recklessly increased spending, while driving our nation deeper into debt than ever before,” said Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC). “I am committed, along with my Blue Dog colleagues, to restoring fiscal restraint to the federal government.”

“These are the type of common sense rules we need that will help foster a transparent process,” said Rep. Charlie Wilson (D-OH)

“Reigning in wasteful government spending is the first step in balancing our nation’s budget and slashing the deficit,” said Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-LA). “With this legislation, the days of negotiators adding expensive 11th hour sweeteners to bills in order to gain votes will be numbered. And lawmakers will know exactly how much of the taxpayers’ money a bill will cost before they have to vote on it. Our government needs to set fiscal priorities based on needs – not wants – and the Blue Dog budget process reform resolution will bring the accountability and transparency necessary to enforce those priorities.”

The fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition was formed in 1995 with the goal of representing the center of the House of Representatives and appealing to the mainstream values of the American public. The Blue Dogs are dedicated to a core set of beliefs that transcend partisan politics, including a deep commitment to the financial stability and national security of the United States. Currently there are 43 members of the Blue Dog Coalition. For more information, visit the Blue Dog website at http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/.

* OREGON DEMOCRATIC PARTY EMBRACES GUN OWNERS

Info about Oregon Democratic Party-Gun Owners Caucus. Every state party should have a similar Democratic pro-gun caucus.

Democrats don't want to take your guns--we've already got our own.

WHO WE ARE

Support for civil rights and economic justice is the bedrock of the Democratic Party. The Gun Owners Caucus (GOC-DPO) believes that gun ownership is the critical civil right which preserves the rest of our American freedoms. We enjoy the benefits of living in a free and armed society and work to live up to the responsibilities that requires.

In 2005, the DPO passed a resolution (RES 2005-008) stating that "the right to keep and bear arms [is] an individual right not granted by the government, but rather guaranteed by the government." That means the right is inalienable. The GOC-DPO aims to expand the promise of the Democratic Party of Oregon by widening the party’s base by advertising, promoting, and defending its pro-Second Amendment platform and policies, and reaching out to all liberals who support the Constitution and its clear language.

WHAT WE DO

Through our efforts, statements, members, and activities the Gun Owners Caucus:
Supports elected Democrats and Democratic nominees for office; volunteers on behalf of Democratic candidates.

Publicizes the Democratic Party’s long-standing support of all Constitutional guarantees, including the Second Amendment.

Represents the political interests and views of gun-owning Democrats in the State of Oregon.

Protects Gun Owners' rights by promoting a pro-Second Amendment legislative agenda
Acts as a forum to educate elected officials and the general public on matters affecting gun owners in Oregon.

Persuades and helps party leaders to accurately reflect the pro-Second Amendment attitudes of the Oregon Democrats they represent.

Provides opportunities for supporters of gun owners’ rights to seek political appointments or elected office.

Creates a Democratic voice for the promotion of firearms education and responsibility, hunter safety, and enforcement of existing gun laws within the state.

Helps strengthen the DPO's grassroots appeal by reaching out to Democrats or would-be Democrats with strong pro-Second Amendment philosophies.

JOIN TODAY: 3 Qualifications for membership

The GOC-DPO's potential for promoting our message is based on the strength of our membership. If you are eligible to join, we strongly encourage you to do so in order to make sure your voice is heard.

You are eligible to join the GOC-DPO if you can answer "yes" to the following:
1. I agree with the stated pro-Second Amendment position of the Democratic Party of Oregon (DPO):

"[The DPO resolves] To recognize and support the right to keep and bear arms in Article 1 Section 27 of the Oregon State Constitution and the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America as an individual right not granted by the government, but rather guaranteed by the government." (Resolution No. 2005-008)

2. I am registered as a Democrat to vote in the state of Oregon.

3. I am willing to promote public recognition of the DPO's pro-Second Amendment Position, perform outreach to Second Amendment supporters on behalf of the DPO, and/or work for the election of Democratic candidates.

Send an e-mailconstituency@dpo.org

Blogsite: http://bluesteeldemocrats.blogspot.com/

• Why the Democratic Party of Oregon Needs a Gun Owners Caucus

Keep up the great work, Oregon Democrats !

Cardwell to challenge Chambliss as populist-conservative Democrat

Former Atlanta TV newsman Dale Cardwell has announced his candidacy for the United States Senate. Cardwell will challenge incumbent Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss as a populist conservative Democrat.

I tend to disagree with Cardwell's advocacy of the "fair tax" but overall he does sound like the right kind of Democrat to win the Georgia Senate seat.

Furthermore, Cardwell has a very impressive background as a investigative reporter for WSB-TV. If elected, I would expect Cardwell to be a maverick in Washington while focusing attention on waste, fraud and abuse much in the same way that the late Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) did with the "Golden Fleece" awards.

We can easily anticipate that Cardwell will continue to draw the wrath of the Moveonner Left and alarm Republican strategists as he seeks to win the Georgia Senate nomination as a Sam Nunn Democrat.

Here is a summary of Dale Cardwell's stands on the issues from his campaign website

Take back your government

I will not take money from special interest PAC's or registered Washington lobbyists. I will owe my allegiance to only one group, the people of Georgia.

Take back your money

I'm going to fight, claw and scratch to abolish the IRS, and replace it with a simple tax system; one that provides true across-the-board tax relief. It will cut taxes and simply the tax system for everyone - and that means it will help the middle class and small businesses, not the special interests that spend big bucks getting their way in Washington.

Take back your country

I'll join with Democrat and Republican lawmakers who are serious about it, and seal our southern border. Not in five years, not in two years, but now! I will require the federal government to take custody of every illegal alien who lands in our local jails, and depending on the severity of their crime, I will force our federal government to incarcerate them, and then send them back to the border they illegally crossed. I will also sponsor legislation to hold employers criminally liable for hiring illegals who do not have a real green card, or a verifiable Social Security number. The stagnant salaries of hard working Georgians can no longer be held hostage by an undocumented and exploited illegal work force.

Iraq

I disagree with many in Washington. We can't just withdraw. We have to create and execute a plan to secure the peace. In order to do that, we must set firm benchmarks for Iraq's success. As long as the government and people of Iraq achieve those benchmarks, we'll stay and help them. If they fail, we'll redeploy our troops; but well never surrender a security perimeter, a beachhead, if you will, that we've earned with the blood of American lives. We'll maintain a base, make it safe from insurgents, and we'll use that base to launch attacks against Al Qaeda, preserve stability in the region, and fight terrorism anywhere we have to.

Summary from Cardwell's biography:

As one of the premier and most consistently honored investigative journalists in Georgia, Cardwell has won six "Emmy" awards and recognized as "Journalist of the Year" by the Atlanta Press Club.

Cardwell's investigations have saved taxpayers millions of dollars, and resulted in the prosecution and/or resignation of numerous corrupt politicians and their appointees.

During an eleven year stint as a consumer reporter and investigative journalist with WSB, Cardwell had the opportunity to work closely with and produce stories for the premier radio and television consumer expert in the nation, Clark Howard. Clark and Dale’s investigations earned numerous awards, but more importantly, saved Georgians millions of dollars, and empowered them to “save more, spend less, become their own consumer advocate.”

The long-time Atlanta TV newsman was involved in more recent investigations have led to the exposure of corruption on the part of former Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell, the conviction of former DeKalb County Sheriff Sidney Dorsey, the resignation of Fulton County Sheriff Jackie Barrett, the return of public funds by Senator Zell Miller, and the termination of Georgia Governor Sonny Purdue’s abuse of government airplanes and helicopters for private benefit.
Cardwell lives in DeKalb County Georgia, with his wife Angie, their son Adam and Daughter Jessica. He serves as a Deacon and substitute Sunday School teacher at Dunwoody Baptist Church.

http://www.dale08.com/

* CHINA PLANS CYBER WARFARE AGAINST U.S.

China is preparing to engage in cyber warfare with America according to a report on a British-based technology site - vnu.net http://www.vnunet.com/ This is really disturbing information. With our reliance on technology, the Chinese government could attack our information systems and disrupt communications which certainly goes along with a recent Chinese missle test which destroyed a weather satellite in space. http://tinyurl.com/2nhzf5

Iain Thomson writes:

A US military report into the future of relations with China has claimed that the Chinese government is developing an information warfare division for use in possible future conflicts.
The Military Power of the People's Republic of China 2007 report (PDF) suggests that, in addition to the Red Army's army, navy, air force and rocket arms, the Chinese government is putting together a team to deal with "electronic and online arenas ".

"People's Liberation Army authors often cite the need in modern warfare to control information, sometimes termed an 'information blockade'," says the report.

"China is pursuing this ability by improving information and operational security, developing electronic warfare and information warfare capabilities, and denial and deception.
"China's concept of an 'information blockade' likely extends beyond the strictly military realm to include other elements of state power."

The report suggests that the People's Republic of China is developing teams to handle computer network attack, defence and exploitation with a separate section handling electronic countermeasures.

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2190876/claims-china-online-army-ready

* NUCLEAR POWER CONTINUES TO GAIN ENVIRONMENTALIST CONVERTS
Canada.Com reports that an increasing number of environmentalists north of the border are expanded peaceful use of atomic energy. Concern about global warming is causing many activists concerned about the environment to reconsider their previous opposition to nuclear power. http://tinyurl.com/2wv7uc

EDMONTON -- The prospect of a planet cooked by climate change is leading some environmentalists to openly embrace what was once considered a bitter foe: the nuclear power industry.

For the last year, Canada has even had its own chapter of an international group called Environmentalists For Nuclear Energy. And prominent academics and conservationists, such as paleoanthropologist Richard Leakey and University of Alberta aquatics ecologist David Schindler, have expressed their support for what they see as a necessary power source to meet the world's ravenous energy demands.

"Our argument is this: We're going to destroy the planet with greenhouse gas emissions," says Rod Anderson, president of Canada's Environmentalists For Nuclear Energy.

Renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, should make up a larger percentage of our power supply than they currently do, Anderson says. But, they're expensive and don't work when the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow. Realistically, they might meet 10 or 15 per cent of our demand, he says.

"Basically, there's going to be a great big gaping hole in demand that's got to be met and the only realistic way of meeting it is through nuclear generation."
http://www.canada.com/

Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy, a worldwide organization, has a website at http://www.ecolo.org/

FAIR: Immigration and Rising Income Inequality

The Federation for American Immigration has just released a study detailing the connection between out of control immigration and increased income inequality in our country. http://tinyurl.com/25sv5r Here is a summary on the report:

Rising inequality in the United States is linked to rising immigration, falling union membership and rising international trade according to economists. But, these three trends are not independent of each other, and the rise in the immigrant population contributes to the other two trends.

Since 1970, the country’s immigrant population has grown by about 26 million persons — a 272 percent increase. Over the same period, the spread between mean and median family incomes — an indicator of increasing income inequality — has grown by nearly four times the rate of increase during the prior period (1947—70) when the immigrant population was fairly stable.

Since mass immigration was unleashed by the 1965 immigration law, increases in average inflation-adjusted family income have steadily shrunk and are approaching no growth, or — if the trend continues — negative growth.

The Bush administration’s proposal to increase immigration and increase both skilled and unskilled temporary foreign workers would increase the labor supply and, thereby, accelerate the trend in rising income inequality and the erosion of the middle class. http://www.fairus.org/

My favorite syndicated columnist Froma Harrop has written yet another excellent piece titled "The working class is not stupid about immigration." As someone who tells it like it is, Ms. Harrop takes aim at labor unions like the Service Workers International Union who are supporting amnesty for illegal aliens and politicians who would sell out working families. http://tinyurl.com/288jef Harrop writes:

"Democrats who think they can get away with throwing blue-collar America to the wolves in return for new immigrants' votes should think again. Many Latinos who are native-born or legal immigrants — however sympathetic to fellow Hispanics who want to come here — do understand how the labor market has been rigged against them. The open border is why median wages are higher in Alabama than they are in Texas."

"And there are other low-income groups who fancy their interests matter. T. William Fair, head of the Miami Urban League, appears in ads calling amnesty for illegal workers "a slap in the face to black Americans" and "an economic disaster." Some predict a new coalition of working-class blacks, whites and not a few Latinos questioning certain Democrats' loyalty to their cause. (Cheap-labor Republicans are already on notice.)"

"Controlled immigration is a good thing, and a little wage competition is an acceptable price for bringing new blood and energy into the country. But the numbers really do matter. If some unions and Democrats choose to deny the economic realities, they should at least be open about their motives. It would be highly risky to assume that everyone else is stupid."

http://www.chron.com/

Fortunately, the AFL-CIO has taken a strong stand against the guest worker program http://tinyurl.com/3af82s and we have Senators like Byron Dorgan (D-ND) who are still willing to fight for the interest of America's wage earners. Senator Dorgan points out three myths about the guest worker program which are part of the propaganda campaign from the cheap labor lobby.

It is, simply put, a plan that would bring cheap labor in the back door in the form of millions of foreign workers, even as we continue to export good paying American jobs to other countries," Dorgan said.

Those pushing the guest worker program are using myths to advance it, Dorgan charged Tuesday and he acted to correct those myths at a Capitol Hill press conference. He addressed three major myths about the program, and provided accurate information on each:

• Myth #1: The guest worker program allows up to 400,000 immigrants to come to America to work at jobs in the United States. That's a "vast understatement" Dorgan said, with the actual total number, thanks to an unacknowledged "multiplier" in the program, closer to 3.6 million additional workers who don't now live in the United States.

• Myth #2: The guest worker program applies to immigrants already in the United States. Every guest worker enrolled in the program would be a new immigrant, someone who is not here now. "Each person admitted to the United States under the guest worker program is exerting further downward pressure on wages, by adding to the number of people willing to work at low wages," Dorgan said.

• Myth #3: The guest worker program involves mostly agricultural jobs and other work Americans don't want to do. In truth, "these are not agricultural jobs. There is a separate program for additional agricultural workers. These are jobs in construction, manufacturing and transportation among other sectors. That's the backbone of our blue-collar middle class," Dorgan said.

Sadly, Senator Dorgan's arguments fell on deaf ears as the Senate has voted to defeat his amendment that would have killed the guest worker program.

There is still time to stop the dangerous Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty legislation. Contact your Senators and Representatives and urge them to oppose this sell-out of American workers.
http://tinyurl.com/yqk379 And if our politicians (Republican or Democratic) should think again if they believe it is possible to pander to the cheap labor lobby and win the support of working families.

Kansas Democratic Governor signs official English law

Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius has signed legislation to make English the official language of Kansas. The measure, H.B. 2140, passed the House, 114-7 and the Senate, 32-8 earlier this year.

“I want to applaud Gov. Sebelius and Representatives Mario Goico, Candy Ruff, and Don Myers for their efforts in passing this bill,” said Mauro E. Mujica, Chairman of the Board of U.S. English, Inc. “English-speaking Kansans deserve to know that their tax dollars will not continue to perpetuate unfettered government translations. Newcomers to Kansas deserve opportunities to learn the English language and assimilate into our nation. This law benefits both natives and newcomers to the Sunflower State.”

As passed by the House and Senate, H.B. 2140 would make English the official language of Kansas. Under the legislation, state agencies would not be required to conduct business and provide documents in languages other than English, except where necessary to comply with federal law, protect public safety, and maintain Constitutional rights.

Kansas becomes the 30th state overall, and the third in seven months, to enact English as its official language, following Idaho in March and Arizona last November. The seven month span marks the shortest amount of time for three new states to adopt official English legislation since Montana, South Dakota and New Hampshire approved similar laws over three months in 1995.
“Making English the official language is not some stop-gap measure designed to thwart immigration,” continued Mujica, who immigrated from Chile in 1965. “It is a long term policy that takes into account that our nation functions best when we can all communicate in the same language, and that government must promote English learning for all Americans.”

Polls have shown enthusiastic support for official English among all segments of the population. A June 2006 poll from Rasmussen Reports found that 85 percent of Americans favor making English the official language of the United States, while a Oct. 2006 survey by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research found support for a state law among nearly eight-in-ten Kansans. Most recently, a survey by the Harvard University Institute of Politics found that 72 percent of 18-24 year old Americans support making English the official language of the United States.

Strong support for official English has also been demonstrated at the state and federal levels, raising the possibility for a 31st state before the end of the year. More than 20 states had official English legislation introduced in the state legislature this year, and measures are still pending in several active chambers, including Delaware, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. At the federal level, H.R. 997, the English Language Unity Act, has the support of more than 100 Representatives, making it one of the most widely supported bills in the 110th Congress.

“While Americans continue to search for that elusive solution to our immigration problem, they are more united than ever toward a focus on assimilation,” added Mujica. “Americans do not want to live in an ‘English-only’ nation, but they also oppose the creation of an ‘English-optional’ nation. I hope that more states will follow the lead of Kansas and provide the combination of beneficial government policy and increased English language learning funding.”

U.S. English, Inc. is the nation's oldest and largest non-partisan citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. Founded in 1983 by the late Sen. S.I. Hayakawa of California, U.S. English, Inc. (http://www.usenglish.org/) now has more than 1.8 million members.

* ELLSWORTH SUPPORTS A STRONG DEFENSE

WASHINGTON – Continuing his track record of strongly supporting U.S. troops, Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN) voted to restore military readiness and strengthen national defense. The House Armed Services Committee passed the 2008 Defense Authorization bill unanimously last week, and the House passed the bill today with overwhelming bipartisan support.

“As a member of the Armed Services Committee, my number one priority is providing our brave men and women in uniform with the weapons, equipment, and training they need to complete their missions,” said Ellsworth. “This is critical not only for current conflicts, but to ensure our Armed Forces are ready to respond to emerging threats throughout the world.”

The bill creates a Defense Readiness Production Board to identify critical weapons and equipment shortfalls and develop creative solutions to increase defense industry capacity and fill those shortfalls. It establishes a $1 billion Strategic Readiness Fund to meet this goal. In addition, the bill provides an additional $250 million to improve soldiers’ training in a full-spectrum of combat scenarios.

“There is no question the War in Iraq has had a crippling effect on our military. They simply do not have the weapons, equipment and training they need,” said Ellsworth. “We let these problems go unaddressed for too long. It will be a long road back to restoring readiness levels, but we took an important first step today.”

The bill addresses National Guard readiness concerns. In testimony before the Commission on the National Guard in January 2007, Lieutenant General Steven Blum said, “88 percent of the forces that are back here in the United States are very poorly equipped today in the Army National Guard.” Articles published late February about the possible early redeployment of National Guard troops from four states, including Indiana, conveyed similar findings with military officials indicating troops were currently short of some equipment needed for deployment. Indiana National Guard troops from the 76th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Indianapolis have since been called up for redeployment to Iraq.

The bill requires the Department of Defense to conduct quarterly state-by-state assessments of National Guard capability to meet homeland and military responsibilities. Currently, there is no system in place to assess the National Guard’s ability to respond to natural disaster or national crisis. It also provides $1 billion to address shortfalls in ‘critical, high-priority equipment’ for National Guard units.

“National Guard units across the nation are playing a vital role in the security of our country; not only serving valiantly in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also responding to national crisis and natural disaster at home,” said Ellsworth. “However, their ability to respond to tomorrow’s crisis depends on the steps we take today. This Congress cannot afford to leave these shortfalls unaddressed, and I’m glad to see us taking action in this bill.”

The bill includes numerous provisions to further strengthen national defense. It provides $4.6 billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles which could reduce casualties from Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) by as much as 80%. It also includes billions of dollars for body armor, up-armored humvees, and other weapons and equipment for troops. It authorizes expanding the U.S. Army by 36,000 soldiers to alleviate the stress placed on soldiers and families, and provides $2.3 billion for military construction to accommodate the larger force.

“We need to treat our troops as if they were our own sons or daughters,” said Ellsworth. “Nothing but our full support is acceptable to me, and I think this bill accomplishes that goal. I am proud to support it.”


* PRO-IMMIGRATION CONTROL MAYOR WINS DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLICAN NODS

WASHINGTON, May 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- When Hazleton, Pennsylvania, Mayor Lou Barletta took the bold step of implementing local ordinances to curb illegal immigration in his city, he was widely described as "controversial." Barletta's strong stance against illegal immigration was so "controversial," in fact, that the two-term Republican not only won yesterday's Republican primary with 94.4 percent of the vote, but he won the Democratic nomination through a write-in campaign by nearly a 2-1 margin. Given the opportunity to express their views on Barletta's battle against illegal immigration, Hazleton residents did not so much as elect him to a third term, but virtually anointed him their mayor for the next four years.

The voters' judgment on Mayor Barletta presents an interesting contrast to a local election that took place in Herndon, Virginia, exactly one year ago. In that local election, the central campaign issue was the mayor's and city council's decision to fund an illegal alien day labor center, in spite of widespread public opposition. While Mayor Barletta was re-elected by acclaim in Hazleton, the mayor and all but one of the Herndon council members who voted to accommodate illegal aliens were swept out of office.

"FAIR congratulates Mayor Barletta not only for his remarkable and convincing victory in yesterday's election, but for his strong and principled stance against illegal immigration," said Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). "Mayor Barletta has not only demonstrated how local governments can take an effective stance against illegal immigration in their communities, but he has proven that doing so is politically popular."

Since Hazleton moved to curtail illegal immigration by imposing local penalties against employers who hire and landlords who rent to illegal aliens, similar local policies have been adopted by cities all across the United States. "Mayor Barletta's sweeping bipartisan reelection proves, once again, that the assortment of illegal alien rights and civil liberties groups who file lawsuits challenging local ordinances and otherwise make a lot of noise, represent absolutely no one but themselves. When it comes to enforcing laws against illegal immigration, there simply is no controversy," declared Stein.

Barletta's convincing affirmation of his policies against illegal immigration comes precisely amidst Senate deliberations on legislation that would grant amnesty to tens of millions of illegal aliens, which is supported by President Bush. "According to the latest polls, the only people who are held in lower regard by the public than President Bush is Congress. The readiness of the people in Washington to sell out the interests of working Americans on immigration is emblematic of why they are held in such low esteem," Stein noted. "Back home, where Americans live with the consequences of unchecked illegal immigration, politicians who are prepared to enforce laws and protect ordinary citizens, enjoy overwhelming public support. The message out of Hazleton yesterday was very clear: Supporting immigration enforcement is perhaps the least controversial political position in America today."

Website: http://www.fairus.org/