Archive for the ‘Congress’ Category

The congressional leaders who negotiated $1.1 trillion federal spending bill – dubbed the “CRomnibus” – must not have known they were in for a fight.

But when Public Citizen and other public interest allies got hold of the 1,600-page bill and saw that it contained a bevy of atrocious policy riders that had nothing to do with funding the government, the fight was coming.

The take-it-or-leave-it budget – including the poison pill provisions that Public Citizen opposed – did ultimately pass. The fight for its passage is instructive for how public interest advocates can wield power in the coming years, even as majorities in Congress seem determined to deliver a return on Corporate America’s Citizens United-enabled election investments.

The worst that could have happened would have been if the giveaways to corporations and the super rich had been accepted without a fight.

Thankfully, that’s not what happened.

We called on grassroots activists like you to act – to email and call your members of Congress – and you acted.

Tens of thousands of outraged citizens made it known that they would not accept a budget bill that allows millionaires and billionaires to have more influence in our elections and that puts taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street’s recklessness.

And then – hearing the outrage of tens of thousands of constituents across the country – principled members of Congress (of both major parties) fought the bipartisan backroom deal.

Continue Reading

Share/Bookmark

We’ve just seen the worst that Washington has to offer with the “cromnibus” government spending bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last night.

Instead of Congress passing a clean funding bill along lines that were previously agreed to and had bipartisan acceptance, Big Business exercised its insider influence and took advantage of an artificially rushed and secretive process to cut deals to enhance the political influence of the super-rich, put taxpayers on the hook – again – for Wall Street recklessness and make our roads less safe.

Moneyed interests maneuvered to eviscerate campaign spending rules, so that a super-rich couple may now contribute up to $3 million to a national political party in a single (two-year) election cycle. It’s a certainty that this move will be followed up by calls to “level the playing field” and permit the same monstrous contributions to candidates and political committees.

Wall Street called on its friends to include a Citigroup-drafted provision that would roll back a key Dodd-Frank measure that was designed to prevent Big Banks from using taxpayer-insured money to bet in the derivatives markets. With the top four banks responsible for 93 percent of derivatives activities in the United States, there is zero question about which entities will benefit. Nor who will pay; when the next financial crisis comes – as it will, as certainly as the calendar changes – taxpayers will be forced to pay for Wall Street gambling on derivatives.

At the behest of the trucking industry, U.S. Sen. Susan Collins included in the spending bill a provision to override rules to reduce truck driver fatigue, which risks the lives of truckers and other drivers.

These are only some of the known giveaways in the spending bill. It will probably take many weeks, or longer, before all of the industry deals are discovered.

As serious and troubling as are these measures, there is reason to fear worse is to come. Even though it opposed many of these harmful provisions, the White House pushed for approval of the overall spending deal, which had to overcome substantial opposition from members of Congress in both parties. If this is the kind of “bipartisanship” we’re going to see in the coming two years, the country is facing dire prospects indeed.

Continue Reading

For more than four decades, the landmark right-to-know law, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), has given the public (and organizations like Public Citizen fighting on behalf of the public) an essential tool for prying open the veil of secrecy surrounding government activities. In the words of Justice Louis Brandeis, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants,” and FOIA is the beacon of light that’s bright enough to shine into the darkest recesses of the government.

But there are limits to the FOIA law’s reach. Nine official exemptions to the law prevent information from being released to the public concerning specific types of documents—for example classified information related to national security or information compiled for law enforcement purposes. Some of the exemptions are grossly overused; “Exemption 5,” for example, can indefinitely keep secret communications between and within agencies on issues like why one rule was enacted instead of a stronger safeguard.

From the start of his Presidency, Barak Obama has officially called for more openness by government agencies — including directing Attorney General Eric Holder to require agencies to disclose more information to the public, which Holder did in 2009. That policy, called “the presumption of openness,” directs agencies to disclose information to the public unless prohibited by law or if the agency can see a direct harm protected by one of the numbered exemptions.

But even though President Obama’s administration has a goal of being the most transparent ever, it’s imperative that his changes be reflected in the language of the FOIA law so that this presumption of openness remains in place after his adminstration.

Public Citizen and our partners in the open government community were very pleased when improvements to the FOIA law were passed unanimously by the U.S. House of Representatives and even happier when U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) introduced a stronger bipartisan bill in the Senate. The FOIA Improvement Act (S. 2520) cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously earlier this month with more than 70 groups signing the letter of support drafted by Public Citizen and Openthegovernment.org.

Now, there are but a few short days to get this important legislation across the finish line before the end of the 113th Congress. Please let your senators know that you want to see critical improvements made to FOIA.

More can be done to increase the public’s right to know under FOIA, but S. 2520 is an excellent way to increase the amount of information “sunlight” shining on the workings of government.

Susan Harley is the deputy director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division.

Weissman-FTT-memeFollow on Twitter

Now that the election and its tidal wave of dark money spending has passed, hopefully Congress will get to the process of governing. Granted, forging bipartisan alliances will be even more important as we usher in a new Congress, but holding Wall Street accountable for the financial crisis and reining in high speed trading is something leaders on both sides of the aisle should be able to get behind.

That’s why this fall Public Citizen and a diverse coalition of consumer, labor and economic policy groups hosted a congressional briefing outlining the benefits of a Wall Street Tax (sometimes called a Financial Transaction Tax or Robin Hood Tax) and explaining the great progress that’s taking place in Europe on this issue. But we’ve yet to gain even one Republican co-sponsor to this commonsense policy.

People — individual voices of constituents — are one of the best ways to get the attention of reluctant congressmembers. That’s where you come in. Public Citizen supporters like you have achieved some huge victories and reach very important milestones and we are calling on you to help us win another fight against Wall Street.

If you haven’t already done so, please send an email to your lawmaker in support of the tiny Wall Street Tax (three cents for every $100 traded) that would raise over $352 billion in less than a decade. Then take the next steps to help us win a Wall Street Tax: Watch and share the video below and share the image of Public Citizen President Robert Weissman calling for a Wall Street Tax.

Continue Reading

Autumn is upon us. In addition to leaf color tours, pumpkins and cider, this fall has brought a political frenzy to Michigan as numerous members of the congressional delegation retire. Among the departing lawmakers is a real tax policy heavyweight, U.S. Rep. Dave Camp (R).

Camp soon will leave his position as chairman of the powerful U.S. House of Representatives Ways & Means Committee without having accomplished his chief goal of comprehensive tax reform. His languished swansong proposal to update the tax code, though flawed in many ways, offered some bold moves, like taxing banks and limiting executive pay.

In his remaining time, Camp should continue to push for such bold proposals. He also should focus on closing international tax loopholes that cost the U.S. an estimated $90 billion per year, and which allow some highly profitable companies pay no federal corporate income tax. With 150,000 Michigan families being hit by food stamp cuts, this is unacceptable.

Corporations avoid taxation in a number of ways, including using tax breaks that allow corporations to indefinitely put off — or “defer” — paying taxes on certain profits. One such scheme allows tax avoidance on some profits that appear to be made by foreign subsidiaries. Another huge loophole allows tax deferral on profits from interest made by foreign financial subsidiaries. Apple and GE are well known to make use of these supposedly temporary loopholes, which are bundled with 50 plus other tax breaks, referred to in Washington, D.C., as “extenders” because they are renewed every couple of years.

The package of corporate tax breaks is estimated to cost taxpayers more than $84 billion and up to nearly $700 billion over 10 years if they are continuously renewed. Even with that stunningly high price tag, the cost of these tax cuts won’t be held to the same standard as is applied to programs on which ordinary Americans depend. For example, House Republicans have refused to allow a vote on extending emergency unemployment benefits for the 3.6 million Americans who have been out of work for more than six months, unless the $25 billion-plus cost of the program is “paid for” with other cuts or tax increases.

Continue Reading

© Copyright . All Rights Reserved.