As a little precursor to The Dems upcoming attempt to raise the minimum wage, I thought I’d share this gem by John Fund on the activist group ACORN with you:
Founded by union organizer Wade Rathke in 1970, Acorn boasts an annual budget of some $40 million and operates everything from “social justice” radio stations to an affordable-housing arm. Still run after 36 years by Mr. Rathke as “chief organizer,” it is best known for its campaigns against Wal-Mart, and for leading initiatives in six states to raise the minimum wage….
Acorn is vulnerable to charges it doesn’t practice what it preaches. Its manual for minimum-wage campaigns says it intends “to push for as high a wage as possible.” But it doesn’t pay those wages. In 2004 Acorn won a $9.50 an hour minimum wage in Santa Fe, N.M., for example, but pays its organizers $25,000 a year for a required 54-hour week–$8.90 an hour. This year Acorn had workers in Missouri sign contracts saying they would be “working up to 80 hours over seven days of work.” Mr. Rathke says “We pay as much as we can. If people can get more elsewhere, we wish them well.”
In 1995 Acorn unsuccessfully sued California to be exempt from the minimum wage, claiming that “the more that Acorn must pay each individual outreach worker . . . the fewer outreach workers it will be able to hire.” Mr. Rathke acknowledges higher wages can cost some jobs but that the raises for other workers are worth it.
So maybe the really do have a basic understanding of economics, but choose to push forward an agenda that doesn’t work in the real world? I just don’t get it… Whatever, it was good for a laugh anyway.
H/T: Coyote Blog
An article in today’s Wall Street Journal Online entitled, “The Republicans Deserved to Lose.” The article (subscription only) reads,
Consider these results from a poll of voters in 12 swing GOP-held congressional districts, conducted by OnMessage Inc. (PDF):
No, these results are not typographical errors:
* When asked which Party they believe would cut taxes for the middle-class 42% said the Democrats while only 29% chose the Republicans.
* When asked which Party will work toward reducing the deficit 47% chose the Democrats while only 22% chose the Republicans.
* Again, when asked who will keep government spending under control the Democrats held a 17 point edge (38% Democrats, 21% Republicans).
H/T: To The People
See the whole story here.
Democrats wrested control of the Senate from Republicans Wednesday with an upset victory in Virginia, giving the party complete domination of Capitol Hill for the first time since 1994.
Jim Webb’s squeaker win over incumbent Sen. George Allen gave Democrats their 51st seat in the Senate, an astonishing turnabout at the hands of voters unhappy with Republican scandal and unabated violence in Iraq. Allen was the sixth Republican incumbent senator defeated in Tuesday’s elections.
The Senate had teetered at 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans for most of Wednesday, with Virginia hanging in the balance. Webb’s victory ended Republican hopes of eking out a 50-50 split, with Vice President Dick Cheney wielding tie-breaking authority.
Carrie Lukas has an great post on InkWell today, which argues that while yesterday’s elections may have meant defeat for individual Republicans, it may be a victory for conservatism. As she explains,
Republicans are going to have to do some real soul searching and remember why people supported them in the first place. This means returning to first principles, like a belief in limited government, less regulation, fewer government handout programs, a transparent tax code, reformed entitlement programs, and more individual control. When I was on Fox News yesterday, I struggled to come up with any legislative victory from the past two years. It shouldn’t be that hard. Republicans in Congress really fell down on their job, beginning with their failure to engage with the President on reforming Social Security. This should have been a no brainer. It should be conservativism 101 to want to transform our broken, tax-and-spend Social Security system into one that is based on savings and investment. Not only is this good policy, but survey research increasingly shows it’s also good politics. Yet the Republican Congress balked, and proved that they were more concerned with avoiding a challenging political conversation than in doing the right thing. That has to change. Republicans need to get back to talking about their vision of an ownership society.
The Democrats didn’t win this election so much as the Republicans lost it. The country didn’t embrace a Democratic vision of government and domestic policy: they never even offered one. They put forth a few small time initiatives — a higher minium wage and more subsidies for student loans — but never tackled any of the big issues, like Social Security, healthcare or immigration. Many of the big pickups for the Democrats came through candidates that positioned themselves as fiscal conservatives and practically Republicans on many core issues.
Conservatives should take heart. In two years, there is another chance to reclaim Congress. By that point, not only will we we will be able to point to the vacuous Democratic agenda, hopefully, we will have committed conservatives to root for.
There was at least one victory for limited government yesterday–eminent domain reform was one issue an overwhelming majority of voters agreed on. Eminent domain ballot measures to restrict governments from taking private property and giving it private entities, passed across the country. All eight ballot measures limiting eminent domain by addressing “public use,” passed overwhelmingly. There is now a total of 35 states that have limited eminent domain abuse.
In addition, voters passed constitutional amendments in the following six states:
Florida: government can no longer take property for so-called “blight” removal and the newly passed statutes prohibit localities from transferring land from one owner to another through the use of eminent domain for 10 years-effectively eliminating condemnations for private commercial development. After yesterday, with nearly 70% approval of the constitutional amendment, each house of the Legislature must now pass exemptions by a 3/5 vote.
Georgia: nearly 85% of the electorate voted for a constitutional amendment requiring a vote by elected officials any time eminent domain will be used.
Louisiana: passed the first post-Kelo constitutional amendment to restrict eminent domain abuse in September’s primary election. The amendment prohibits local governments from condemning private property merely to generate taxes or jobs and ensures that the State’s blight laws can only be used for the removal of a genuine threat to public health and safety on a specific piece of property.
Michigan: More than 80% voters approved a proposed constitutional amendment that prohibits “the taking of private property for transfer to a private entity for the purpose of economic development or enhancement of tax revenues” and requires government to prove its authority to take a piece of property for blight removal by clear and convincing evidence.
New Hampshire: state legislature passed both statutory reform a d a constitutional amendment, which was supported by more than 85% of New Hampshire voters.
South Carolina: the constitution now specifically prohibits municipalities from condemning private property for “the purpose or benefit of economic development, unless the condemnation is for public use.” Also, an individual property must now be a danger to public health and safety for it to be designated as “blighted,” closing a loophole that enabled local governments to use eminent domain for private use under the State’s previously broad blight definition
In addition:
Nevada’s constitutional amendment, which was presented to voters through a citizen initiative and sharply limited eminent domain for private development, was affirmed by over 60% of voters and will reappear on the 2008 ballot for final approval.
Oregon voters overwhelmingly passed, with over 65% approval, a citizen initiative that provides stronger property rights protections in Oregon’s statutes.
For more information on Eminent Domain Reform, visit The Institute for Justice and The Castle Coalition