Late last month, Bloomberg reported that British Petroleum continues to experience substantial growth in the amount of money it receives from the Pentagon for its oil services. From 2010 to 2011, Pentagon contracts with BP increased by one-third from about 1 billion to 1.35 billion.
This was presented by some in the media as a scandal, since presumably, BP should be punished by the Pentagon for it’s massive 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The larger story, however, should be about just how much the Pentagon spends on oil every year.
Defense contractors, in their relentless campaign to avoid reductions in Pentagon spending and, consequently, the hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars they receive every year, have started taking hostages—their own employees.
Last week Politico reported that defense contractor's new plan is to “Threaten to send out layoff notices—hundreds of thousands of them, right before Election Day.” This threat is intended to frighten incumbents into rolling back the impending Budget Control Act sequestration, which would reduce Pentagon spending by roughly ten percent.
Mitt Romney’s financial company, Bain Capital, invested in a series of firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by American workers to new facilities in low-wage countries like China and India.
During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Most mornings, Oscar Contreras Carrillo takes two trains and a rickety bus, called a pesero, across Mexico City to manage a food truck. He gets one day off each week. Otherwise, he’s working 11- and 13-hour shifts, serving sandwiches, tacos and glasses of horchata, a sweet rice drink. His monthly income hovers at $430.
On June 18, Van Jones gave a hard-hitting speech to progressive activists in which he praised the Occupy movement while chiding the older, more established iterations of left-wing activism for abandoning the cause because of disappointment in President Barack Obama. But if you read Dana Milbank's coverage in the Washington Post, you'd think precisely the opposite had happened. In a piece representing either the worst of lazy-reporter hackery or outright dishonesty, Milbank wrote that Jones used his speech to slam the Occupy movement -- a false charge if there ever was one. (Video of Jones' speech appears at the end of this post.)
U.S. Rep. and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison wants the National Federation of Independent Business -- the organization that filed the legal challenge to the federal Affordable Care Act to reveal its members and donors -- but that isn't likely to happen.
In a letter to the president of the National Federation of Independent Business' president, Ellison and co-chair Raul Grijalva ask for a list of donors and members.
While libertarian Rep. Ron Paul has been racking up delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa, the running assumption has tended to be that even if his supporters might make some noise for a change to the party platform, they won't be able to stand in the way of Mitt Romney. But what about his choice for Vice President? Jon Ward writes that an obscure rule change made by the GOP four years ago could provide Paulites an avenue to unleashing convention chaos:
Save yourself the bother and just get ticked off now: A new poll shows that most people will be unhappy regardless of how the U.S. Supreme Court rules in its much-anticipated decision on the nation’s sweeping healthcare law.
The survey by the Pew Research Center found that regardless of whether the law is upheld, struck down or kept intact except for its “individual mandate,” fewer than half those asked would be happy with the outcome.
The nutty thing about the health care debate that will play a prominent role in the next election is that most Americans want pretty much the same outcome: to control costs without sacrificing quality. And that’s not what either major-party candidate is offering. Few think that Obamacare, a Romneycare descendant that contains the same kind of individual mandate the then-governor of Massachusetts signed into law, will get us to that desired goal. Nor would Mitt Romney, who has been reborn as a celebrant of the old, pre-Obama system with a few nips and tucks.
My cancer won’t wait and doesn’t care about what nine robed judges in Washington, DC, say about healthcare. Cancer doesn’t care. Obamacare. Romneycare. No matter. Cancer doesn’t care. But the nurses do.
Unrelenting and not fearful of any CEO’s rage or the loss of a political contribution, cancer, illness and injury march on. It is with that sort of fearless and unwavering force that the nurses of National Nurses United and the patients for whom they advocate are advancing the cause for healthcare justice.