• Advertisement

Labor Leaders Speak Out Against Scott Brown’s Outsourcing Strategy

Small Business and Labor Leaders: Outsourcing Record Makes Brown
Obvious Choice for U.S. Chamber of Commerce Endorsement
But Wrong For New Hampshire

Group That Profits Off The Offshoring of U.S. Jobs Will Spend Millions to Elect Buddy Scott Brown, Who Endorsed Outsourcing Strategy of Company That Paid Him $270K

Manchester, NH – Scott Brown is getting endorsed today by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a group that has a long history of supporting outsourcing, much like Scott Brown, who voted to protect tax breaks for companies that outsource while in the Senate, and just a few months ago endorsed a business strategy that included the offshoring of U.S. jobs to Mexico and China.

“Scott Brown is touting the support of an organization that would rather see big companies make more money than support American jobs,” said Charlie Balban, Chair of the New Hampshire Sheet Metal Workers Local 17 Political Action League. “This is just the latest example of why Scott Brown is wrong for New Hampshire. He’d rather align himself with big money groups that champion job-killing policies than with the working families of our state.”

“Scott Brown was a reliable ally of companies that outsourced jobs while he was in the Senate, and now he is cozying up to a pro-outsourcing group that is trying to buy him New Hampshire’s Senate seat,” said Joe Donahue, business manager of Carpenters Local 118. “When push comes to shove, Brown will always take sides with the corporate interests that are lining his pockets and filling his campaign coffers. That’s the only explanation for him to accept the Chamber of Commerce’s endorsement today.”

“Working families in New Hampshire should know exactly who is spending millions to get Scott Brown back in the Senate: companies that outsource and groups that support outsourcing,” said Mark MacKenzie, President of NH AFL-CIO. “Last month we learned that Brown was collecting a personal paycheck—to the tune of more than a quarter million dollars—from a company that outsourced. And today, Brown accepts the endorsement of a pro-outsourcing group. We know who Brown is working for, and it’s not Granite Staters.”

“Jeanne Shaheen has always stood up for New Hampshire small businesses and her work has made a real difference for our state,” said Adria Bagshaw, small business owner and Chair of the New Hampshire Small Business Development Center Advisory Board.  “Scott Brown’s record may have scored him an endorsement from a pro-outsourcing interest group, but it’s not what New Hampshire needs in the Senate. We need a Senator like Jeanne Shaheen who will promote job creation here at home, not someone like Scott Brown who profits from outsourcing companies and protects tax breaks to create jobs overseas.”

In August, it was revealed that Scott Brown signed legal documents clearly endorsing the outsourcing strategy of Kadant, Inc, a company that paid him more than a quarter million dollars to serve on its Board of Directors. The SEC document, signed March 12, 2014—just days before Brown announced his New Hampshire Senate run—reads: “We pursue a number of strategies to improve our internal growth…using low cost manufacturing bases, such as China and Mexico.”  Previous filings with the SEC that also have Brown’s signature include the same language and endorsement of outsourcing American jobs.

What happened in the US Senate yesterday? (Hint: They’re not trying to overturn Citizens United anymore.)

Money Corrputs by Light Brigading via Flikr

photo by Light Brigading via flikr

Yesterday, the Senate GOP voted to block any further consideration of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.

That means the amendment won’t go over to the House of Representatives for a vote.

And it won’t go out to the 50 states for a ratification vote.

The proposed amendment would have explicitly authorized Congress and state legislatures to set campaign finance limits. (Read more about Citizens United and the resulting “unprecedented amounts of outside spending” in the 2010 and 2012 elections here.)

So… those 16 states that have already voted in favor of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United? Sorry, folks.

All those other states – including New Hampshire – whose state Legislatures have shown interest in a constitutional amendment? Sorry, folks.

Those 80% of ordinary Americans – including 72% of ordinary Republicans – who oppose Citizens United? Sorry, folks.

The Senate GOP knows better than you do.

So you don’t get a vote on this.

Who to thank, for taking the states’ vote away? The 42 GOP Senators who voted to block the amendment yesterday.

citizens_united_switched_votesOr, more bizarrely, the 25 Senators who on Monday night voted to let the amendment proceed – but by Thursday afternoon, had changed their votes to block it. (And yes, that would include New Hampshire’s own Senator Kelly Ayotte.)

If those 25 Senators had voted the same way on Thursday as they voted on Monday, the constitutional amendment would be going to the House. And then, maybe, out to the 50 states for ratification votes.

So… what happened during those 68 hours, to make those 25 Senators change their votes?

Can’t tell for sure, from out here in the hinterlands. The news is full of the Oscar Pistorius case… 9/11 remembrances… the Ray Rice case… ISIS and the spectre of terrorism. But there’s relatively little press coverage of this attempt to amend our Constitution.  The 80% of Americans who oppose Citizens United probably don’t even know that the Senate took a vote yesterday.

Here’s my best guess: I think Mitch McConnell happened. I’m guessing that the Senate GOP Leader told them how to vote… and the 25 Senators did. (Even Arizona Sen. John McCain, one of the sponsors of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, more commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act.)

That’s just a gut-instinct guess, but there are two things behind it.  First, during Committee consideration of the amendment, the GOP members marched in lockstep to oppose the amendment. Every recorded Subcommittee and Committee vote was strictly along party lines.

Second reason: GOP Leader McConnell has opposed campaign finance limits since… well, it seems like forever.

Take some time and listen to the GOP Leader’s speech at a June “retreat” for billionaires organized by the Koch Brothers.

In his remarks, GOP Leader McConnell tracks the history of campaign finance reform efforts “back to the beginning of the 20th century” … and how they “petered out” during “the great prosperity” of the 1920s. (Do you think he remembers how the 1920s ended?)

He reminisces about his own efforts to block passage of campaign finance reform:

We had filibuster after filibuster, which in my first term in the Senate I was leading. And then it came back again in the first two years of Clinton. The bill would pass the House, the bill would pass the Senate, and then it would go to conference. And I was so determined, I came up with a new filibuster. That’s all I’d ever done before was filibuster and go in, go into conference. We had to do it all night long. Under (inaudible) procedure every senator had an hour, and if you didn’t show up right on time, you were out of luck.

Everybody rallied together. This was about two months before the great fall election of 1994. Everybody rallied together. We went around the clock. Everybody showed up on time. And I thought, well, maybe we’re finally through with this nonsense.

He says “The worst day of my political life was when President George W. Bush signed McCain-Feingold into law.”

He talks about his own lawsuit to overturn McCain-Feingold. (You can read the Supreme Court decision here.)

He talks about what has happened since his lawsuit.

So what really then changed the Court was President Bush’s appointment of John Roberts. The most important was Sam Alito because we lost the McCain-Feingold case five to four because of Sandra Day O’Connor. The majority was all liberal. Then she retired, and Sam Alito replaced her, and we now have the best Supreme Court in anybody’s memory… Now, that’s where we are today. I’m really proud of this Supreme Court and the way they’ve been dealing with the issue of First Amendment political speech. It’s only five to four, and I pray for the health of the five.

And then he talks about some other things of interest to his audience of billionaires: like minimum wage… environmental regulation… regulation of the financial services industry. And he promises to use federal spending bills to “go after” those issues.

And I assure you that in the spending bill, we will be pushing back against this bureaucracy by doing what’s called placing riders in the bill. No money can be spent to do this or to do that. We’re going to go after them on healthcare, on financial services, on the Environmental Protection Agency, across the board (inaudible).

And – in response to a mostly-inaudible question from David Koch about “free speech” and amending the Constitution – GOP Leader McConnell says:

Having, having struck out at the Supreme Court, David, they now want to amend the Constitution. … These people need to be stopped, and believe me, something that I thought to do (inaudible) what is spent (inaudible) independent coordination?
(Laughter.)
(Applause.)

Yeah, read that again: “These people need to be stopped.”

THAT’s why I’m guessing “Mitch McConnell happened” to those 25 Senators who switched their votes between Monday and Thursday.

What can we do about it, now? What can we – the 80% of Americans who oppose Citizens United – do, now that the Senate GOP has blocked the amendment?

We can make it a campaign issue.

Scott Brown in 2010 Image by Wiki Commons

Scott Brown in 2010
Image by Wiki Commons

Starting here in New Hampshire, with Scott Brown… who, as Massachusetts Senator, helped block the DISCLOSE Act back in 2010. Here in New Hampshire, 69% of us want a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. Even among Granite State Republicans, six out of 10 want a constitutional amendment. (Sen. Ayotte: who were you listening to, when you voted yesterday?) How do you think Scott Brown will vote on this, if he is elected in November?

We need to make Citizens United an issue in the 2014 campaigns.

There’s not all that much else we can do, at this point.

—–

If you want to wander through Leader McConnell’s campaign finance disclosure records – including $14.8 million in “large individual contributions” – click here. Remember: that’s just contributions to his official campaign.

“Outside spending” is much harder to track. So far, during this election season, McConnell has also “been boosted by $2.2 million in positive ads, mainly by the [U.S.] Chamber. Outside Republican PACs have already spent $7 million on ads attacking his Democratic challenger, Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes.”

A running tally of money that “non-profits” have spent on electioneering so far in the 2014 campaign is available here.

—–

More information about grassroots efforts to support the “Democracy for All” amendment is available here.

Tuesday’s NHLN story about the amendment is here.

Can We Overturn Citizens United? US Senate will vote again later this week.

(FLICKR LIght Brigading

(FLICKR LIght Brigading)

Last night, the proposed constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United moved one tiny step forward. By a 79-18 vote, the US Senate invoked cloture to end a GOP filibuster of the measure.

That means the Senate will actually be able to vote on the amendment, probably later this week. But will it pass? One Hill reporter says, “The amendment is almost certain to fail.”

That’s because constitutional amendments require a two-thirds vote in the Senate – and until last night, the Senate GOP had been working in lockstep to defeat (or undermine) the measure. Every recorded Subcommittee and Committee vote was strictly along party lines: with the Democrats in favor of moving the proposal forward; and the Republicans trying to keep it from seeing the light of day.

So even though some GOP Senators (including NH Sen. Kelly Ayotte) voted to end the filibuster last night, it’s quite possible they will be pressured into voting against the amendment when it comes up for a vote.

If the Senate approves the amendment, it will still need to be approved by the House and ratified by two-thirds of the states. (Read more about the process here.)

Cash Bribe Politician MoneyWhat’s at stake: The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission helped unleash unprecedented amounts of outside spending in the 2010 and 2012 election cycles. (Read more here.)

It has led to billionaires like Sheldon Adelson wielding incredible personal influence.

It led to Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell making a pilgrimage to a “secret strategy conference of conservative millionaire and billionaire donors hosted by the Koch brothers” where he promised to block debate on “all these gosh darn proposals” like increasing the minimum wage, extending unemployment benefits, and allowing students to refinance their college loans.

Now, Mitch McConnell may believe – as he told those prospective donors – that “all Citizens United did was to level the playing field for corporate speech…. We now have, I think, the most free and open system we’ve had in modern times. The Supreme Court allowed all of you to participate in the process in a variety of different ways.”

But America is seeing through that spin.  

Sixteen states have already endorsed the idea of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.

More than 500 local governments have already supported such a change. (Here in the Granite State, the list includes: Alstead; Amherst; Andover; Atkinson; Barnstead; Barrington; Bradford; Bridgewater; Chesterfield; Conway; Deerfield; Eaton; Exeter; Francestown; Henniker; Hampstead; Hudson; Kingston; Lee; Lyme; New Boston; Northwood; Rindge; Tilton; Wakefield; Webster; and Windham)

And the public? America is united on this issue. There is more agreement on overturning Citizens United than on just about anything else. 80% of Americans – and 72% of Republicans – oppose Citizens United. Here in New Hampshire, 69% of Granite Staters support a constitutional amendment like the one the Senate will finally be voting on. (Amendment supporters include six out of every 10 NH Republicans, and almost three-quarters of NH independents.  Senator Kelly Ayotte, are you listening?)

So this past weekend, the GOP tried out some new spins, trying to rationalize why they will be voting against something that eight out of 10 Americans support.

New Spin #1: It’s the Democrats! “‘Senate Democrats have long been funded by a group of billionaires bent on maintaining their power, yet they pretend to be outraged’ by the spending of the Koch brothers and their allies. …In advance of Monday’s floor debate, Senate Republican staffers circulated a chart showing the reach of Democracy Alliance…”

(No, this spin does not explain why Republicans want to maintain the Citizens United status quo. If the Republicans and the Koch Brothers are truly outraged by Democratic big-dollar contributors – why don’t they vote to approve the constitutional amendment?)

New Spin #2: Guns! (Yes, really.)

Here’s how the National Rifle Association described Citizens United: “The court declared unconstitutional the parts of the law that had been enacted for the explicit purpose of silencing the NRA and its members. Of course, the gun-banners in the White House and Congress opposed the decision because it thwarted their plans.”

Here’s how the NRA described the amendment to overturn Citizens United: “As the title of the proposed constitutional amendment suggests, S.J.R. 19 is intended to allow anti-gunners in Congress to silence their critics and to control the gun ‘debate.’”

(The actual title: “Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.” And: while the NRA may be #5 on the list of non-profits that spend money on electioneering… the proposed amendment isn’t actually about guns. It’s about allowing Congress and the states to “regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.” It’s about “protect[ing] the integrity of government and the electoral process.”)

Does the GOP really think either of these spins is going to stick any better than the “Citizens United leveled the playing field” spin?

Why is this such an important issue for those of us in the Labor movement?

Reason 1: “Whatever slice [of political contributions] you look at, business interests dominate, with an overall advantage over organized labor of about 15-to-1. Even among PACs – the favored means of delivering funds by labor unions – business has a more than 3-to-1 fundraising advantage. In soft money, the ratio is nearly 17-to-1.”

Reason 2: Mitch McConnell, shilling for those billionaire donors: “In late April, Senate Republicans, led by McConnell, successfully filibustered a bill to increase the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour, a widely popular measure that would increase wages for at least 16.5 million Americans. Earlier in the year, McConnell also led a filibuster of a three-month extension of unemployment insurance to some 1.7 million Americans.”

Is our government really for sale to the highest bidder?

The 2014 campaigns are breaking fundraising records set in the 2012 and 2010 elections.

Isn’t it time to send this constitutional amendment to the states for a ratification vote?

NH’s Midterm Primaries Are Tomorrow, Do You “Know Your Candidates?”

Editor’s Note: This years elections are very important and there is a lot of competition for spots on the party tickets.  It is very important to get a full picture of who is running. Susan Bruce originally wrote this editorial for the Conway Sun Times, and she has granted us permission to republish it here. If you like this post, you can also follow Susan on here own blog “SUSAN THE BRUCE,” which is very straight forward and edgy.   

Most of all, do not forget to Vote tomorrow!

voting-20

 

Know Your Candidates

By Susan Bruce.

The midterm primary elections are coming up on September 9. In a state where most of the media skews to the right, getting an accurate picture of candidates can be challenging. One must go beyond the conventional (newspaper and TV) sources and dig a little deeper. Candidate research is crucial in order to avoid electing people who will be a huge embarrassment right out of the gate. With a 400 member House, there will be others who will require more time to maximize their embarrassment potential.

The highest profile primary contest is for the GOP nominee for US Senate. The winner will go on to face popular Senator Jeanne Shaheen in November. The three top candidates are Scott Brown, Jim Rubens, and Bob Smith. Brown and Smith are both former US Senators, Smith from NH and Brown from MA. Brown’s campaign has been strange. In Colebrook he knocked on the doors of supporters and called that “campaigning.” In N. Conway he ran away from a reporter and hid in the bathroom. Days ago on the radio in Massachusetts, he urged folks to come to NH and use our same day registration policy to vote for him. He has a lot of money, the party establishment has lined up behind him, and he looks pretty. Will that carry the day?

Rubens is a Dartmouth grad who has made a boatload of money. He once had a public blog called oversuccess.com. When some of the content from that blog went public, the blog went private. No longer can we peons read about the perils of being wealthy: “I have bathed in camera light during press conferences, political opponents skulking in the rear of ballrooms, forced to tolerate my applause lines, sycophants and well-wishers beaming and waiting in line to shake my hand or offer their help.” Rubens also ran afoul on that same blog by suggesting that the increasing number of women in the workplace has resulted in mass shootings. The implication being, of course, that those women are taking men’s jobs away from them. Rubens signed on to the campaign finance reform bandwagon and won the support of Lawrence Lessig and his MayDay PAC. He’s also jumped on the libertea bandwagon, and has attempted to be photographed in every gun store in NH.

Former Senator Bob Smith lost his bad toupee in Florida. He may have updated his hair, but not his ideology. Smith is working overtime to appeal to the farthest right fringe, but they seem more interested in Rubens. He’s unlikely to do well in the primary.

In the GOP primary for governor, the contest comes down to Walt Havenstein and Andrew Hemingway. Havenstein was the CEO at BAE Systems. BAE is a defense contractor. Walt boasts about the jobs he created there. He may have hired people, but those jobs were actually created by US taxpayers. The obscene US military spending is made possible by folks like you and me. Without the public teat to suckle from, Walt wouldn’t have been hiring.

Havenstein also entered the race with some confusion about his residency. He claimed that he’s always lived in NH, but he signed a homestead deduction in Maryland that stipulated he lived there in order to save a few thousand a year. The NH ballot commission ruled that he is a NH resident, and Maryland sent him a bill for the tax money he defrauded them for. He’s “considering” whether or not to pay it, a luxury not available to the rest of us.

Andrew Hemingway is the darling of the libertea crowd. A look at his website reveals he’s promoting the same old “solutions” that have been failing NH for decades. Neither Havenstein nor Hemingway mentions the word “infrastructure” on their campaign websites.

In Congressional District 1, the race comes down to former Congressman Frank Guinta and former Dean of the former Whittemore School of Business at UNH, now renamed the Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics.

Frank Guinta slid into Congress during the red tide of 2010. He stayed for one term. Guinta “found” a bank account that provided his campaign with a $350,000 infusion of cash in 2010. That “find” didn’t match up with his income. The FEC investigation appears to be moving at the speed of the tectonic plates. Frank also distinguished himself by campaigning loudly about Congresswoman Carol Shea Porter’s alleged abuses of the Congressional franking system. In 2011, he spent more on franked mail than any other Congressperson. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) rated him one of the most corrupt legislators.

Dan Innis became the Dean of the business school at UNH in 2007. In 2008, the business school received a big wad of cash ($25 million) from alumnus Peter T. Paul. The school built what his now known as the Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics. Peter T. Paul amassed a fortune selling subprime mortgages, and later devising ways to package and sell mortgage debt to investors – a practice that has been cited as a key factor in the economic meltdown of 2008. In 2013, Innis stepped down from his position as Dean to explore a run for Congress. In 2014, Peter T. Paul created a Super Pac to help his friend Dan Innis beat Guinta in the primary. If Innis gets to Washington what kind of regulatory oversight will he be providing? Will he protect voters or his benefactor?

This is why it’s important to know the candidates. Do they already have a record of corruption? Where do their loyalties lie? Are they bought and paid for?

On the local level, we’ll also be electing House and Senate candidates, and various county positions. Last biennium, the House and Senate were both filled with rabid ideologues and obstructionists who did their best to subvert the process. Anyone who tells you that cutting taxes and eliminating regulations is the key to job growth in NH is lying. NH has failed for decades to invest in our state and the results of that failure are now hobbling our economy. The GOP inability to be honest about that is a shameful and deliberate failure.

In order for the NH legislature to accomplish anything, there has to be some bipartisan cooperation and compromise. Electing people who claim government is bad and broken leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy. It’s up to voters to decide whether they want to elect serious people who are interested in working to fix some of NH’s very real problems, or if they want bellicose obstructionists trumpeting the usual slogans.
*                                *                                       *
This was written as my regular column in the Conway Daily Sun newspaper, in NH’s First Congressional District, which is why I didn’t include the CD 2 race.

I’ve been encouraged to add in information about the GOP primary in CD 2, to determine who will run against Congresswoman Ann Kuster.

There are 3 Republicans in the race.

Marilinda Garcia is a former state representative. She was one of former Speaker Bill O’Brien’s acolytes. She’s also distinguished herself by being heavily funded by the Koch brothers. A young attractive woman with a Latino surname who espouses the beliefs of the far right libertea fringe doesn’t come along every day for the GOP. She wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with the same GOP plan that has failed us all for decades – the marketplace! She mentions Bowles Simpson which is a coy way of saying she wants to privatize Social Security. She wants to cut gummint spending.

Garcia’s inexperience showed at the debate last week when she refused to shake opponent Gary Lambert’s hand, because he “lied about her positions.” Time to toughen up Buttercup. This isn’t the 400 member NH House, this is hardball.

She’s also made the classic rookie mistake of airing all this on her campaign blog. Repeating what he’s said in his ads is giving him double the advertisement space. Former Rep. Garcia is not ready for prime time.

Gary Lambert wants to force women to serve as involuntary incubators, secure our borders, repeal Obama care, and give us MOAR GUNZ! He has a Wake Up Washington Pledge on his campaign website, full of promises of term limits and not taking a pension or a pay raise! Funny how these guys who claim to hate career politicians are desperate to become career politicians.

Jim Lawrence promises to Win Back NH for NH. He’s going to repeal Obamacare and replace it with the same old market “solutions.” He’s going to secure our border! He’s going to fix the IRS! He’s going to give us a strong foreign policy! He’s going to prevent NH from having wind turbines! He’s going to eliminate regulations and give everyone MOAR GUNZ!

Three far right fringe candidates with no new ideas. Welcome to today’s GOP.

© sbruce 2014

published as an op-ed in the Conway Daily Sun newspaper, Sept. 5, 2014

republished with permission

Walt Havensteis’s Job Plan Just Doesn’t Add Up

Following Labor Day, Failed CEO Walt Havenstein Needs to Explain to New Hampshire Workers Why He Fudged the Job Numbers in His Economic “Plan”

Havenstein’s “Plan” Distorts Job Creation Numbers in Attempt to Mislead Voters; Hides Fact that NH is Already on Pace to Create 25,000 Private Sector Jobs in Two and a Half Years 

Manchester, NH – Following Labor Day, failed CEO Walt Havenstein needs to explain to New Hampshire workers why he fudged the job numbers in his economic “plan.” Havenstein’s so-called “plan” promises to create 25,000 private sector jobs in two and a half years. But by using misleading numbers to calculate the current rate of job-creation, Havenstein tries to hide the fact that New Hampshire’s economy is already on pace to create 25,000 jobs in the same amount of time.

Though Havenstein’s “plan” uses misleading and unsound methodology to claim that New Hampshire created 4,500 jobs over the past year, an honest accounting reveals that New Hampshire’s economy actually created 10,400 private sector jobs between June 2013 and June 2014.

“It should come as no surprise that Havenstein botched his own economic ‘plan’ given that as CEO of SAIC, his last attempt to implement a ‘plan’ drove the company into the ground, as SAIC lost millions of dollars and thousands of jobs,” said New Hampshire Democratic Party Deputy Communications Director Bryan Lesswing. “The truth is that under Governor Hassan’s leadership, New Hampshire’s job-creators are already on pace to hit Havenstein’s targets. Havenstein’s Koch Brothers ‘plan’ would just pad the profits of multi-national corporations while undermining our economic progress and hurting New Hampshire’s middle class families and small businesses.”

A closer look at the numbers behind Havenstein’s “plan” reveals a misleading and unsound methodology. Havenstein not only cherry-picked seasonally-adjusted jobs number to calculate New Hampshire’s current rate of job creation, but he also incorporates government job losses to drive the number down to his claimed 4,500 figure.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ own guidance, “annual average estimates are calculated from the not seasonally adjusted data series.” Meaning the most accurate number of private sector jobs created from June 2013 to June 2014 is 10,400 (non-seasonally adjusted, non-government jobs). By this measure, New Hampshire’s economy is already on pace to exceed Walt’s target in the same amount of time.

BACKGROUND

The revelations over Havenstein’s misleading and unsound methodology come as criticism of his “plan” mounts.

An editorial in today’s Concord Monitor notes, “Havenstein, if elected, would push to lower the state’s Business Profits Tax from 8.5 percent to 7.4 percent, something that he magically believes would create 25,000 new jobs. He offers no evidence to support that belief, and history suggests it’s misplaced.”

In a fact check of Havenstein’s“plan,” the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute points out that the business tax giveaways in Havenstein’s so-called “plan” would “reduce tax revenue by as much as $90 million per biennium.” And as NHFPI notes, “Business tax cuts, if not offset by increases in other taxes, will lead to reductions in the public services on which both residents and businesses rely.”

The Union Leader’s Garry Rayno also highlighted how Walt’s economic “plan” to lower the Business Profits Tax would largely benefit multi-national companies, while not helping New Hampshire small businesses and local job creators.

And in a Nashua Telegraph Op-Ed, Mark Connolly described Havenstein’s “plan” as, “more slogan than reality” and possessing “no basis in economic reality,” likening it to GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain’s failed “9-9-9” idea.

For full New Hampshire employment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics see below or here

New Hampshire not seasonally adjusted non-farm jobs

  • June 2013: 649,300
  • June 2014: 658,500
  • Change:  +9,200

New Hampshire not seasonally adjusted government jobs

  • June 2013: 88,400
  • June 2014: 87,200
  • Change: -1,200

New Hampshire not seasonally adjusted private sector jobs (total non-farm minus total government jobs)

  • June 2013: 560,900
  • June 2014: 571,300
  • Change: +10,400 jobs

NEA-NH Endorses Governor Maggie Hassan for Re-Election

Manchester—Today, National Education Association-New Hampshire (NEA-NH), the state’s largest educator and public employee union, announced its endorsement of Governor Maggie Hassan for re-election, asking its more than 16,000 members and their families to support Governor Hassan during the campaign and on Election Day.

Governor Maggie Hassan has been a tireless advocate for public education and we must re-elect her this November to preserve the dream of a quality public education for every child in New Hampshire,” said Scott McGilvray, NEA-NH President. “Walt Havenstein or Andrew Hemingway would be a disaster for public education in this state, taking us back to the devastating cuts of the Bill O’Brien era. For the sake of our children’s future, we cannot afford to put either one of them in the Governor’s office. From freezing in-state tuition to protecting K-12 funding to modernizing STEM education, Governor Hassan has proven time and again that she will fight to ensure the success of every child and champion the interests of our students and their parents.”

“I am truly honored to have earned the support of more than 16,000 of New Hampshire’s teachers and their families,” said Governor Maggie Hassan. “New Hampshire’s public schools are often ranked among the nation’s best, but we must continue working to ensure that all of our young people can develop the skills and innovative thinking they will need to compete in today’s global economy. Since entering office, I’ve fought to invest in public K-12 and higher education, and I will keep working to strengthen our public education system in order to expand opportunity for all of our children.”

Governor Hassan worked across party lines to pass a fiscally responsible, balanced budget that maintained funding for K-12 education and restored funding for higher education – making it possible to freeze in-state tuition at the university system and reduce tuition at our community colleges.

The Governor also created a Science Technology Engineering and Math Task Force to modernize STEM education in our public schools, and launched a new effort to partner manufacturing companies directly with classes at local schools, building relationships that can lead to a stronger workforce pipeline.

The Governor will continue working to ensure our children have access to a world-class education in order to be prepared for success in the 21st century economy.

About NEA-New Hampshire

Founded in 1854, the New Hampshire State Teachers Association became one of the “founding ten” state education associations that formed the National Education Association in 1857. Known today as NEA-NH, and comprised of more than 16,000 members, NEA-NH is the largest association of public employees in the state. Our mission to advocate for the children of New Hampshire and public school employees, and to promote lifelong learning remains true after more than 150 years. Our members are public school educators in all stages of their careers, including classroom teachers and other certified professionals, instructors at public higher education institutions, students preparing for a teaching career, education support personnel and those retired from the profession.

Scott Brown Takes Big Money From A Company That Outsources American Jobs, Locals Discuss

New Hampshire Leaders Discuss Scott Brown’s Role On Board Of Outsourcing Company and Record Of Supporting Breaks For Companies That Offshore U.S. Jobs

Brown Is Cashing In Again, Collecting Quarter Of A Million Dollars On Board Of Outsourcing Company At The Expense Of NH Economy

Manchester – Today, following reports that Scott Brown is lining his own pockets with more than a quarter of a million dollars from a company that outsourced American jobs, New Hampshire economic leaders and elected officials spoke on a conference call about why Brown’s role on the company’s board of directors makes him wrong for New Hampshire. Berlin Mayor Paul Grenier, former DRED Commissioner George Bald, and Nashua State Senator Bette Lasky discussed the negative impact outsourcing has had on local economies in New Hampshire as well as Scott Brown’s record of voting to protect tax breaks for companies that offshore jobs when he was Massachusetts’ U.S. Senator.

“I was really disappointed to find out that Kadant’s focus really is not on creating jobs in New Hampshire or in this country, and that outsourcing is a major part of its business plan,” said former Department of Resources and Economic Development Commissioner George Bald. “I know what Senator Shaheen has accomplished and when you look at that accomplishment it’s pretty significant in terms of creating good jobs. And as far as what Mr. Brown has done for the state of New Hampshire, it is a blank sheet of paper.”

“It’s not only that Scott Brown is profiting from this outsourcing company, but in his first year in Massachusetts as Senator, he voted to protect tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas,” said Nashua State Senator Bette Lasky. “In New Hampshire we value leaders who invest in our state’s economy and believe in our workforce. Scott Brown is wrong for New Hampshire and the people of New Hampshire deserve better.”

“There’s the politics of watching outsourcing and then the living of outsourcing,” said Paul Grenier, Mayor of Berlin. “Over the course of one generation Berlin has lost over 3800 manufacturing jobs. That’s the end result of some of the policies Scott Brown supported and I could never support him. I’ve worked closely with Senator Shaheen on a number of issues and I could tell you that protecting and creating jobs in the North Country has been of paramount importance to her.”

On Sunday, the Nashua Telegraph reported that Scott Brown has collected more than a quarter of a million dollars as a member of the board of directors of Kadant, Inc., a company based in Westford Massachusetts that touts its outsourcing of American jobs to China and Mexico. Brown’s involvement with the company fits his record from when he was a U.S. Senator from Massachusetts and voted to protect tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.

This isn’t the first time Scott Brown has been caught cashing in on his Senate candidacy and selling his reputation as a former Senator. This past spring, Brown was caught collecting $20,000 at a Las Vegas hedge fund conference.  Separately, Brown was forced to resign from a beauty supply company turned weapons manufacturer that was paying him $1.3 million in stock options as an advisor, and whose executives had been sued for fraud.

As New Hampshire’s Governor and U.S. Senator, Jeanne Shaheen has worked to spur investment in New Hampshire’s economy and create new jobs.  Her support for Trade Adjustment Assistance grants supported the development of advanced manufacturing training programs that helped workers who had lost their jobs because of foreign competition.  Those job retraining programs have been cited by New Hampshire businesses as a reason they chose to locate, and create jobs, in the Granite State.

The NH AFL-CIO Make Endorsement Announcement for U.S. Senate, NH Governor, Congress

New Hampshire AFL-CIO endorses Shaheen, Hassan, Shea-Porter and Kuster in November elections

The New Hampshire AFL-CIO announced its top slate of candidates for the 2014 elections today, pledging to support the reelection bids of Senator Shaheen, Governor Hassan, and Congresswomen Shea-Porter and Kuster. The state’s largest labor federation is prepared to roll out an aggressive field campaign to turn out voters in support of these working family champions.

“As our economy recovers, we need leaders who will commit to creating economic opportunity for New Hampshire families,” said New Hampshire AFL-CIO President Mark MacKenzie. “Governor Hassan has worked across party lines to support job creation for middle class families. Our representatives in Congress successfully protected thousands of jobs at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard from furloughs under sequestration. This is the kind of bold leadership that will ensure that New Hampshire’s economic recovery will translate into more opportunities for working families.”

“Working people know how critical this election is. In the last year, we’ve seen what can happen in New Hampshire when we work together to solve big problems. Yet too many people are still struggling and living paycheck to paycheck. We need to protect the leaders who care about the struggles of working people, deliver on their promises to us, and are willing to work together to expand opportunity for all.”

LETTER: Combat Veterans Are Furious Because Scott Brown Is Disingenuous About Afghanistan Service

letters to the editor

Boston, MA—As Scott Brown launches a “Veterans for Brown” group, Massachusetts veterans are reaching out to New Hampshire veterans to inform them that Brown continues to exaggerate and misrepresent his “service” in Afghanistan.  Since Brown declared that he “served in Afghanistan” while debating Elizabeth Warren in 2012, the truth has come out regarding Brown’s actual military record—that he never served in combat in Afghanistan, as his statement suggests.

“Scott Brown’s shameless self-promotion of his ‘service’ overseas is offensive to veterans everywhere. He alleges that he served in combat, but the truth is, he avoided it entirely,” said Bill Dooling. “Scott Brown only requested to perform his two week National Guard training in Afghanistan so he could use it to score political points to help his campaign. In reality, Brown’s trip to Afghanistan was nothing more than a publicity stunt – that’s why he leaked it to the press himself. It’s an insult to combat veterans that Brown keeps trying to paint himself with the same brush and uses his alleged ‘service’ in the way he has.”

“There is nothing that Scott Brown won’t do or say for Scott Brown—even if it means passing off his ‘service in Afghanistan’ as something that it most definitely was not,” said John Hurley. “Brown could not have been more ostentatious the way he turned a normal two-week training period into a complete media circus. He simply did not serve in combat, and the way he explains his service is meant to mislead voters and veterans. Even the Boston Globe editorialized against Brown, saying he was wrong to state that he ‘served in Afghanistan.’ It makes me sick.”

“I don’t know a single non-combat veteran who would try and pass himself off as a combat vet the way that Scott Brown does on a regular basis,” said Doug Clifford. “The guy requested to go to Afghanistan for training—which is highly irregular. Then he leaked it to the press. He’s made a mockery of the seriousness of entering a combat zone so that he could gain a political advantage in Massachusetts. He needs to be called out, so that New Hampshire veterans know exactly who they are dealing with if they choose to support Scott Brown.”

Signed,

Bill Dooling Vietnam Veteran ( Pleiku,1968-69) 1Lt. US Army (Ret)

Doug Clifford, Sgt. U.S. Air Force, Vietnam service, September, 1968 – September, 1969

John Hurley, 1LT, U.S. Army, Vietnam veteran (Mekong Delta, 1967-1968)

Senator Shaheen’s New Ad BURDEN: Fighting For Student Loan Refinancing

New TV Ad: Jeanne Shaheen Is Fighting Rising College Costs, Working To Make A Difference For New Hampshire Students And Their Parents

Manchester, NH – A new television ad from Jeanne Shaheen’s campaign highlights how Shaheen is working to lower college costs for New Hampshire students and their parents by giving them the freedom to refinance their college loans, just like they can with a home mortgage or car loan.  The ad, running 30 seconds, began airing Sunday on televisions stations in New Hampshire.

“Jeanne Shaheen has deep roots in New Hampshire. She raised her family here and her record proves she shares our values. She understands the importance of education to our kids and their future,” said Campaign Manager Mike Vlacich.  “That’s why as Governor she expanded public kindergarten and created a tax free tuition savings program, and why as Senator she’s introduced new legislation to lower the cost of college loans.  New Hampshire comes first for Jeanne Shaheen and always has.”

In the Senate, Jeanne Shaheen was an original cosponsor of the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinance Act that would allow students in New Hampshire and across the country to refinance their loans at lower interest rates.  While the legislation was blocked by congressional gridlock and a Republican filibuster, it would have helped 25 million borrowers across the country save thousands of dollars on their loan payments.  Individuals with older loans at higher interest rates would be able to refinance at rates below 4 percent.

New Hampshire college graduates leave school with $33,000 in student loan debt on average.  It is the second highest rate of debt in the country.  Over half of the more than 200,000 Granite Staters with federally backed student loans would benefit from Senator Shaheen’s legislation.

Independent economists point to the relatively low share of first-time home buyers in today’s market compared with historical levels as a result of increasing levels of student loan debt.  Graduates with high monthly student loan payments are less likely to qualify for a mortgage or have been able to save money for a down payment on a home.

“New Hampshire students leave college on average with $33,000 in debt. It can slow them down for years. But right now, our students can’t refinance their loans the way you can refinance a car loan or a mortgage,” says Senator Shaheen in the new television ad.  “I want to change that.  I am fighting for a bill to allow students to refinance their loans. It will lower rates and save families thousands of dollars.”

Watch the new television ad here http://jeanneshaheen.org/burden

  • Advertisement

  • Advertisement