-Caveat Lector- This is definitely worth checking out. At the link provided below, you can download pdf versions of the poster, but due to the dark colors and tiny print, it would probably be better to spring the $15 to buy the real thing. I've included a few of the 13 categories with their source info below for a representative sample of what's given on the poster (the source material is not included on the print, though it does show graphs, also available for viewing on the website).
My thanks to Joe for this excellent forward! goldi > oooh, this is rich, no pun intended. Well worth your time to check out > this picture. > ~Joe > > ------------------------------->$$$$$<--------------------------------- > OUCH! A Regular Bulletin on How Money in Politics Hurts You > > #109 Public > Campaign January 21, 2002 > ------------------------------->$$$$$<-------------------------------- > THE REAL STATE OF THE UNION > > Sometimes a picture speaks louder than a thousand words, even louder > than thousands of campaign contributions. > > That's what we at Public Campaign think of our new poster: "STATE OF > THE UNION: How Big Corporate Campaign Contributors Are Buying America… > And What the Rest of Us Pay." > > Think of it as our first "visual OUCH!"—or better, a colorful and > compelling compilation of key facts and figures from many of our > previous OUCH! bulletins. > > The poster shows President Bush speaking before a composite image of > Congress and Wall Street, a phantasmagoric assembly of elected > officials, stock exchange brokers, and high-tech stock tickers—what > you might call the trading floor of Congress, where politicians > exchange our tax dollars for campaign contributions from wealthy > special interests. > > Beneath the photo are a series of thirteen charts detailing how big > corporate campaign contributions from leading industries are buying > America, the fabulous returns they are getting for their political > investments, and what the rest of us pay in higher taxes, dirty air > and water, billions lost from our retirement funds, more expensive > prescription drugs, worsened health, and the like. > > If, as a person concerned with the corrosive effects of big money on > our political system, you have ever wanted to own one document that > summed up the big picture in one eye-catching place—this poster is > for you. Maybe it's also for your friends, relatives, students, > teachers, and fellow activists, too. > > To view the poster as well as the detailed industry-by-industry > charts, go to www.publicampaign.org/stateoftheunion > > We made this poster to show the public what they intuitively sense is > true, and because none of us want our democratic representatives to > be bought and sold like pork bellies. If you have a lot of money you > can buy a fancy car, or a second home, but Americans don't believe it > should entitle you to buy a second helping of democracy. > > We hope you agree, and will support our efforts to reach more > Americans with this critical message. > > Sincerely, > > The folks at Public Campaign > > P.S. We planned this project well before President Bush decided to > pitch his entire "economic stimulus" package around eliminating the > tax on stock dividends and further cutting taxes on the wealthy. But, > with the president scheduled to deliver his state of the union > message on January 28, the timing is too irresistible, so next Monday > we're going to ask you to take part in a (hopefully) fun effort to > get this poster image to spread around the Internet—to go "viral," as > they say. > > Here's the plan. Write your friends with the following message, or > put it in your own words: > > Message title: UNCENSORED PHOTO OF BUSH GIVING STATE OF UNION SPEECH! > Message text: If you thought that President Bush was too close to > Wall Street and his big money campaign contributors, wait until you > see this photo of him giving the State of the Union speech. It's > unbelievable! Just go to http://www.publicampaign.org/stateoftheunion > and check it out! > Sourcing – STATE OF THE UNION Poster The Richest Americans (people who made campaign contributions of $1000 or more) $1.8 billion in 1999-2002 alone 1 47% to Republicans; 41% to Democrats, 12% to PACs and other unaffiliated entities 83% hard money, vs 17% soft money GOT: • A $1.35 trillion tax cut over 10 years, $769 billion of which (or 57%) will go to the top 10% of all Americans, who make $104,000 or more 2 • A dramatic drop in the rate of Internal Revenue Service audits on the wealthy 3 • $70 billion a year in taxes evaded using off-shore havens 4 • A proposed $300 billion elimination of the tax on stock dividends 5 WE PAY: • With huge new government deficits • A rising national debt left to our children • Deep cuts in important social programs like unemployment insurance, education, roads, police and fire • An average effective federal tax rate that is almost as high as the rate paid by the wealthiest 6 1 Only about one-tenth of one percent of the entire U.S. population gave a contribution of $1,000 or more during the 2000 elections — however, these contributions, from a tiny minority of Americans, totaled more than $1 billion. The amount climbs to $1.8 billion when the amount contributed by donors giving at least $1,000 in the 2002 elections is added. Political donors are among the wealthiest of Americans. One out of five big donors (defined as someone who makes a contribution of at least $200) make more than $500,000 a year, and another three out of five make over $100,000. See: Larry Makinson, The Big Picture: The Money Behind the 2000 Elections, Center for Responsive Politics, September 2001, p. 8. “Individual Congressional Campaign Contributors: Wealthy, Conservative And Reform-Minded,” John Green, Paul Herrnson, et. al., Joyce Foundation, June 1998, http://www.opensecrets.org/pubs/donors/donors.asp. 2Citizens for Tax Justice, “Final Version of Bush Tax Plan Keeps High-End Tax Cuts, Adds to Long-Term Cost,” May 26, 2001, http://www.ctj.org/html/gwbfinal.htm. 3 While Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audit rates of the wealthy have dropped over the last decade, investigations of low-income taxpayers has increased, according to an analysis by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. In 1990, the wealthy were more than 10 times as likely as low-income taxpayers to be audited. But in 2001, audit rates for low-income taxpayers exceeded those for the wealthy. Albert B. Crenshaw, “IRS Audits Increase for Low-Income Taxpayers,” The Washington Post, April 15, 2002. 4 IRS Commissioner quotes Jack Blum, an expert on offshore tax havens and money laundering, who has estimated that there are $3 trillion in assets in tax haven banks and that the U.S. Treasury loses $70 billion annually. Press Release, “IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti’s Oral Statement Before The Senate Finance Committee,” April 5, 2001, http://www.ustreas.gov/irs/ci/tax_fraud/2002hearings/irs_releases.htm. 5 In January 2003, President George W. Bush announced he would seek to end taxation on dividends, which is estimated at costing the U.S. Treasury $300 billion over 10 years. Since only a small segment of the richest Americans own stock outside of tax-deferred retirement costs, this change would hugely benefit the wealthy while offering little or nothing to middle class and working people 6 The wealthiest Americans’ effective federal tax rate has declined drastically over the last five decades, while it has grown steadily for typical American families. In 1948, the typical American family paid an effective federal tax (income and FICA) rate of 5.30%, while the wealthiest Americans, the top one percent, paid an effective rate of 76.9%. By 1989, the typical American family paid a rate of 24.37%, while the top one percent of Americans paid 26.7%. See: Kevin Phillips, Wealth and Democracy, Broadway Books, 2002, p. 96. http://www.publicampaign.org/stateoftheunion/sourcing01.htm Resource Extracting Industries (oil and gas, mining, electric utilities, chemical manufacturers, and timber) Total: $318.7 million, 1989-present (Oil and Gas-$148 million; Mining-$22.6 million; Utilities- $71.5 million; Chemicals- $45.9 million; Timber-$30.6 million) 72% to Republicans, 28% to Democrats 66% hard money, 34% soft money GOT: • $33 billion in tax breaks in pending energy legislation 1 • A weakened Superfund toxics clean-up law • The freedom to remove the tops off of mountains and deposit waste in valleys and streams 2 • Lax regulation of energy markets • Other regulatory relief, such as not having to close aging, high-polluting smokestacks WE PAY: • Dirtier air and water 3 • With despoiled national parks, forests and wilderness 4 • High rates of childhood asthma 5 • Billions in price gouging • Heavily polluted toxic waste sites, whose clean-up has been put in jeopardy 6 1 In August 2001, the House of Representatives approved an energy bill, HR 4, which contained $33 billion in tax breaks for the energy industry. The legislation also opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil exploration. Although the Senate passed a version of the bill, the legislation died when Congress adjourned in December 2002. The Senate Republican leadership has announced that it will seek a new energy bill in the 108th Congress that includes oil exploration in ANWR. Sources: Center for Responsive Politics, http://www.opensecrets.org/payback/issue.asp?issueid=EN1&billdisplay=2; U.S. PIRG, www.uspirg.org; News Conference with the Senate Republican Leadership, Federal News Service, January 8, 2003. 2 In May 2002, the Bush Administration finalized Clean Water Act rules that allow coal mining companies to dump millions of tons of mining waste—the debris generated when companies remove entire mountaintops to reach seams of coal—into the valleys and streams of Appalachia,. See: Public Campaign & Earthjustice, “Paybacks: How the Bush Administration is Giving Away our Environment to its Corporate Contributors,” September 2002, http://www.publicampaign.org/press_releases/pr9-25-02.htm. 3 DIRTY AIR: Air pollution will increase thanks to a November 2002 Bush Administration decision to weaken the Clean Air Act. The new version of the provision, known as “New Source Review,” eliminates requirements requiring coal-burning utilities to install modern pollution controls when they make changes to their plants that lead to an increase in polluting emissions. See: News Release, Natural Resources Defense Council, November 22, 2002, http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/021122.asp. DIRTY WATER: As much as 20 percent of wetlands may lose federal protection if a January 2003 proposal by the Bush Administration becomes final. The waterways at risk are creeks, small streams, and many types of wetlands, which could become vulnerable to unrestricted dredging, filling and waste dumping—and would pollute drinking water sources, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). See: News Release, NRDC, January 10, 2003, http://www.nrdc.org/media/default.asp#0110water; Douglas Jehl, “U.S. Plan Could Ease Limits on Wetlands Development,” The New York Times, January 11, 2003, p. A3 4 National forests are at risk thanks to new regulations issued by the Bush Administration in November 2002. Environmental groups warn that there will be increased logging, timber sales, less environmental analysis, and less public participation in decision making over how management plans for forests are developed. News Release, Sierra Club, November 27, 2002, http://lists.sierraclub.org/SCRIPTS/WA.EXE?A2=ind0211&L=ce-scnews-releases&D=1&T=0&H=1&O=D&F=&S=&P=1558. 5 Asthma prevalence among children increased from 36 out of 1,000 in 1980 to 75 out of 1,000 in 1995. Although it has since gone down since then, to 54 out of 1,000 children the rates remain much higher than they were two decades ago. Asthma death rates, meanwhile, rose by 3.4% a year between 1980 and 1998, peaking in 1996 at 3.8:1 million children and rising back to 3.5:1 million in 1998. Asthma continues to affect African American children disproportionately, and the prevalence rates in these children continued to rise between 1997 and 2000. See: “Are Childhood Asthma Rates Plateauing?” Respitory Reviews.com, vol. 7, no. 10, October 2002, http://www.respiratoryreviews.com/oct02/rr_oct02_childasth.html. 6 Since 1995, Congress has refused to reauthorize the taxes on the oil and chemical industries. The Superfund Trust Fund budget has dwindled significantly, from a high of $3.8 billion in 1995 to a mere $28 million projected for 2003. In that time, polluting corporations have saved paying $10 billion in Superfund-related taxes. Although the previous three presidents supported reauthorization of industry taxes, President Bush opposes it, instead favoring an increase in the amount paid by taxpayers. In July 2002, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency inspector general reported to Congress that the agency was slashing funding to clean up 33 toxic waste sites in 18 states as part of the Superfund program. The cuts, which affected some of the most seriously polluted sites in the country, came because the fund is millions of dollars short of the amount needed to keep on schedule with cleanups. See: Green Vs. Gold: Money, Politics, and the Environment, http://www.publicampaign.org/publications/factsheets/goldvsgreen.html. Katharine Q. Seelye, “Bush Slashing Aid for EPA Cleanup at 33 Toxic Sites,” The New York Times, July 1, 2002, p. A6. http://www.publicampaign.org/stateoftheunion/sourcing03.htm Telecommunications $255.8 million, 1989- present 59% to Democrats, 41% to Republicans 54% hard money, 46% soft money GOT: • Drastically reduced regulation of rates they can charge consumers • The deregulation of the industry, allowing phone, cable and broadcast companies to merge with each other 1 • Use of the public airwaves at no cost WE PAY: • With cable TV fees that have risen three times faster than inflation 2 • Costly delays in local phone service competition • Untold damage to our civic fabric and culture because ten giant media conglomerates control production and distribution of nearly all news, TV, radio, publishing, music, movies, etc. 3 1 The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was supposed to offer consumers more choices and lower prices for cable TV, local phone service, and other communications services. Instead, the deregulatory law encouraged a handful of large companies to continue to monopolize the market, according to Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of America. See: News Release, Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of America, February 5, 2001, http://www.consumersunion.org/telecom/teledc201.htm. 2 Consumer Federation of America and Consumer’s Union, “Consumer Group Study Exposes Myth of Cross-Technology Competition in Communications Markets, April 23, 2002, http://www.consumerfed.org/interpressfinal.html. 3 The ten media giants that control nearly all news, TV, radio, publishing, music, movies, are constantly shifting shape due to new mergers, sales, and so forth. See: http://www.thenation.com/special/bigten.html http://www.publicampaign.org/stateoftheunion/sourcing05.htm Big Corporate Tax Evaders (The Top 50 Corporations that paid no taxes in 1996-98, including: AT&T, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chase Manhattan, Enron Corp, Exxon Mobil Corp., General Electric, Microsoft Corp., Pfizer Inc., Philip Morris, Walt Disney Co., and WorldCom Inc) $150.1 million, 1991-June 2001 1 66% Republican, 34% Democrat 56% hard money, 44% soft money GOT: • $55 billion in tax breaks from 1996 to 1998 alone 2 • Perennial legislation to gut the alternative minimum tax and rebate billions to select corporations 3 WE PAY: • A huge shift in who pays more into the federal treasury, from corporations to average working people (three times as much money now comes from working people’s payroll taxes than from corporate tax payments) 4 1Public Campaign and Citizens for Tax Justice researched the campaign contributions of 41 large, profitable companies that received $55.2 billion in tax breaks between 1996 and 1998, including 23 companies that got tax rebates in 1998. See: Public Campaign & Citizens for Tax Justice, “Buy Now, Save Later,” November 2001, http://www.publicampaign.org/buynowsavelater/taxstudy.htm. 2 See: Public Campaign & Citizens for Tax Justice, “Buy Now, Save Later,” November 2001, http://www.publicampaign.org/buynowsavelater/taxstudy.htm. 3 Congress established the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) in the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The 1986 law required companies to do their taxes two ways. First, companies had to calculate their taxes according to regular rules; second, they also had to compute it under AMT rules, which disallowed some loopholes, but applied lower tax rates. Whichever tax — the regular or the alternative — yielded the most taxes was the one that the company had to pay. Ever since the AMT was instituted, industries affected the most have been lobbying hard to get rid of it. The most recent attempt was in October 2001, when the House passed a so-called economic stimulus bill that included repeal of the corporate AMT and an immediate rebate of all AMT payments made by corporations over the past decade. The provision was stripped out of the final bill, but will assuredly pop up on Congress’ agenda again. See: Public Campaign & Citizens for Tax Justice, “Buy Now, Save Later,” November 2001, http://www.publicampaign.org/buynowsavelater/taxstudy.htm. 4 Kevin Phillips, Wealth and Democracy, p. 149, citing Economic Report of the President 2001. See: Public Campaign & Citizens for Tax Justice, “Buy Now, Save Later,” November 2001, http://www.publicampaign.org/buynowsavelater/taxstudy.htm http://www.publicampaign.org/stateoftheunion/sourcing07.htm <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
