November, 11 2009, 03:20pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Brandon Hersh (202) 471-3205,bhersh@mediamatters.org
Town Halls Making a Comeback?
To:
Interested Parties
From:
Ari Rabin-Havt, Media
Matters for America
Re:
Town halls making a comeback?
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009
WASHINGTON
To:
Interested Parties
From:
Ari Rabin-Havt, Media
Matters for America
Re:
Town halls making a comeback?
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009
It looks like the extreme anti-reform town hall protests from August
could be making a return during the November congressional recess. Politico recently reported
that "Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander said
Republicans are 'quietly' planning some 50 in-person and telephone
town hall gatherings over the next three weeks to drum up opposition to
Democratic health care bills."
Media Matters has put together background
information on the media's coverage of the August town halls, which includes following
observations:
- The town hall protests were characterized as
"organic," "real," and "genuine"
despite the fact that conservative groups were actively encouraging
members to attend. - The media often gave a distorted view of the town
hall meetings. - Fox News featured extreme anti-reform rhetoric
and ignored substantive,
pro-reform questions from town halls.
More
details on those observations (included below) could be useful, should you
decide to cover any of the upcoming events.
IN AUGUST, the protests were
characterized as "organic," "real," and
"genuine" despite the fact that conservative groups were actively
encouraging members to attend town halls:
- Several conservative groups engaged in efforts to
encourage their members to attend town halls. Conservative
organizations opposed to health care reform -- including FreedomWorks,
Americans for Prosperity, and Conservatives for Patients' Rights -- conducted
a campaign to turn out their supporters to attend those events. CPR reportedly
"confirmed that it has undertaken a concerted effort to get people out to
the town hall meetings to protest reform," while FreedomWorks and
Americans for Prosperity reportedly "organized" the town hall protesters and were "harnessing
social networking Web sites to organize their supporters in much the same way
Mr. Obama did during his election campaign." [Greg Sargent, The Plum Line,
8/4/09;
The New York Times, 8/3/09]
- America's Health Insurance Plans reportedly deployed employees
to "track[] where local lawmakers hold town-hall meetings,"
"rebut" Democrats. On July 30, The Wall Street Journal reported:
"[I]nsurers continue to wage an aggressive campaign against Democrats'
proposals to create a public health-insurance plan. America's Health Insurance Plans
has stationed employees in 30 states who are tracking where local lawmakers
hold town-hall meetings." And on August 5, the paper reported: "The
health-insurance industry said Tuesday it is launching an effort to send insurance-company
employees to public meetings nationwide this month to rebut increasing
criticism of the industry from the White House and top Democrats." [The Wall Street Journal; 7/30/09,
8/5/09]
IN
AUGUST, the media often gave a distorted view of the town hall meetings:
- Dionne: Media
"went out of their way to cover the noise" at town halls,
highlighted "fringe right-wing view." Washington Post columnist E.J.
Dionne wrote: "There is an overwhelming case that the electronic
media went out of their way to cover the noise and ignored the calmer (and
from television's point of view 'boring') encounters between elected
representatives and their constituents. It's also clear that the anger
that got so much attention largely reflects a fringe right-wing view
opposed to all sorts of government programs most Americans support."
[The Washington Post, 9/3/09]
- Kurtz: "[A]nger
at town-hall meetings ... became an endless loop on television."
Washington Post media
critic Howard Kurtz wrote: "The eruption of anger at town-hall
meetings on health care, while real and palpable, became an endless loop
on television. The louder the voices, the fiercer the confrontation, the
more it became video wallpaper, obscuring the substantive arguments in
favor of what producers love most: conflict." Kurtz added:
"Twenty members of Congress might have held calm and collected town
meetings on any given day, but only the one with raucous exchanges would
make it on the air." [The Washington Post,
8/24/09]
- Fox News only
interested in covering "yelling" and "contentious
questions." As Kurtz reported: "In
fact, after the president convened a low-key town hall in New Hampshire,
press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters: 'I think some of you were
disappointed yesterday that the president didn't get yelled at.' There was
a grain of truth in that. As Fox broke away from the meeting, anchor Trace
Gallagher said, 'Any contentious questions, anybody yelling, we'll bring
it to you.' " [The Washington Post,
8/24/09]
IN AUGUST, Fox News featured extreme
anti-reform rhetoric and ignored substantive, pro-reform questions from town
halls:
- Fox News aired 22
clips of attendees opposed to reform, none of supporters.
During the week of August 24, Fox News aired 22 clips in which town hall
attendees expressed an opinion against health care reform, but no clips of
attendees expressing support. CNN aired three clips of attendees
expressing support and five voicing opposition to reform; MSNBC aired one
clip against and none in support.
- Incendiary town hall
rhetoric highlighted by Fox. During that week, Fox News
provided a platform for incendiary statements about progressive reform
efforts. For example, on five separate occasions, Fox aired a clip of an
attendee who said at an August 25 town hall for Sen. John McCain: "No
compromises! Senator, nuke it now."
- Substantive, pro-reform
questions passed over. Despite providing a
platform for incendiary anti-reform claims, Fox News repeatedly passed
over substantive and pro-reform questions and comments from the town hall
meetings that they covered. While those questions could be heard and read
in unedited footage of the town halls online or in local coverage of the
events, they were not aired on Fox -- even when the network featured
footage critical of reform from the same meetings.
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
LATEST NEWS
Blinken Hasn't Ended Aid for Israeli Military Units Tied to Killings, Rapes
"Blinken continues a very long American tradition of very selective enforcement of human rights laws," said one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Amid global condemnation of Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip and the Biden administration's complicity, ProPublicarevealed Wednesday that U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has for months ignored staff recommendations to cut off American aid to Israeli military and police units accused of human rights violations including killings and rapes.
"The incidents under review mostly took place in the West Bank and occurred before Hamas' October 7 attack on Israel," which was the catalyst for the current Israeli escalation in Gaza, reported ProPublica's Brett Murphy. "They include reports of extrajudicial killings by the Israeli Border Police; an incident in which a battalion gagged, handcuffed, and left an elderly Palestinian American man for dead; and an allegation that interrogators tortured and raped a teenager who had been accused of throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails."
Murphy obtained government documents and emails and spoke with current and former U.S. State Department officials, who said the recommendations from the Israel Leahy Vetting Forum—named for former Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who authored laws restricting aid to human rights abuses—were sent to Blinken in December and "they've been sitting in his briefcase since then."
While U.S. President Joe Biden has gradually increased his criticism of Israeli forces killing civilians in Gaza, "multiple State Department officials who have worked on Israeli relations said that Blinken's inaction has undermined Biden's public criticism, sending a message to the Israelis that the administration was not willing to take serious steps," Murphy wrote.
The Israeli government did not respond to the reporter's request for comment, but a U.S. State Department spokesperson did. "This process is one that demands a careful and full review," the American representative said, "and the department undergoes a fact-specific investigation applying the same standards and procedures regardless of the country in question."
Global critics have long accused the U.S. government of giving Israel special treatment while Israeli officials and troops subject Palestinians to apartheid, ethnic cleansing, occupation, settler colonization, and now "plausibly" genocide, according to the International Court of Justice. Since October, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have killed at least 33,970 people in Gaza.
The reporting sparked a fresh wave of outrage. The U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights declared that "this is how Antony Blinken will go down in history: for enabling Israel to commit the gravest of war crimes with U.S. tax dollars."
Alex Kingsbury, a member of The New York Times editorial board, noted that "Blinken continues a very long American tradition of very selective enforcement of human rights laws," while Brandon Friedman, a former Obama administration official, said that "this would be a career ender for a normal Cabinet secretary under normal circumstances."
Democracy for the Arab World Now "submitted Leahy sanctions requests for two of the Israeli units that Antony Blinken has putzed and punted on, in breach of U.S. law, despite clear evidence of despicable abuses—[including] torture, executions, and even murder of an American," according to executive director Sarah Leah Whitson. "But Antony Blinken insists on special privileges and exemptions for Israel, refusing to hold it accountable, U.S. law be damned."
@StateDept In 2023, we documented Israel counter-terrorism YAMAM unit\u2019s abuses, including two extrajudicial killings & two indiscriminate and reckless killings, including of a child in Jenin in March 2023, constituting gross violations of human rights under Leahy Law & war crimes under Rome\u2026— (@)
The Council on American-Islamic Relations' Robert S. McCaw said in a statement that "despite these internal report State Department reports detailing egregious human rights abuses by the Israeli government, including allegations of rape and torturing children in the West Bank, Secretary Blinken has ignored his own staff and continued to greenlight weapon shipments to the responsible Israeli military and police units."
"The glaring disconnect between the gravity of the accusations and his refusal to act on them is deeply disturbing," McCaw added. "Secretary Blinken must halt any further weapons transfers that the Israeli government will use to commit more human rights violations."
Human rights attorney Qasim Rashid pointed out that in contrast with how the Biden administration has treated Israel, the U.S. government pulled funding from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East—as Palestinians in Gaza starve to death—over the "mere allegation" that a small number of staff were involved with Hamas.
"If we had been applying Leahy effectively in Israel like we do in other countries, maybe you wouldn't have the IDF filming TikToks of their war crimes now because we have contributed to a culture of impunity," Josh Paul, a former director in the State Department's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs and a member of the forum who resigned in protest in October, told Murphy.
Another State Department official, Annelle Sheline, stepped down late last month as a foreign affairs officer at the Office of Near Eastern Affairs in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. She said that with the U.S. government continuing to arm Israel as it devastates Gaza, "trying to advocate for human rights just became impossible."
Sheline's resignation came just days after the Biden administration accepted Israeli government assurances that its use of U.S.-supplied weapons complies with international law—which human rights advocates and officials worldwide, including some congressional Democrats, have challenged over the past few weeks.
Over two dozen Democrats wrote Wednesday to Blinken and two other top officials that "we remain concerned by the stark differences and gaps in the statements being made by the State Department and White House on how Israel has not been found to be in violation of international humanitarian law, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance, which are contradictory to those made by prominent experts and global institutions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Eyes Social Security Cuts By Slashing Payroll Tax
"He is dusting off the old Republican playbook and bringing back the strategy known informally as 'Starve the Beast,'" said one advocate. "In this case, Social Security is the beast."
Apr 18, 2024
Amid new reporting that former U.S. President Donald Trump's economic advisers are urging him to cut the federal payroll tax, a key revenue source for Social Security and Medicare, advocates on Thursday urged voters to remember that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has long threatened to do just that.
"Don't be fooled," said Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, which lobbies to strengthen the social safety net for retired Americans. "At the end of his term in office, Trump delayed Social Security's dedicated revenue paid from workers and their employers. He was quite explicit that, if reelected, he would convert that delay into a permanent cut."
Altman was referring to an executive order Trump signed in August 2020, allowing companies to delay payroll tax payments—an option most companies declined to take as the Treasury Department made clear they would have to pay all of the deferred taxes the following year and that employees would see smaller paychecks as a result of the program.
Trump promised to make the payroll tax cut permanent, and as Reutersreported late Wednesday, the former president is discussing the proposal with economic advisers including Fox News host and former National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow and right-wing commentator Stephen Moore.
The former president is weighing cuts to Social Security's revenue stream even as Republicans complain that the popular program is unaffordable and push to raise the retirement age to delay Americans' use of the funds.
The GOP has long claimed Social Security is headed toward insolvency and pushed to privatize the program or cut benefits, but last year's Social Security trustees report found that the program's trust fund currently has a $2.85 trillion surplus and could pay 80% of benefits for the next 75 years even if Congress takes no action to expand it—as long as it continues to be funded through taxes.
"Social Security can only pay benefits if it has sufficient dedicated revenue to pay its costs. That is why it doesn't contribute even a penny to the deficit," said Altman. "If Trump succeeds in slashing that dedicated revenue so that it is no longer sufficient to fully cover the cost, it will result in an automatic benefit reduction. This would happen without any Republicans having to vote for the cuts, or Trump having to sign them into law."
"He is dusting off the old Republican playbook and bringing back the strategy known informally as 'Starve the Beast,'" said Altman of Trump. "In this case, Social Security is the beast."
Along with cutting payroll taxes, which are paid by workers and employees and amount to 7.65% of each employee's gross pay in order to fund senior citizens' post-retirement income, Trump has proposed extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the vast majority of which benefited the wealthiest Americans, according to the Economic Policy Institute and the Center for Popular Democracy.
Altman noted the contrast between Trump's tax proposals and those of President Joe Biden, who has proposed strengthening Social Security and extending its solvency by requiring people with wealth over $100 million to pay at least 25% in income taxes, raising the corporate tax rate to 28%, and quadrupling the stock buyback tax to disincentive companies lavishing their shareholders with their profits instead of investing in their workforce.
"The choice this election is clear: Trump and the Republicans will cut Social Security and give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires," said Altman. "The Democrats will expand Social Security, paid for by requiring millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdogs' Database Details Right-Wing Efforts to Sway US Supreme Court
"Supreme corruption demands supreme transparency," said one campaigner behind the new effort.
Apr 18, 2024
A trio of progressive watchdog groups on Thursday unveiled a new database detailing the "troubling connections" between the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing justices, the conservative organizations that have intervened in cases before the court, and the wealthy donors funding them.
Take Back the Court, Revolving Door Project, and True North Research published the database at SupremeTransparency.org, which "shines a spotlight on the complex web connecting justices to powerbrokers and the organizations that those powerbrokers fund, lead, and are otherwise linked to."
The watchdogs found that nearly 1 in 7 amicus briefs filed during the 2023-24 Supreme Court term were lodged by at least one powerbroker-affiliated organization. This affects 32 different cases before the court.
"The current U.S. Supreme Court has gone rogue."
For example, in Moore v. United States—in which the Supreme Court could preemptively ban or limit wealth taxes—half of all amicus briefs were filed by groups affiliated with right-wing powerbrokers.
In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, groups funded by billionaire industrialist Charles Koch want to scupper the Chevron deference, a 40-year precedent under which judges defer to the legal interpretations of federal agencies if Congress has not passed any laws on an issue. Powerbroker-affiliated organizations have filed more than one-third of the amicus briefs seeking to overturn the Chevron doctrine.
"Far too often people with insidiously close ties to justices like Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, such as Harlan Crow and Paul Singer, signal their interest in the outcome of cases by funding, leading, or influencing organizations that file amicus briefs," Revolving Door Project executive director Jeff Hauser said in a statement.
"There is just as much of a conflict of interest when a justice hears a case involving a benefactor as a named party and one in which the person who illicitly enabled their luxurious lifestyle is 'merely' similarly situated to one of the parties," Hauser added.
According to SupremeTransparency.org:
The current U.S. Supreme Court has gone rogue. The right-wing justices that make up the court's supermajority frequently toy with precedent and the rule of law to issue opinions that not only defy the will of a majority of Americans, but also rewrite constitutional principles, overturn widely respected legal precedents, and gut longstanding rules that protect the public interest.
In just the 2021 and 2022 Supreme Court terms alone, the court overturned Roe v. Wadeafter 49 years; gutted both the decades-old Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act; overturned a 100+ year old gun safety law; eroded the National Labor Relations Act (adopted as part of New Deal reforms to protect workers); broke with their own procedures regarding standing to sue in order to block student debt relief; and reversed decades of precedent to end the decadeslong practice of race-conscious college admissions policies that promoted diversity and redressed discrimination. But this radically reactionary court and its radically reactionary justices aren't acting alone.
"Supreme corruption demands supreme transparency," said Take Back the Court president Sarah Lipton-Lubet. "It's no secret that the many of the rich benefactors cozying up to the conservative justices are the same people who fund right-wing organizations with business before the court."
"But too often, stories about the Supreme Court don't connect these dots—and as a result, they leave us with an incomplete picture," she continued. "The truth is right-wing powerbrokers are seemingly paying to play; they're funding groups that are weighing in on court cases even as they buy access to the justices who will rule on those cases."
"It's just one of the ways our Supreme Court is deeply, fundamentally broken," Lipton-Lubet added. "And it's a reminder of how urgent and necessary it is that we reform this corrupt court."
Last year, the Supreme Court adopted a Code of Conduct that contained few new rules, no enforcement mechanism, and was widely panned as a toothless public relations stunt. Bolder proposals for reforming the high court include term limits and increasing the number of justices.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular