

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Want to know how your reps on Capitol Hill rate on inequality? Check out a new Congressional Report Card for the 99 Percent issued by my organization, the Institute for Policy Studies.
We based the report card on 40 bills (24 in the House and 16 in the Senate) that cover taxes, jobs, education, and other issues. Together, they form a good litmus test of whether lawmakers are working for the "1 percent" or for all of us.When we started the grading process, we feared it could turn out to be a big bore. With Congress so polarized, we expected to find lock-step partisan voting that would give all Republicans F's and all Democrats A's. Instead, we found that the divisiveness between parties is also alive and well within parties.
On the Republican side, for instance, more than two dozen voted to protect the Davis-Bacon Act, which since 1931 has helped lift up the bottom of the income scale by requiring contractors for federally funded works projects to pay prevailing wages. More than a dozen GOPers also crossed the aisle to support a bill that would have given Treasury more power to punish banks that help the rich hide their money in tax havens.
In general, however, we found Republicans to be extremely loyal to the "1 percent." We gave 59 of them an F. The Dems' loyalties were more divided. None of them got F's or even D's, but 17 got either a C+ or a C grade -- not exactly parental bragging material. Of the 11 House members on this "dishonor roll," nine are Blue Dogs who are no doubt still licking their wounds from the 2010 mid-term election. Republican challengers bumped off more than half the members of this coalition for fiscally conservative Democrats.
It's also no surprise that 14 of the 17 "dishonorable" Dems are from states that lined up behind the Republican presidential candidate in at least three of the last four elections. The three blue state Dems on the list: Rep. Bill Owens of New York, Rep. Timothy Walz of Minnesota, and Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut (an independent who caucuses with the Democrats).
Owens and Walz both represent mostly rural swing districts. Owens's North Country district had been held by Republicans since 1993 until he squeaked by in a three-way special election in 2009. Walz touted his military credentials (he's a former National Guard Command Sergeant Major) to bump off a Republican incumbent in 2006. Both Owens and Walz voted to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. As for Lieberman, well, let me just say I'll be oh SO sad to see him retire after this term.
The point of this report card is not just to name and shame. We also aim to draw attention to the many creative proposals for restoring fairness that deserve more support. Two of the pending bills on our list would raise revenue for human needs by putting a small tax on Wall Street transactions. Another would increase the minimum wage and then index it to inflation. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget would protect social programs by reducing military spending and raising taxes on speculative investments. These innovative ideas challenge the oft-asserted notion that austerity is our only viable option.
It's vital for voters to recognize that their legislators' votes have a big effect on who wins and who loses in our economy. With a Congress full of lawmakers who rate a solid A on issues around economic fairness, we would all stand a better chance of winning.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Want to know how your reps on Capitol Hill rate on inequality? Check out a new Congressional Report Card for the 99 Percent issued by my organization, the Institute for Policy Studies.
We based the report card on 40 bills (24 in the House and 16 in the Senate) that cover taxes, jobs, education, and other issues. Together, they form a good litmus test of whether lawmakers are working for the "1 percent" or for all of us.When we started the grading process, we feared it could turn out to be a big bore. With Congress so polarized, we expected to find lock-step partisan voting that would give all Republicans F's and all Democrats A's. Instead, we found that the divisiveness between parties is also alive and well within parties.
On the Republican side, for instance, more than two dozen voted to protect the Davis-Bacon Act, which since 1931 has helped lift up the bottom of the income scale by requiring contractors for federally funded works projects to pay prevailing wages. More than a dozen GOPers also crossed the aisle to support a bill that would have given Treasury more power to punish banks that help the rich hide their money in tax havens.
In general, however, we found Republicans to be extremely loyal to the "1 percent." We gave 59 of them an F. The Dems' loyalties were more divided. None of them got F's or even D's, but 17 got either a C+ or a C grade -- not exactly parental bragging material. Of the 11 House members on this "dishonor roll," nine are Blue Dogs who are no doubt still licking their wounds from the 2010 mid-term election. Republican challengers bumped off more than half the members of this coalition for fiscally conservative Democrats.
It's also no surprise that 14 of the 17 "dishonorable" Dems are from states that lined up behind the Republican presidential candidate in at least three of the last four elections. The three blue state Dems on the list: Rep. Bill Owens of New York, Rep. Timothy Walz of Minnesota, and Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut (an independent who caucuses with the Democrats).
Owens and Walz both represent mostly rural swing districts. Owens's North Country district had been held by Republicans since 1993 until he squeaked by in a three-way special election in 2009. Walz touted his military credentials (he's a former National Guard Command Sergeant Major) to bump off a Republican incumbent in 2006. Both Owens and Walz voted to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. As for Lieberman, well, let me just say I'll be oh SO sad to see him retire after this term.
The point of this report card is not just to name and shame. We also aim to draw attention to the many creative proposals for restoring fairness that deserve more support. Two of the pending bills on our list would raise revenue for human needs by putting a small tax on Wall Street transactions. Another would increase the minimum wage and then index it to inflation. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget would protect social programs by reducing military spending and raising taxes on speculative investments. These innovative ideas challenge the oft-asserted notion that austerity is our only viable option.
It's vital for voters to recognize that their legislators' votes have a big effect on who wins and who loses in our economy. With a Congress full of lawmakers who rate a solid A on issues around economic fairness, we would all stand a better chance of winning.
Want to know how your reps on Capitol Hill rate on inequality? Check out a new Congressional Report Card for the 99 Percent issued by my organization, the Institute for Policy Studies.
We based the report card on 40 bills (24 in the House and 16 in the Senate) that cover taxes, jobs, education, and other issues. Together, they form a good litmus test of whether lawmakers are working for the "1 percent" or for all of us.When we started the grading process, we feared it could turn out to be a big bore. With Congress so polarized, we expected to find lock-step partisan voting that would give all Republicans F's and all Democrats A's. Instead, we found that the divisiveness between parties is also alive and well within parties.
On the Republican side, for instance, more than two dozen voted to protect the Davis-Bacon Act, which since 1931 has helped lift up the bottom of the income scale by requiring contractors for federally funded works projects to pay prevailing wages. More than a dozen GOPers also crossed the aisle to support a bill that would have given Treasury more power to punish banks that help the rich hide their money in tax havens.
In general, however, we found Republicans to be extremely loyal to the "1 percent." We gave 59 of them an F. The Dems' loyalties were more divided. None of them got F's or even D's, but 17 got either a C+ or a C grade -- not exactly parental bragging material. Of the 11 House members on this "dishonor roll," nine are Blue Dogs who are no doubt still licking their wounds from the 2010 mid-term election. Republican challengers bumped off more than half the members of this coalition for fiscally conservative Democrats.
It's also no surprise that 14 of the 17 "dishonorable" Dems are from states that lined up behind the Republican presidential candidate in at least three of the last four elections. The three blue state Dems on the list: Rep. Bill Owens of New York, Rep. Timothy Walz of Minnesota, and Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut (an independent who caucuses with the Democrats).
Owens and Walz both represent mostly rural swing districts. Owens's North Country district had been held by Republicans since 1993 until he squeaked by in a three-way special election in 2009. Walz touted his military credentials (he's a former National Guard Command Sergeant Major) to bump off a Republican incumbent in 2006. Both Owens and Walz voted to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. As for Lieberman, well, let me just say I'll be oh SO sad to see him retire after this term.
The point of this report card is not just to name and shame. We also aim to draw attention to the many creative proposals for restoring fairness that deserve more support. Two of the pending bills on our list would raise revenue for human needs by putting a small tax on Wall Street transactions. Another would increase the minimum wage and then index it to inflation. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget would protect social programs by reducing military spending and raising taxes on speculative investments. These innovative ideas challenge the oft-asserted notion that austerity is our only viable option.
It's vital for voters to recognize that their legislators' votes have a big effect on who wins and who loses in our economy. With a Congress full of lawmakers who rate a solid A on issues around economic fairness, we would all stand a better chance of winning.