BP Getting Off the Hook Two Years After Oil Spill

Two years after BP was responsible for the Gulf Oil Spill which killed 11 people and left potentially irreversible damage to marine life, it is lobbying against Congress taking action to rstrict offshore oil drilling.  With the help of mostly Republicans in Congress, oil companies lobbied in 2010 against provisions to lift the liability for oil spills from $75 million to $10 billion after the Gulf disaster.  President Obama wanted unlimited liability for companies involved in oil spills, but the Senate filibustered the raising of the liability cap.  Last year, BP made $8.43 million in lobbying expenditures aimed at protecting its tax breaks on its $26 billion in profits.  Even in a highly partisan environment, one thing that the vast majority if Americans agree on is that no company that destroys the environment should be allowed to make huge profits, pay their executives lavishly, and lobby Congress to stop legislation designed to hold companies like BP accountable for disasters like the Gulf Oil Spill.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/12/bp-oil-spill-gulf-of-mexico-oil-lobbyists_n_1335556.html

Sen. Nelson's "Cow" Tax Break in Tens of Thousands

Congressional Representatives and Senators are immensely wealthy, a fact which contributes to the record disapproval of Congress of the past 2-3 years.  Their wealth has separated too many of them from the economic challenges that their constituents face.  They obtain this wealth through some of the oddest tax breaks that the average American is most likely unaware of.  Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida lowered his property tax bill by $43,000 last year and paid just $3,696 in property taxes.  He did this by keeping cows on part of the ground of his 55-acre property, which he classified as agricultural and has sold some lots of the property.  But, three of five lots that he sold do not fit this classification.

This type of hypocrisy hurts Democrats, who believe that the Wealthy should pay their fair share of taxes.  Republicans, on the other hand, do not mind since they want to people to keep their money, even if they got it through tax breaks that benefit only wealthy landowners like Senator Nelson. 

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/02/23/431661/bill-nelson-cows-property-taxes/

Small Businesses: Citizens United Hurts Us (for 1/21/12)

Two of every three U.S. small business owners say that the Supreme Court's January 2010 decision in Citizens' United harms them. The American Sustainable Business Council and Main Street Alliance asked 500 of them in a recent survey and they said money that big corporations spend in political campaigns hurts small businesses. Big corporations can spend their money to get special tax breaks and relief from regulations that they oppose. They can also use their economies of scale, large bank accounts, and the thousands of employees they have to find those hidden tax breaks that overburdened small business owners do not have the time to find. http://mainstreetalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Release-smallbusinesspoll-CitizensUnited.pdf

Mitt Romney's Investments Scattered Around The World (1/18/12)

Mitt Romney his hiding his tax returns for a very good reason. They will not help him win the November 2012 Presidential election. While at Bain Capital, he probably moved much of his wealth to accounts abroad to take advantage of various tax breaks used by only the wealthiest bankers and investors in the Top 1%. Bain funds have key international connections for moving money offshore. Romney shifted his wealth to Delaware, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Hong Kong, and Ireland. Romney's family got over $1 million in 2010 from one Cayman Islands investment, Bain Capital Fund VIII. What does this mean for President Obama? In the 2008 campaign, he ran into Joe the Plumber, who questioned why Obama wanted to raise his taxes. Obama can effectively use the phrase, "spread the wealth," and have more credibility than Romney, who spreads his wealth -- around the world, that is. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/yet-another-tax-advantage-for-romney/2012/01/18/gIQAvh017P_blog.html

Romney Profitted from Tax Breaks, Subsidies (for 1/13/12)

During Mitt Romney's tenure, Bain Capital invested in Steel Dynamics to help its steel mill grow to over 6,000 jobs now in Indiana's DeKalb County. He has not told the public how Indiana and DeKalb County provided Bain with very favorable tax breaks and subsidies. Bain made a June 1994 investment of $18.2 million in Steel Dynamics and reaped $104 million off it five years later. Bain received $37 million in subsidies for the mill and despite citizen opposition, DeKalb County raised income taxes for infrastructure upgrades to benefit Bain, which also received $23.4 million in property tax relief from the County. State tax credits of $4.4 million also went to Bain. GS Industries, another Bain Investment, was based in Kansas City and went broke in 2001. Bain reaped huge dividends from GS Industries while taking away paychecks, health insurance, and some retirement benefits from 700 workers. Bain wanted the U.S. Government to back $50 million on this investment. Stories like these will drive the public to demand real tax reform that gets rid of subsidies that benefit corporations, investors, and the wealthy. The Cato Institute, a free-market think tank, has even decried these as example of "corporate welfare." http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bain-subsidies-20120113,0,1268299.story

The 99% are More Giving Than The Top 1% (for 12/28/11)

While the wealthiest 1% of Americans donate more overall income than all other Americans, they are actually less charitable than other Americans. Wealthy people often establish their own philanthropic foundations for giving. Their donations often go to cultural causes, their alma maters, and other causes not primarily interested in helping those in great need. The rest of Americans donate through their churches. The wealthiest Americans' giving is most often influenced by tax breaks. Their donations are fully tax deductible, but the law requires a foundation to only give away 5% of its total funds annually. But, charitable donations have ranged from 1.7 to 1.95% of earnings per year, even as the top individual tax rate has dropped from 70% in 1980 to 35% in 2003. The result of this is huge public sector losses of around $250 billion, maybe more, to Federal and State Governments. Sometimes, as in the case of Charles Koch, their giving serves their own purposes. Since 2008, Koch has donated money to Florida State Univeristy to hire economics professors according to his preferences. Therefore, he can pick professors who will teach students his views on free market capitalism and why government is bad. http://www.alternet.org/story/153560/the_giving_season%3A_why_the_99_are_actually_more_philanthropic_than_the_1/