American Federation of Teachers: Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?

According to a recent article in the San Jose Mercury News, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) is pursuing  a possible ballot initiative to raise taxes YET AGAIN on California's millionaires. I certainly wish that the members of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) would actually apply their math, economics, history, and critical reasoning skills. AFT is right. We do have a problem, but the problem is NOT that California's taxes are too low for upper-income earners.


First, a caveat: I am not now, nor have I ever been a "millionaire."  However, in 2007, 2008, and 2010, I spent more on federal, state, and payroll taxes than all my other family living expenses COMBINED!

California ALREADY has the second highest marginal tax rate (10.3%) in the nation. Only Hawaii has higher marginal rates (11%).  California's 2nd highest tax rate of 9.3% is the fourth highest in the nation behind Hawaii, California's top tax rate, and Oregon.  California's 2nd highest tax bracket starts at 48,000 in income.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/228.html

California's millionaires ALREADY pay a surtax supposedly to fund mental health services proving, I guess, that you must be crazy to be a millionaire and officially live in California.

California ALREADY implements President Obama's so-called "Buffett Test."  Capital gains in California are ALREADY taxed EXACTLY like ordinary income.

California's wealthy ALREADY pay the bulk of the state's income taxes.  The top 2% pay roughly HALF OF ALL PERSONAL INCOME TAXES (PIT).
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2009/07/oppressive-progressive-income-tax.html

The top 33% minority ALREADY pays 94% of the entire Personal Income Tax load.  Meanwhile, the bottom two-thirds supermajority contributes JUST 6%. But who has more voting power to raise taxes on the minority?

Similarly, the 33% minority contributes more than half of California's General Fund revenue.

California's upper-income taxpayers ALREADY pay a much higher effective tax rate than do the majority of Californians.  I ask you, looking at the chart in the article below, who isn't paying their fair share?
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2011/10/who-pays-their-fair-share-in-california.html

Even though a majority of Californians pay a lower state income tax rate than do a small minority, California's overall state tax burden is ALREADY one of the highest in the nation.

California's high taxes ALREADY places the state at or near the bottom on a variety of business climate surveys.  On one survey of 500 CEOs from around the country, California has ranked DEAD LAST as a place to do business since at least 2005!  In another survey, 70.5% of respondents ranked California as the least favorable business climate in the U.S.!
http://chiefexecutive.net/best-worst-states-for-business
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html
http://www.aboutdci.com/wp-content/themes/dci/docs/Winning-Strategies-2011.pdf (See Appendix C).

Is it any surprise then that California also has the nation's second-worst unemployment rate?
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Of course, as part of the AFL-CIO, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) enjoys tremendous clout both in Sacramento and Washington, as does its cousin organization, the California Teachers Association (CTA).  The California Teachers Association (CTA) is the #1 top spender in California politics according to the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).  CTA outspends the #2 top spender, SEIU, by almost double!
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2011/02/do-public-employee-unions-have-major.html
http://www.fppc.ca.gov/reports/Report31110.pdf

AFT is #11 on the list of top all-time national political donors, giving 91% of their member's state-mandated contributions to Democrats, 0% to Republicans. Hmmm.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

California's politicians kowtow to the unions.  Even fellow career Democrats like former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown recognize this.  As he stated in his article, "Jerry Brown won't challenge teachers union," ...
http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-02-27/bay-area/28635640_1_teachers-union-pensions-union-leaders

"No one knows the power of such unions in California better than Gov. Jerry Brown.

"You'll notice that even as he's proposed draconian cuts to health and welfare programs and the state's universities, and asked taxpayers to pony up extra for several more years, BROWN HAS BEEN CAREFUL NOT TO TOUCH TEACHERS.

"HE KNOWS GOOD AND WELL WHAT THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION CAN DO FOR HIM - OR AGAINST HIM - IN AN ELECTION."

Here's the ironic part of the story.

• BOTH the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the California Teachers Association (CTA) are tax-exempt 501(c)(5) organizations, according to Form 990 disclosures on file with the U.S. Government and with Guidestar.org.
• BOTH the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the California Teachers Association (CTA) derive the majority of their revenues from state-mandated union dues, paid by hard-working public school teachers.
• This begs the next obvious question:  Who pays teachers' salaries?  Naturally, these come from the taxpayer.

Instead of using their political clout on REAL solutions, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) is wasting their member's dues and our time on yet more non-solutions.  AFT, how about using your political clout on tax reform, spending reform, or pension reform?  For too long, organizations like AFT have blocked prudent reforms in California and in Washington.  Consequently, there are likely massive spending cuts coming as part of the Super Committee process, which likely means jobs cuts for AFT members and other public employees.  AFT, if you refuse to be part of the solution, then by definition, you become part of the problem.

An Honest Health Care Debate?: Are We Really THIS #*&@ Stupid?

Like many Americans, yes, I'm interested in real, sensible, practical health-care reform--you know, the type that makes sense, reduces costs, and improves care. However, I just have to shake my head when I see the blatant manipulation (they're not technically lies) coming from our so-called "leaders" in Washington.

Here's a little snippet that caught my eye about a month ago in a Washington Post article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR2009070100950.html

"In the stage-managed event, questions for Obama came from a live audience selected by the White House and the college, and from Internet questions chosen by the administration's new-media team. Of the seven questions the president answered, four were selected by his staff from videos submitted to the White House Web site or from those responding to a request for 'tweets.'

"The president called randomly on three audience members. All turned out to be members of groups with close ties to his administration: the Service Employees International Union, Health Care for America Now, and Organizing for America, which is a part of the Democratic National Committee. White House officials said that was a coincidence."

If this really was "a coincidence," I would suggest that the President buy himself a lottery ticket! His luck is truly phenomenal!

The Serivce Employees International Union (SEIU)? I've heard of them. As reported in the L.A. Times and the Chicago Tribune, didn't the SEIU spend $60 million to elect the President and now have unprecedented access to the White House? The SEIU is also #9 on the list of the largest political contributors to some of our lofty, ethical elected officials (97% from only one political party--you guess which).

I'm not familiar with Health Care for America Now. That sounds like a non-partisan group interested in prudent health-care reforms, right? Let's see what I can find out about them from their web site.
http://healthcareforamericanow.org/about-us/members/

Hmm, well let's see. There's ACORN, the AFL-CIO (#31 on the top politcal donors list), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (#2 on the list), Americans United for Change (hey, isn't their former president, Brad Woodhouse, now the communications director for the Democratic National Commitee (DNC)?). Wow, and I haven't even made it out of the 'A's yet.

Again, I wasn't familiar with the name Organizing for America until I again searched the web. Oh yeah, this was the organization that then-candidate Obama formed when he was seeking the White House. The site helped organize his campaign in different states, mobilize his volunteers, and they maintain huge E-mail list. I scroll down the page. Wait a second, is this site managed by the DNC--the same DNC where Brad Woodhouse now works but used to be with Americans United for Change? Wow, another stunning "coincidence"!

And people thought Richard Nixon was tricky. Apparently President Obama excelled in his previous role as a "community organizer." These groups are well coordinated from the top, but they are also more inbred than some crazy dog breeds.

This so-called "national debate on health care" is a complete SHAM. This is a complete SHAME!!!