Al Acta de Exenciones Especiales - No a la Prop 32


Published on

Published in: News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • We’re here today to talk about Prop 32. Has anyone heard of it? On the ballot it will be labeled “Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction” and you may hear it called “paycheck protection” We think you’ll agree that a better description is the “Special Exemptions Act.”
  • Let’s take a look at how elections are currently funded. This table shows the types of entities that can contribute to campaigns, where they get their money and any limitations.The Super PACs and Independent Expenditure committees are what we hear so much about these days because they are unlimited and are pumping millions and millions of dollars into elections. These areorganizations that promote or oppose candidates and ballot measures, but without many of the spending restrictions or transparency requirements that limit the campaigns themselves.Corporations and wealthy individuals can give unlimited amounts to Super PACs.Union workers do get to voluntarily opt in to have their payroll deductions used for political spending. >Compare hotel workers to hotel owner/developer and UT publisher Doug Manchester
  • Proponents claim that Prop 32 bans contributions from BOTH corporations and unions.*NOTE: READ actual language from the proposition. > Sounds pretty good, right?
  • But here’s what they don’t tell you:The ban has specific exemptions for corporate donations to Super PACs and Independent Expenditure committees.This is also direct language from the proposition. >READ and click for animation circling “remain unrestricted”So let’s go back to how elections are funded…
  • So, which of this funding would be affected by Prop 32? (Let the audience answer)>CLICK for red X -- That’s right. Only the voices of union members will be silenced. Only the voluntary payroll deductions are banned.Clearly, Prop 32 is not the reform it claims to be.
  • Unions operate similarly to your local Church or Town Council, or other organizations that collect voluntary donations from members. Union members annually choose to give money through payroll deductions so that their representatives can advocate on their behalf (ex. work safety). Corporations use their profit as their major source to fund elections. When you purchase a product at a store, that money may go to lobby for issues that are not in your interest. Prop 32 doesn’t regulate the use of corporate profits in political spending.Corporations already outspend unions 15 – 1 in political expenditures. Take a look at this chart…
  • This chart shows political spending in the US from 2000 to 2012. The blue line at the top is spending by business interests. The yellow line at the bottom is labor. The other two represent ideological and other organizations. As you can see, business interests already dominate politics in this country.Note: The numbers in this chart are available if you scroll LEFT of this slide. (Open, 2012)
  • > Discuss just a couple of these:Unions worked with CPI to pass San Diego’s Living Wage Ordinance – which applies primarily to nonunion workers and helps more families live self-sufficiently, so the local economy benefits.CPI is working –with union allies –for the PVPO, which will protect all neighborhoods from the impacts of blighted foreclosures.The Homeowner Bill of Rights ensures that if we are mortgaging our home or facing foreclosure that we aren’t stuck in limbo.Union members advocated to make sure that our college grads can maintain their health insurance until age 26 and additionally they made sure that we can get coverage even if we have a pre-existing condition. They also advocate for better access to insurance for uncovered workers.Here’s a few more things unions have advocated for:Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, providing an increase in the federal minimum wage. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, a comprehensive federal law ensuring safety in the workplace. Workers' compensation laws, giving workers injured on the job medical coverage and compensation for lost time. Mine safety laws strengthening mine safety standards and protecting the rights of mine workers.The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, creating the 40-hour work week and the first minimum wage. The Social Security Act of 1935, providing benefits to unemployed and retired workers. Side notes on Homeowner’s Bill of Rights:The Homeowner Bill of Rights prohibits a series of inherently unfair bank practices that have needlessly forced thousands of Californians into foreclosure. The law restricts dual-track foreclosures, where a lender forecloses on a borrower despite being in discussions over a loan modification to save the home. It also guarantees struggling homeowners a single point of contact at their lender with knowledge of their loan and direct access to decision makers, and imposes civil penalties on fraudulently signed mortgage documents. 
  • Union advocacy historically has helped to improve our quality of life.Why? Because unions represent regular people who are just like the rest of us.Examples:Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, providing an increase in the federal minimum wage. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, a comprehensive federal law ensuring safety in the workplace. Workers' compensation laws, giving workers injured on the job medical coverage and compensation for lost time. Mine safety laws strengthening mine safety standards and protecting the rights of mine workers.The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, creating the 40-hour work week and the first minimum wage. The Social Security Act of 1935, providing benefits to unemployed and retired workers. 
  • Prop 32 takes away the ability of teachers, nurses, firefighters and millions of other working women and men to speak out on issues that matter to us all—like cuts to our schools and colleges, police and fire response times, workplace safety, consumer protections, homeowner rights and unfair corporate tax giveaways. But who stands to gain? Hedge funds, billionaires and all of these types of corporations will still be able to spend freely if Prop 32 passes.Not surprisingly, this is exactly who is funding Prop 32.
  • Think about it. If Prop 32 really did what proponents say it does, and eliminated corporate spending in elections, wouldn’t we see a lot of corporate spending right now to defeat it? But the opposite is true.Many of the financial backers of Prop 32 also made large donations to two previous similar initiatives, in 1998 and 2005, which failed. Some specific contributors include:$350,000 from Larry T. Smith (Real Estate Investor)$300,000 from William Bloomfield (developer)$100,000 from Timothy Draper (venture capitalist)$120,000 from Charles MungerJr. (wealthy heir)You can look up the list of contributors on the Secretary of State’s website or on
  • When these billionaires and giant corporations pour money into politics, they don’t have YOUR interests in mind. Their goal is to pass laws and policies that will boost their bottom line – and that’s often counter to the public interest.Monsanto provides an example this year. On the same ballot this November is Prop 37, which is a consumer protection measure to require labeling that tells us whether foods are genetically modified – so that when you buy groceries or put food in your child’s life, you know what’s in it. Monsanto and other giant agribusinesses have already spent more than $25 million to defeat this simple food labeling measure in California.
  • The political goals of corporate interests often have included policies and laws to remove regulations that protect the public, such as… (read from slide)In 2010, Mercury Insurance advocated for a measure that would increase car insurance rates for anyone who ever had a break in their insurance. This includes if you leave the country, if you are a vet or a student studying without the need for a car. It was actually the California Nurses Association that cared enough to advocate AGAINST this measure and it was defeated by a narrow margin.The Koch Brothers work on a regular basis to limit regulations on hazardous chemicals, so that they can continue to profit from their chemical production. This would be another loophole for organizations like WalMart that are seeking exemptions in the permitting process.Other examples: Hotel workers put their pay checks together to advocate for workers rights. However, hotelier and news paper owner, Douglas Manchester already has a larger voice then them with the acquisition ofWorkers Comp – Chamber of Commerce advocates against it.
  • We're not the only ones who see through this fraud. Here are some quotes from mainstream newspapers.And the League of Women Voters & Common Cause – two organizations that have advocated for years to get money out of politics – are both strongly against Prop 32.
  • We at CPI believe reducing the influence of money in politics is one of the most important issues of our time. But Prop 32 won’t do that. It’s a giant step backwards, because it would allow even greater spending by the special interests that already spend the most – while silencing opposing voices.And finally, is this the right way to make law? – by tricking voters are into passing something that is not what it seems?
  • What can you do?Everybody knows 5 people who vote – or should vote! Tell them how important it is to defeat this deceptive measure.
  • Al Acta de Exenciones Especiales - No a la Prop 32

    1. 1. Al Acta de No on Prop 32
    2. 2. ¿Cómo se financian las elecciones? Campaign Contributor Source of Funding Details Pueden recaudar fondos Super PAC/ PAC/ Independent Uniones, Corporaciones, I ilimitados, independie Expenditure (IE) Committee ndividuos ntes de los candidatos Corporate Pueden escribir Corporacion Profit, Unlimited cheques a PACs Pueden escribir cheques a Super Payroll Deductions: PACs, Limitada contribucion voluntaria a las donaciones de los cheques de voluntarias de Union trabajadores trabajadores Cantidades limitadas a candidatos, PACS Individual Fondos personales partidos politicos
    3. 3. Lo que nos van a decir… La Proposición 32 dirá que va a prohibir las contribuciones monetarias de las corporaciones y las uniones a los
    4. 4. Lo Que No nos Diran…Que incluye exenciones especiales paradonaciones corporativas, a Super PACs ya Comitivas Independientes de
    5. 5. La finaciacion de la eleccion con la Proposicion 32 Contribuidor a la campana Fuentes de los Recursos Detalles Pueden reacudar fondos ilimitados, Super PAC/ PAC/ Independent Uniones, Corporaciones, independientes de los Expenditure (IE) Committee Individuos candidatos Ganacias corporativas , Pueden escribir Corporacion Ilimitadas cheques a PACs Pueden escribir cheques a Super PACs, Limitada a las Payroll Deductions: donaciones Voluntary contribution voluntarias de Union from workers’ paychecks trabajadores Cantidades limitadas a candidatos, PACS y Fondos Personales partidos politicos
    6. 6. Apuntar solo a las Uniones es injusto • Los miembros del sindicato anualmente eligen si desean donar voluntariamente a través de deducciones de su cheque a políticos que abogan a su favor. • Las empresas utilizan sus ganancias para financiar las elecciones, sin darnos a nosotros los contribuyentes la oportunidad de escoger. • Las empresas ya superan a las uniones en gasto político 15 a
    7. 7. Los intereses corporativos ya dominan los gastos politicos Los intereses de negocios, tienen una amplia ventaja sobre los sindicatos de trabajadores de aproximadamente
    8. 8. Porque deberia de importarle siusted no es parte de una Union?• Las Uniones ayudan a abogar en beneficio de la comuniada entera: • Sueldos Dignos y suficientes para vivir • Ordenanza de la proteccion del valor de las viviendas • Carta de Derechos del Dueño de Casa • Regulaciones para la seguridad en el trabajo • Cuidado de la salud
    9. 9. Resultados de la abogacia de las
    10. 10. Si la Ley de Exenciones Especiales pasara, silenciaria efectivamente la voz de hombres y mujeres trabajadores, al mismo tiempo le daría intereses especiales a las super PACs, y rienda suelta a los corporativos y empresarios multimillonarios para influir aún más en nuestro sistema político. Y eso nos perjudica a
    11. 11. Quien Gana?Quien esta prohibido? Who is Exempted from the Prohibition Quien esta• Maestros enxcento de la Prohibicion? :• Enfermeras • Hedge Funds• Bomberos • Multimillonarios • Sociedades Limitadas• Oficiales de Policia • Sociedades de responsabilidad• Otros hombres y mujeres limitada (LLP) trabajadores que representan a las uniones • Sociedades de Responsabilidad Limitada (LLC) • Inversión de Bienes Raíces Trusts (REITs) • Fideicomisos de Negocios (Business Trusts)
    12. 12. ¿Quién está detrás de la Prop. 32? • Intereses Adinerados de corporativos • Ejecutivos de Wall Street • Desarrolladores Inmobiliarios • Muchos de los mismos que apoyaron y financiaron dos iniciativas similares que fueron rechazadas por los votantes. • Directores ejecutives de bancos •
    13. 13. ¿Quién puede gastar sin limites?
    14. 14. ¿Qué quieren las empresas y losmultimillonarios por su gasto político? Con las exenciones especiales en la Proposición 32, las corporaciones no tendrá restricciones en el gasto en cosas como: • Cortar la seguridad del aire y del agua • Anular de los derechos del Trabajador • Quitar la protección al
    15. 15. Here’s what others say about Prop 32: “…it would gut only one sides ability to play in politics” – Sacramento Bee “…a phony veneer of fairness…one-sided and biased” – Long Beach Press Telegram “…would just expand unaccountable independent expenditure committees and the super-PACs” – LA Times League of Women Voters and Common Cause:
    16. 16. En Resumen La Prop 32 : No sacara el dinero de la política Permite a las Súper PACs y Comités Independientes de gastos seguir gastando sin límite No es una reforma real. Porque una reforma política real trata a todos por igual. Es desequilibrado e injusto, ya que tiene como blanco a las contribuciones de los miembros de la unión pero no a las ganancias de
    17. 17. La verdad sobre la Prop. 32 Es engañosa. No es la reforma que pretende ser. No es justa. Silencia un lado - los trabajadores - al mismo tiempo que aumenta el poder de los intereses especiales corporativos para influir en la polí
    18. 18. ACCION • Vote No A La Prop 32. • Firmar la peticion hoy 32 • Pase la voz • Puedes comprometerte a decirle 5 personas? • Cuales otros grupos deberian escuchar esta presentacion? • Sea
    19. 19. Para Mas Informacion: (619) 584-5744