08-04-08
Monday, August 4, 2008
Attached is the latest edition of Public Affairs News Monitor, the twice-monthly electronic news service that is available ONLY to Public Affairs Council [1] member organizations.
WHAT'S NEW IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Which political party will be good for business this Fall? Senate Democrats are complaining that recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings overly favor corporations. Their GOP counterparts, meanwhile, are upset over a Democrat-supported bill to make it easier to unionize. But the Economist notes that 80% of small-business owners can't decipher which presidential candidate will benefit their business the most. And now that a poll shows most Americans favor government intervention to solve economic problems, guess who is leading the charge to increase government oversight? According to the Wall Street Journal, that would be the Republican-appointed heads of federal regulatory agencies, of course. Make sense? These stories and more in this edition of the Public Affairs News Monitor.
HEADLINES AT A GLANCE
"Energy Is Top Economic Issue for Voters" [2]
"Which Way Will Capital Vote?" [3]
"Pro-Business Rulings Blasted" [4]
"DeMint Aims to 'Build the Level Of Anger' on Union Bill" [5]
"Amid Turmoil, U.S. Turns Away From Decades of Deregulation" [6]
"Trading Gibes" [7]
"Campaign Finance Laws Under Siege" [8]
© copyright 2008 INFORMATION, INC. [9]
Public Affairs News Monitor may be reproduced in hard copy form or electronically for internal circulation to Public Affairs Council member companies and associations.
"Energy Is Top Economic Issue for Voters"
Wall Street Journal Online (07/25/08) P. A3; Power, Stephen; Murray, Sara; Hughes, Siobhan
Polls find that American voters are most concerned about gasoline prices and the country's energy crisis heading into the November elections. The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll reveals that American voters rank energy as the top economic issue that affects them the most. The poll also finds that Americans are conserving energy more aggressively. The Energy Information Administration confirms the trend in a new report in which it reports that gasoline stocks exceeded analysts' prediction of a 200,000-barrel increase, posting instead a 2.8 million-barrel surge in the week ended July 18. The poll also finds that more Americans support Republicans' proposal to increase domestic drilling for oil and natural gas, but trust Democrats more to implement energy policy. Of those polled, 42 percent of respondents favor Democrats to handle energy policy, versus 22 percent who prefer Republicans.(www.wsj.com)
"Which Way Will Capital Vote?"
Economist (07/19/08)
It is still unclear as to which presidential candidate a majority of the business community will vote for. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain has substantial business experience and, while both have lauded enterprise theoretically, each has spoken out against large corporations at one time or another. However, business is on many voters' minds. Around 10.7 percent of registered voters own a small business and 11.9 percent of voters belong to a union. According to American Management Services, a consultancy, 81 percent of small-business owners believe the economy is in recession. The National Federation of Independent Business, a lobby group, claims that small-business confidence has plunged to its lowest level in 30 years, as many owners are worried about inflation. Over the past nine years, health-insurance costs for small firms has skyrocketed 130 percent, prompting wages to languish and a good portion of businesses to limit or cut coverage. Both candidates have voiced their plans for conquering increasing health-care and energy costs and have outlined their tax plans, which vary immensely. Still, a recent survey of small-business owners concluded that 80 percent have a hard time deciphering which candidate will benefit their business the most.(www.economist.com)
"Pro-Business Rulings Blasted"
Washington Times (07/28/08) P. B1; Ramstack, Tom
Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have criticized the U.S. Supreme Court for rulings they say overly favor corporations. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy accuses the Supreme Court of substituting its own will for the intent of the laws approved by Congress. "I'm more concerned about the rights of people," Leahy says, discussing the recent Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker case regarding the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the punitive damages paid to approximately 32,000 plaintiffs would be limited to compensatory damages. This slashed Exxon Mobil punitive damages from $2.5 billion to $507 million. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports the ruling, explaining that it would curb runaway juries and offer companies with a predictable formula to determine potential litigation expenses. Leahy disagrees, saying "If Congress had wanted to cap punitive damages for disasters that impact thousands of Americans, it could have but it did not." In January 2008, businesses also gained a victory in "Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta," which restricts the right of corporate investors to sue if they are the victims of fraud. The Supreme Court ruled that only the parties that committed the fraud can be named in fraud claims, not their business affiliates. Another case, "Circuit City Stores Inc. vs. Adams," the Supreme Court broadened the businesses' ability to resolve disputes with employees via arbitration. (www.washingtontimes.com)
"DeMint Aims to 'Build the Level Of Anger' on Union Bill"
CongressDaily (07/22/08); Hunt, Kasie
Republican lawmakers in the Senate will focus on Democratic-backed "card-check" labor legislation in an effort to garner votes, boost fundraising, and trigger opposition to Democratic candidates. "What we're trying to do is what we did with immigration: Let people know the facts and over a period of time build the level of anger," says Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). The proposed legislation, which is supported by unions, would enable the creation of a union without a secret-ballot election if more than 50 percent of workers signed authorization cards. The bill passed the House last year but fell short of the 60 votes required to advance it in the Senate. DeMint warns that, "A few losses in the Senate and an Obama presidency, and we're going to lose the secret ballot." A business group is spending millions of dollars on ads this summer in the states of Maine and Minnesota in support of Sens. Norm Coleman, (R-Minn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), who voted against card check legislation in the Senate. The group, called the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, will spend $6 million to $8 million on the first batch of ads, according to an industry source. Meanwhile, backers of the card-check bill say secret-ballot elections let employers lengthen the unionization process, enabling companies to intimidate workers and perhaps fire them during the interval. (www.nationaljournal.com)
"Amid Turmoil, U.S. Turns Away From Decades of Deregulation"
Wall Street Journal (07/25/08) P. A1; Davis, Bob; Paletta, Damian; Smith, Rebecca
For much of the past 25 years American governance has gravitated toward deregulation, but that tendency is being challenged by the new push for regulatory oversight in the wake of the economic downturn. "There's a backlash against the laissez-faire, 'isn't-it-wonderful-how-creative-markets-are' viewpoint," says Alan Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve. "Markets are creative, but sometimes the creativity leads to strange and dangerous directions." The Fed is taking a careful look at Wall Street investment banks by putting officials inside the firms to scrutinize their assets and capital, after offering vast amounts of money in emergency loans. More government intervention in economic problems is favored by Americans, according to a recent public opinion poll, while the incoming president will greatly influence the move toward or away from regulation. Democratic candidate Barack Obama wants to protect infrastructure spending from political caprice by setting up a $6 billion bank patterned after the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC). The housing crisis' adverse effects on financial institutions has required the kind of rapid, large-scale intercession only the central bank can supply, and the Fed's track record for tackling inflation and restricting the severity of recessions has augmented government agencies' reputation, which is fueling government activism. FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair has been pushing for more proactive behavior by lenders to help homeowners stave off foreclosure, and the collapse of IndyMac Bank and the FDIC's subsequent intervention have given weight to her arguments.(www.wsj.com)
"Trading Gibes"
National Journal (07/26/08); Stokes, Bruce
A June CNN/Opinion Research poll reveals that 50 percent of voters worry that the economy could be negatively impacted by foreign trade agreements, while surveys by the Pew Research Center show an increase in Americans who believe unemployment is tied to free trade to 61 percent in April from 48 percent in December 2006. Although voters have concerns about trade and the issue was a major focus in the Democratic primaries, observers do not believe it will be a focal point of the presidential campaign. "For 20 years, people have been trying to make trade a campaign issue and they have never succeeded," says National Foreign Trade Council President William Reinsch. "At best, the debate will devolve into a discussion of American competitiveness, retraining, and dealing with the victims." If elected, observers believe McCain would move the Bush Administration's initiatives forward, focus on multilateral and bilateral trade liberalization, and enhance aid for "dislocated" workers, among other things. Meanwhile, Obama likely would try to make the issue less controversial and offset concerns about job security by bolstering healthcare, education, and job retraining, among other things. Experts say Obama would alter the trade agreement with Columbia to improve labor rights and change the trade agreement with South Korea to expand U.S. automakers' market access prior to pushing for Congress to pass them.(www.nationaljournal.com)
"Campaign Finance Laws Under Siege"
National Journal (07/28/08); Carney, Eliza Newlin
On June 26, the Supreme Court annulled the so-called Millionaire's Amendment, a finance regulation within the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002. The Millionaire's Amendment raised the contribution limits for any candidate pitted against a wealthy, self-financed opponent. In "Davis vs. Federal Election Commission," the court ruled 5-4 that the amendment is unconstitutional. In 2007, another BCRA measure was also declared unconstitutional. That measure prohibited unions and corporations from using treasury funds to pay for unregulated "issue" ads depicting or mentioning a candidate on the eve of an election. The Supreme Court concluded in "Federal Election Commission vs. Wisconsin Right to Life" that those limits are unconstitutional. Paul S. Ryan, an attorney for the Campaign Legal Center, says the Wisconsin ruling created a "fairly sizable loophole" in the BCRA, which was sponsored by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.). Several other challenges to current election law are now heading toward the Supreme Court, including "Citizens United vs. FEC," which calls into question BCRA's disclosure requirement for groups that take part in "electioneering communications." SpeechNow.org's federal lawsuit challenges an amendment in the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 that requires independent groups that clearly advocate a candidate's election or defeat to solely use hard, or regulated, money that must adhere to contribution limits. (www.nationaljournal.com)