Showing posts with label Chamber of Commerce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chamber of Commerce. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

U.S. Chamber says health care law hammers small businesses in an attack on Betsy Markey, D-Colo.

The Truth-O-Meter Says:

U.S. Chamber of Commerce

The new health care law crushes small businesses "with billions in penalties."

U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday, October 5th, 2010 in a campaign ad


U.S. Chamber says health care law hammers small businesses in an attack on Betsy Markey, D-Colo.

False


The U.S. Chamber attacks Betsy Markey, D-Colo.



The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is attacking Betsy Markey, a Colorado House member running for re-election, for supporting major Democratic initiatives. But in making its criticism, the chamber distorts key parts of the proposals.

"Colorado is facing economic disaster," the ad says. "We told Betsy Markey we needed jobs. Why didn't she listen? Markey fought for the Obama-Pelosi government take over of health care, crushing small businesses with billions in penalties. Now Markey wants a national energy tax, costing families nearly $2,000 a year. Call Betsy Markey, tell her to listen. Tell her to stop supporting Pelosi and making the economy worse."

Markey did vote for the new health care law, a major overhaul of health care regulations, as well as a cap-and-trade law intended to curb carbon emissions and address climate change. But the ad's descriptions of those measures are deceptive.

For example, Markey does not favor a national energy tax. She did support a cap-and-trade proposal that limits carbon emissions of polluters by requiring them to buy permits. Companies would more than likely pass on their costs to consumers, but it wouldn't cost nearly $2,000. Nonpartisan agencies estimate it would cost families between $80 and $340 a year, depending on income. We wrote a detailed analysis last year when Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said that the Obama administration's cap-and-trade plan would create "a $1,761 yearly energy tax." We rated the statement False. The $1,761 number was a figure created and promoted by a conservative blogger.

Here, we're looking at the ad's claim that the Democratic health care law crushes small businesses "with billions in penalties."

We found this claim perplexing, because small businesses can actually qualify for tax credits under the new health care law.

Generally speaking, tax credits are available to employers with fewer than 25 employees who are paid average annual wages of less than $50,000. If the employer pays for at least half of the insurance for workers, the employer gets a tax credit for part of the contributions. Those tax credits start for the 2010 tax year, and they increase in 2014 when more provisions of the health care law take effect.

During the debate leading up to the health care law, members of Congress considered -- but ultimately rejected -- a straightfoward mandate requiring employers to offer health care to workers and imposing penalties if they didn't. Instead, they came up with a complicated fine for large employers. Starting in 2014, large employers who don't offer health care face a fine, but only if their workers qualify for tax credits from the government to buy health care. It's likely that most large employers who don't offer insurance will have to pay the fine.

But again, small employers -- those with 50 employees or fewer -- are exempt from the fine.

Still, that's the provision the Chamber pointed to when we asked them for evidence for the claim in the ad. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines would come to $52 billion over 10 years.

We should note that there's a lot of political mischief to be had around the term "small business." Pollsters tell us that Americans have very positive opinions of small businesses, but people often have different ideas of what size a small business is.
In a similar vein, Republicans have made the case this year that most of the wealthiest Americans are actually small business owners, but that's a dubious claim. We looked into a statement to that effect earlier this year and rated it Barely True. And the health care law does impose some new taxes on the wealthiest Americans: It imposes a 3.8 percent tax on the investment income of couples who make more than $250,000 or individuals who make more than $200,000.

The Chamber argued that businesses can have more than 50 employees and still be considered small businesses.  Spokesman J.P Fielder pointed to regulations from the Small Business Administration that consider a small business to be anyone with 500 or fewer employees.
And it's true that generally speaking, the Small Business Administration does consider a small business to be a firm with 500 employees or less. But there are exceptions for that, depending on the industry. For example, a manufacturing firm with 500 employees is probably a small manufacturer, but an accounting firm with 500 employees is relatively large, said spokesman Hayley Matz. In some cases, the small business designation is determined by the firm's revenues, not the number of employees.
We also looked at research the Small Business Administration compiles using data from the U.S. Census. Their research shows that the vast majority of businesses in the United States have fewer than 50 employees. In 2007, 5,814,584 firms had fewer than 50 employees, compared with a total just over 6,049,655 firms. In other words, 96 percent of U.S. small businesses are specifically exempted from fines on employers who don't insure their employees.

The Chamber's ad said that the new health care law crushes small businesses "with billions in penalties." But some small businesses will actually get tax credits from the health care law. Meanwhile, almost all small businesses -- those with fewer than 50 employees -- are exempt from penalties, whether they offer insurance or not. Some small businesses are larger than 50 employees and could face fines if they don't offer employees insurance. But a vast majority of U.S. firms are smaller than 50 employees and are exempt from the health insurance requirements. The chamber's ad is sweeping, and doesn't account for any of the positive provisions that don't "crush" small business but actually help them. So we rate the Chamber's statement False.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

U.S. Chamber of Commerce says Glenn Beck’s appeal crashed servers

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce says it received an "outpouring of support" that crashed its servers Thursday morning after conservative host Glenn Beck pledged $10,000 on the air to the organization and urged his listeners to donate what they can afford.
"Let's break all records," Beck said. "Let's show these people that we actually believe in something different from what Barack Obama and Joe Biden are saying, that we don't think the Chamber of Commerce is all of a sudden some KGB agent."
The Obama administration has recently questioned funding sources for the Chamber of Commerce, a business lobbying group that is spending tens of millions of dollars on advocacy ads critical of Democratic policies and candidates. ThinkProgress, a liberal blog run by the Center for American Progress Action Fund,has alleged that foreign funding is paying for political ads.
You can listen to Beck's on-air appeal below, via Media Matters:
So how effective was Beck?
"We don't discuss membership or contributions but I can say that there was an outpouring of support today," Tita Freeman, the chamber's vice president of communications, said in a statement. "So much so that the Chamber's server crashed this morning. I think this is a sign of support for the Chamber's pro-business policies and our continued focus on one issue: job creation."
Beck isn't the only person affiliated with Fox News to help out the chamber this election cycle. Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox parent News Corp., donated $1 million over the summer.

"Stealing Democracy"

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Justice Alito Was Wrong;Foreign Entities Are Investing in Our Elections

Justice Alito Was Wrong;Foreign Entities Are Investing in Our Elections

And they are doing so anonymously, and without limit.

Think Progress reminded us yesterday of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s big moment during the State of the Union address in January.

When President Obama warned in last January’s State of the Union address that the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision “will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our election[s],” right-wing Justice Samuel Alito infamously mouthed the words, “Not True.”
  

Earlier this week, our Citizen’s United update reported the money flowing from the Chamber, but what we did not know at that time was that foreign entities were contributing to the Chamber’s fund.

Thanks to the investigation conducted by Think Progress, we now know that to be the case.
A ThinkProgress investigation has found that the Chamber funds its political attack campaign out of its general account, which solicits foreign funding. And while the Chamber will likely assert it has internal controls, foreign money is fungible, permitting the Chamber to run its unprecedented attack campaign. According to legal experts consulted by ThinkProgress, the Chamber is likely skirting longstanding campaign finance law that bans the involvement of foreign corporations in American elections.
In recent years, the Chamber has become very aggressive with its fundraising, opening offices abroad and helping to found foreign chapters (known as Business Councils or “AmChams”). While many of these foreign operations include American businesses with interests overseas, the Chamber has also spearheaded an effort to raise money from foreign corporations, including ones controlled by foreign governments. These foreign members of the Chamber send money either directly to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, or the foreign members fund their local Chamber, which in turn, transfers dues payments back to the Chamber’s H Street office in Washington DC. These funds are commingled to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6) account which is the vehicle for the attack ads:

And so, President Obama was right, and Alito has now been proven wrong.

Adding….this is just the first of many years to come that we will be fighting against the aftermath of the Citizen’s United ruling.

VIDEO: Michelle Bachmann Claims That No Foreign Money is Being Used to Fund Candidates

VIDEO: Michelle Bachmann Claims That No Foreign Money is Being Used to Fund Candidates

Joining Karl Rove in his protests, the batshit crazy Bachmann [R-MN], was on Fox Business yesterday where she was all in a fury, railing at Democrats and the White House for asking the Chamber to disclose its donors. Bachmann said that the Chamber only funds candidates out of its political action pac, and that there are no foreign donors.

Bachman:
This is about as low as it goes. It’s more than just disingenious, it’s a flat-out, patent lie. The Chamber of Commerce, who has been accused of taking foreign contributions to spend on elections, is absolutely not doing that. They have a separate political action fund and they use that only from American donors.

  

Unfortunately for Bachmann, her claim is easily proven false.

The Chamber does indeed have a political action fund. However, its PAC has so far raised $161,000 and spent only $104,000. Yet, the Chamber itself has spent more than $12 million so far this election season (and plans to spend $75 million), largely helping Republican candidates.
See, the PAC is required to disclose donors and funds; thanks to the Citizen’s United ruling, corporations are not required to disclose, nor limited as to dollar amounts of contributions.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, the Chamber would have had to run its political ads out of its PAC, contributions to which are disclosed. But the Court’s decision allows large corporations — such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns without publicizing their donors. [......]