The Electronic Frontier Foundation fights for a free and fair Internet. But it will barely get a chance to weigh in on a new trade agreement.

“Free trade” deals have traded away the jobs and rights of American workers for decades. The newest one being cooked up by politicians of both parties is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which some labor advocates are calling the “NAFTA Of The Pacific.”

Obama’s U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) office is responsible for negotiating this new trade deal. Although powerful corporations have gotten to weigh in on it for months, public interest groups are finally getting a chance to air their grievances to negotiators. A very, very small chance.

Techdirt reports that the Electronic Frontier Foundation — a leading Internet freedom group — will get just eight minutes to present its view on the agreement to USTR negotiators during a “Direct Stakeholder Engagement” meeting in Virginia next month. This is particularly disturbing in light of the revelation that TPP may include new intellectual property powers that may curb Internet rights.

That’s the role that public interest groups get when money dictates our politics. From trade, to health care, to consumer safety — Americans will always take a back seat to Big Money unless we reform the way our political system works.

Join PCCC’s Take Back Democracy campaign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiHNVYRTKP8

Sign up to attend an Elizabeth Warren house party near you.

One Wisconsin protester’s sign against the Kochs. (Photo credit: Flickr user Sue Peacock)

Yesterday, billionaire industrialist David Koch, who along with his brother Charles has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into right-wing infrastructure and causes, claimed to the press that he actually doesn’t believe in much that the Republican Party promotes.

While attending the Republican National Convention, Koch said that he backs same-sex marriage, thinks the defense budget should be cut and that the U.S. should consider withdrawing from the middle east, and that “maybe itai??i??s going to require some tax increases” to address the budget deficit

This produced the following headline in Politico: “David Koch breaks from GOP on gay marriage, taxes, defense cuts.”

Soon after, numerous other media outlets picked up the Politico story, each also proclaiming that Koch had broken from the Republican Party line.

But all of this begs the question — why should we take Koch at his word? Isn’t it possible that he is simply trying to repair his image in the face of criticism? After all, if Koch really believes these things, then why is he putting up countless millions of dollars to promote causes and organizations that believe the opposite?

Here’s a rundown of a small sample of the organizations that David Koch and his brother have funded:

Americans for Tax Reform:Ai??The goal of this group led by Grover Norquist is ostensibly to battle any form of tax increase. It even asks lawmakers to sign a pledge to never vote for any tax increase ever. It has received at least $40,000 in Koch foundation money from 2005 to 2010.

The Heritage Foundation: This organization, which is against marriage equality, tax increases, and reducing defense spending, has received …

Earlier this week, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal (R) announced that he will not be complying with the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid. “I do not have any intentions of expanding Medicaid,” Deal told a reporter at the Republican National Convention. “I think that is something our state cannot afford.”

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported yesterday that an estimated 650,000 Georgians are expected to receive care thanks to the Medicaid expansion, which means that Deal’s obstruction would leave an enormous number of people without access to health care (one out of every five Georgians is currently uninsured). Additionally, the state’s hospitals are in uproar over Deal’s decision, with one official saying that he is “certainly putting hospitals at risk” by not allowing the flow of federal dollars that allows for them to care for patients.

As US News & World Reports notes, the “federal government would pick up the tab for most of the Medicaid expansion when it is implemented in 2014, but states would be required to pay for 10 percent of it by 2020.”

That’s a relatively small price to pay for securing the health andAi??well-beingAi??of most of the people in your state. But Deal doesn’t want to pay, and Georgians may suffer as a result.

Former Missouri House Speaker Steven Tilley (R)

Around three weeks ago, Missouri House Speaker Steven Tilley (R) announced his resignation as both speaker and a member of the house. Tilley was term-limited and would have to leave in January regardless, but his resignation months before the end of the legislative lesson left many wondering.Ai??”My decision to resign early is one I made with my daughters and that puts my family first,” he saidAi??in an emotional written statement where he explained that being a lawmaker was keeping him away from his family.

But Tilley’s supposed desire to step away from the legislature and spend more time with his family must have been short-lived. He’ll be heading back to the Missouri capital soon — this time as a lobbyist. The St. Louis Dispatch reports:

Tilley, who resigned his House seat less than three weeks ago,Ai?? registered with the Missouri Ethics Commission today as a lobbyist for Fred Weber Inc. of Maryland Heights, a major builder of roads and bridges, and Supermarket Merchandising, a St. Louis firm. […] In registering with the Ethics Commission, Tilley listed his new firm as Strategic Capitol Consulting, based in an office building in Chesterfield near Olive Boulevard and Highway 40 (I-64).

Missouri is one of fourteen states that has no restrictions on when a ex-lawmaker can become a lobbyist (35 states have “cooling off” periods that must pass first). This ethical loophole allows legislators like Tilley to tell the public that they simply want to spend more time with the family then be back at the state capitol in no time, winning special deals for corporations as well-paid lobbyists. If Missourians don’t think this is right, they should ask their lawmakers to close this squeaky revolving door by …

(Photo credit: Flickr user Cletch)

GOP vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan took to the stage of the Republican National Convention last night to blast Barack Obama and promote the presidency of Mitt Romney. (Here’s a transcript of that speech.)

But in doing so, Ryan repeatedly distorted the truth and misled Americans. Here’s a roundup of the top five lies in his speech:

Ryan And Romney Will Protect Medicare: “A Romney-Ryan Administration will protect andAi??strengthen Medicare for my mom’s generation, for my generationAi??and for my kids and yours.”Ai??Why it’s a lie:Ai??Ryan’s infamous plan ends Medicare by handing it over to the insurance companies. The Center for American Progress estimates that future seniors would pay $60,000 more for their healthcare under the Romney-Ryan plan.
Obama Is To Blame For The Closure Of A GM Plant In Ryan’s District: “At that plant [in Janesville], candidate ObamaAi??said, ‘I believe that if our government is there to support you,Ai??this plant will be here for another 100 years.’Ai??That’s what he said in 2008. Ai??Well, as it turned out, thatAi??plant didn’t last another year.” Why it’s a lie:Ai??Talking Points Memo’s Benjy Sarlin notes that the plant actually “closed in 2008, under President George W. Bush.”Ai??Here’s an excerpt from a letter Ryan wrote in June of 2008 protesting the closure of the plant.
Obama Cut Medicare By $716 Billion:Ai??”They needed hundreds of billions [of dollars to fund the Affordable Care Act]. Ai??So theyAi??just took it all away from Medicare, $716 billion funneled outAi??of Medicare by President Obama.” Why it’s a lie: The Affordable Care Act cut Medicare waste — including useless payments to private insurance companies to administer the program under Medicare Advantage. Medicare benefits “will not change,”Ai??notes Time Magazine’s Kate Pickert.Ai??(It is important to …

What should be Mitt Romney’s convention theme song? (Photo credit: Flickr user Adam Glanzman)

Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan poked some fun at Mitt Romney during his speech last night. He made said he heard some of Romney’s songs on the campaign bus, and that he was urged to play those songs at campaign rallies. “I said, ‘look, I hope it is not a dealAi??breaker Mitt, but my playlist starts with AC/DC and it ends withAi??Zeppelin,’” he joked.

That gets us thinking. What song will Mitt Romney emerge to tonight (in 2008 John McCain appeared to the tune of Indiana Jones)? Here are some tracks we thought would be appropriate from Romney:

– Ai??ABBA’s “Money Money Money”:Ai??It is indeed a “rich man’s world” if Romney wins the election. He’s promising an average tax cut ofAi??$87,117 to Americans making over a million dollars a year. Meanwhile, middle-class families would face an average tax increase of $2,000.

– Barry McGuire’s “Eve of Destruction”: This song that recalls the war in Vietnam and the spiral of violence overseas is appropriate when you look at Romney’s ultra-hawkish foreign policy. He wants to increase military spending by over $2 trillion over the next ten years, and some of his advisers like John Bolton have even suggested a nuclear strike on Iran.

– Bruce Springsteen’s “The Ghost of Tom Joad”:Ai??The Boss’s track recalls the Depression-era tale ofAi??The Grapes of Wrath and the migrant families who were unable to find work. Romney’s business tenure was marked by profiting off of outsourcing, and he’s a strong backer of corporate-written, job-killing “free trade” deals.

– The Zombies’ “I Can’t Make Up My Mind”: With the lyrics “I can’t make up my …

Sheldon Adelson refused to take Democracy Now!’s questions.

Republican mega donor Sheldon Adelson is one of the most powerful men in politics, and is reportedly willing to spend as much as $100 million to unseat Obama.

So the radio and television show Democracy Now! sent its senior producer Mike Burke to go interview Adelson at the Republican National Convention. After all, if Adelson is spending so much money to help Romney, isn’t it fair to ask him what he expects to get for all that dough?

Burke and Democracy Now! staffer Hanny Masoud tried to interview Adelson after they saw him at the convention talking to Karl Rove. Adelson refused to Ai??answer any questions, and his daughter pushed Burke. She then grabbed Democracy Now’s camera and threw it to the ground. Here’s a transcript of the exchange from Democracy Now!:

MIKEAi??BURKE:Ai??And weai??i??ve just spotted Sheldon Adelson being pushed in a wheelchair down the hall. Karl Rove is right behind him. Weai??i??re going to try to follow them to see how far we can get.

Mr. Adelson, your thoughts on the Romney-Ryan ticket?

SHELDONAi??ADELSON:Ai??No comment.

MIKEAi??BURKE:Ai??Weai??i??re trying to follow Karl Rove and Sheldon Adelson as they go down the hallway here in the suites.

Mr. Adelson, how much money are you going to spend on this election?

ADELSONAi??HANDLER:Ai??Guys, guys, hey!

ADELSONAi??DAUGHTER:Ai??Get off me!

ADELSONAi??HANDLER:Ai??Hey! Hey!

ADELSONAi??DAUGHTER:Ai??Get off me! Iai??i??ll hit you!

HANYAi??MASSOUD:Ai??Heai??i??s just walking.

MIKEAi??BURKE:Ai??I did not touch her. She ran back into me. She just grabbed our camera! This woman grabbed our camera.

Watch the confrontation (it begins at 10:10)

Adelson’s daughter did later apologize for the incident, and a spokesman for the tycoon also offered an apologetic response. But Adelson did not offer to answer any questions to Democracy Now!’s polite and professional reporters. For a billionaire who’s willing to …

(Photo credit: Flickr user Philip Taylor PT)

Right-wing politicians and their appeasers have a new cause: raising the Social Security retirement age, which would amount to a huge cut to the system. They claim that this is necessary to shore up the future solvency of the system, but the truth is that simply raising the payroll tax cap — so that the rich would have to pay a little bit more — would secure the system for theAi??foreseeableAi??future. And gains in life expectancy have mostly been concentratedAi??among white collar workers — blue collar workers are mostly not living much longer. By asking working Americans to work longer so that the rich don’t have to pay a little bit more, these politicians are essentially demanding a lot of pain to avoid a little inconvenience. And there’s one underlying truth about the retirement age that these politicians are not acknowledging. Social Security is actually not providing enough social support for those in their old age. This USA Today article from last near notes that nearly a fifth of Americans 65 and older are still workingand have failed to retire, a number that had increased as the economy and inequality worsened:

The percentage of people who work and people who want to work has increased markedly in both the 65-and-older and 75-and-older groups, says Sara Rix, senior adviser for the AARP Public Policy Institute. For 2011, the participation rate for 65 and older was 17.9% compared with 10.8% in 1985. For 75 and older, the rate jumped from 4.3% in 1990 to 7.5% in 2011.Ai??“Those are whopping increases,” Rix says. “I see these rates continuing to increase as we move into the future.”

These numbers point to a stark fact: …

(Photo credit: Flickr user Spencer T.)

Here’s an interesting tidbit from a 2008 interview with Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan. TheAi??Walworth County Week asked Ryan about alternative energy, and the congressman blasted ethanol:

RYAN: On ethanol, and that’s, you’re going to hear a lot about this. Turning food into fuel is not a good long-term energy policy. I think there are better renewable energy policies like cellulostic ethanol, where you turn corn stalks, switch grass, into fuel instead of food into fuel. Because if you turn food into fuel as your energy policy that makes both more expensive. Food and fuel become more expensive. And I’m also fearful that this is going to produce a backlash against our farmers. You’re already seeing this. […]

INTERVIEWER: Now in the last, it was the farm bill or the energy bill they kept the subsidies for corn ethanol, but haven’t been able to pass subsidies for wind —

RYAN: Congress quintupled the ethanol mandate. I did not support that. Because I thought that’s what happening now was going to happen when we were goin to have dramatic price increases.

 

Watch the interview (the relevant section is at 3:13)

Both conservatives and progressives have good reason to be skeptical of ethanol. The lobby for this fuel has invested well in politicians and has worked to downplay the potential disastrous consequences on food prices. As former vice presidential nominee Al Gore admitted, politicians of both parties have pandered to the lobby and put aside legitimate concerns.

But while Ryan deserves some credit for his ethanol skepticism in 2008, it’s ironic his running mate Mitt Romney is a huge supporter of the mandate the congressman opposed. Romney supports the Renewable Fuel Standards that include ethanol, “a mandate several …

(Photo credit: Flickr user monkeyz_uncle)

Tonight, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) blasted President Obama for failing to save a GM factory in his district. The problem with this is that the plant actually closed under George W. Bush.

In June 2008, Ryan sent a letter along with his Wisconsin colleagues Senators Russ Feingold (D) and Herb Kohl (D) protesting the closure of General Motors plant in Janesville, Wisconsin.

“We ask that you reconsider the decision to close the Janesville GM plant and request a meeting with youAi??as soon as possible to discuss OM’s plans for the Janesville plant, including the possibility of retoolingAi??the plant for different production lines,” said the letter from the three lawmakers to GM CEO Rick Wagoner.

As Talking Points Memo’s Benjy Sarlin notes, Ryan actually voted for a Bush-era effort to expand government loans to GM, a plan that failed to save the Janesville plant.

Ryan also went on to support Obama’s GM restructuring plan, which earned him the rebuke of Michelle Malkin, who grouped him with “pro-bailout, anti-free market Republicans.”

Tonight, Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz aggressively questioned Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) about Ryan’s claim that the closure under Bush could be blamed on Obama. “It had nothing to do with Barack Obama’s economic policy,” said Schultz about the Janesville closure. “You can’t get away from that fact!”

The Republican vice presidential nominee is playing fast and loose with the facts. He knows that this plant closed before President Obama even took office, and he also knows that he supported both Bush and Obama’s plans to assist the auto industry. This letter shows that Ryan knew the plant was failing despite Bush policies and that he recognized the need for intervention then.

This afternoon, President Obama engaged in a question and answer setting with Reddit users. Suzanne Merkelson, a staffer with the campaign finance reform organization United Republic, asked Obama, “What are you going to do to end the corrupting influence of money in politics during your second term?” In his his response he endorsed a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United:

Obama: Money has always been a factor in politics, but we are seeing something new in the no-holds barred flow of seven and eight figure checks, most undisclosed, into super-PACs; they fundamentally threaten to overwhelm the political process over the long run and drown out the voices of ordinary citizens. We need to start with passing the Disclose Act that is already written and been sponsored in Congress – to at least force disclosure of who is giving to who. We should also pass legislation prohibiting the bundling of campaign contributions from lobbyists. Over the longer term, I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United (assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t revisit it). Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of the super-PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change.

(Over 55,000 people have applied pressure for this change by endorsing the Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s Take Back Democracy agenda.)

At a Senate hearing about overturning Citizens United last month, Harvard University law professor Lawrence Lessig outlined such a process.

LessigAi??called for Congress to establish 4 non-binding citizen conventions in different regions of the country, with 300 people picked at random for each. This would be akin to picking and compensating a jury. Each convention would deliberate and recommend a Constitutional Amendment.Ai??Congress could then use the results …

The middle class and unions are inextricably linked. As union membership has declined income inequality has skyrocketed, as this chart from the Center for American Progress shows:

A new report released today by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) shows another benefit from being in a union. The report looked at workers with comparable “experience, education, region, industry, occupation, and marital status” and found that similar workers in a union earned on average 13.6 percent more than their non-union colleagues. Here’s a table from the report showing some of these results:

The message of these stats is clear. If you want to rebuild the middle class, start by rebuilding unions. Read the full EPI report on unions and inequality here.

Super PACs are the latest vehicle that millionaires and corporations are using to manipulate our political process. But a progressive congressman in New Mexico just showed that good progressive organizing withstand this Big Money onslaught.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) won his primary challenge yesterday, but not without a fight. A Super PAC calling itself the “Opportunity for All Committee” flooded his district with direct mail pieces alleging that he had taken money from insurance companies and consequently voted to cut Medicare by $716 billion. It also urged support for his primary opponentAi??Amanda Aguirre.

Compared to Mitt Romney, Nixon may well have been a defense spending dove.

Last week, we showed you how far to the right the Republican Party has drifted by noting that in its 1956 platform, the party called for expanding unions rights, gender equality, investing in science, and other now-banished ideas among right wing thinkers.

Here’s another area where the party has in several decades drifted dangerously to the right.

At the party’s 1972 convention, Republican President Richard Nixon — certainly no dove by any stretch of the imagination — took to the podium and boasted of cutting defense spending:

NIXON:Ai??Let’s look at the record on defense expenditures. We have cut spending in our Administration. It now takes the lowest percentage of our national product in 20 years. We should not spend more on defense than we need. But we must never spend less than we need.

Watch Nixon boast of reducing defense expenditures (the relevant section is at 33:06):

Current GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s platform is more than a little different. Romney is proposing aAi??$2 trillion increaseAi??in military spending over the next ten years, a plan that the Brookings Institution’s Peter Singer says “doesn’t reflect fiscal reality,” and that other defense experts warnAi??would require huge cutsAi??to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid if taken in conjunction with the candidate’s promise to reduce the deficit.

Should the public be kept in the dark about conditions within factory farms? (Photo credit: Flickr user faul)

Big Ag doesn’t want you to know about abuses at factory farms that violate animal rights and can endanger the health of consumers. That’s why it’s worked to pass laws all over the country that criminalize people for taking undercover video at these institutions.

Late last week, three California House Republicans — Reps. David Nunes, Kevin McCarthy, and Jeff Denham — allied to the industry sent a letter to the Department of Agriculture asking it to take action against animal welfare groups and their “onslaught” of undercover investigations at factory farms.

In a blog post about the letter, Nunes used shrill rhetoric to describe these investigations. First bringing up actual acts of terrorism — the incidence of a fringe group blowing up farm trucks — Nunes then says that his district is now facing “economic terrorism” because of the investigations by animal welfare groups.

Besides being from California, there’s one thing all three Republicans share: a reliance on Big Ag for campaign dollars. Here’s a rundown:

Denham: Crop processing and production is the congressman’s top donor this cycle, clocking in at $343,813. Meanwhile, the livestock industry is fifth, hittingAi??$88,650. Dairy is sixth atAi??$88,332. Agricultural services and products are ninth at $62,250.

McCarthy: Crop production and processing is his seventh-largest donor this cycle, givingAi??$150,300. Meanwhile, food and beverages have given himAi??$64,550, with McCarthy ranking in as the 3rd-favorite district among the food and beverage industry.

Nunes: The crop production and processing is his largest donor, givingAi??$199,900 this cycle. The dairy industry is his second-largest donor, givingAi??$70,800. The livestock industry has given him $21,750.

Big Ag will do anything to shield itself from watchdogs …

Rhee’s group was coordinating with an astroturf organization in Connecticut. (Photo credit: Flickr user angela n.)

Next month, the filmAi??Won’t Back Down will be released in theaters nationwide. This drama starring Maggie Gylenhall and Viola Davis — and backed by Walmart and the right-wing Anschutz Film Group — promotes the “parent trigger,” an American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) idea that would make it easier for schools to be turned over to private firms and for teachers to be fired.

The Daily Change has obtained documents showing collaboration between StudentsFirst — the group started by the anti-union former D.C. schools chancellor Michelle Rhee — and a group in Connecticut, the Connecticut Parents Union (CTPU), that is promoting Won’ t Back Down and ALEC’s parent trigger bill.

On March 14th, Rhee’s group held a rally on the steps of the Connecticut capitol to promote Ai??its education “reforms,” including the parent trigger. In doing so, it allied with CTPU. Unfortunately for Rhee and CTPU’sAi??educationAi??privatization agenda, very few people showed up to the event. Governor Malloy (D) declined to make an appearance, saying through a spokesman that Rhee had been a “divisive figure.”

The letter we received shows bitter infighting between StudentsFirst and CTPU. In a letter to CTPU, StudentsFirst General Counsel Angelia Dickens complains of the Connecticut astroturf group’s “effort to obtain financial compensation from StudentsFirst.” Dickens notes that StudentsFirst had repeatedly told CTPU founder Gwendolyn Samuel that it will not offer direct payments to her group and that Rhee’s group declined repeated requests from Jason Bartlett, a former state representative that now works with CTPU, to “put him on a financial retainer.”

In short, the letter exposes CTPU as being just as interested in if not more interested in enriching …

As for-profit virtual schools expand, are children getting the short end of the stick? (Photo credit: Flickr user Elizabeth Albert)

One of the biggest scams Corporate America is trying to foist on the nation is the privatization of our schools, often by promoting online education. The Nation’s Lee Fang documented last year how online learning companies are flooding state legislatures with lobbyists to win funding and mandates for online, for-profit charter schools and educational software.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker (R) used his budget last year toAi??quietly removeAi??the cap on student enrollment his state’s virtual charter schools, opening up a flood of taxpayer dollars for online education companies. The “Wisconsin Coalition of Virtual School Families,” a group promoting these companies, named Walker a “Rock Star of Education Reform” for this move.

But a new analysis shows that these online schools aren’t living up to lobbyists’ hype:

Enrollment in Wisconsinai??i??s online schools has doubled in the last five years, but students who have chosen class without a classroom often struggle to complete their degrees and repeat grades four times as often as their brick-and-mortar counterparts, according to a Gannett Wisconsin Media analysis. […]Ai??In the 2011-12 Wisconsin Student Assessment System testing,virtual students fared slightly betterAi??in reading than their brick-and-mortar counterparts, with 83.1 percent scoring proficient or advanced, compared with 81.9 percent statewide. ButAi??virtual students fell shortAi??in other subjects, with 5 percent to 12 percent fewer virtual students scoring proficient or advanced in math, social studies, language arts and science compared with the statewide average.

Promoting huge subsidies for private school education takes well-connected lobbying. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) …

The man at the microphone stood up to his congressman and his Koch Brothers backers.

Lobbyists for big natural gas companies and drillers have been leaning on Washington to support the controversial and dangerous process of fracking.

Last week, one of Rep. Dan Lungren’s (R-CA) constituents confronted him at a town hall about his support for fracking and the over $100,000 of oil money his campaigns have received from the oil industry:

CONSTITUENT: You implied later that [earlier] evening that you support research into alternative energy sources. One that we hear brought about is natural gas, which is obtained by a process known as fracking, or hydraulic fracking. This process of drilling has actually caused earthquakes in Ohio and it has polluted rivers and it has polluted sources of drinking water for humans so that it’s not for drinking for humans or animals. And in 2005 you voted for an exemption in the Clean Water Act which would allow this process to go unchecked. You’ve been an avid supporter of deregulation of Big Oil as well as the beneficiary of $173,000 from Big Oil and Big Gas according to Oil Change International [light audience applause]. So why did you vote against the law that would inform citizens if there are dangerous toxic chemicals released into their neighborhoods or their workplace. How can we trust you to protect our environment and to protect our public health with this track record? [raucous audience applause].

Following the constituent’s question, Lungren replied, “There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that any earthquakes were caused by fracking,” provoking laughter and cries of “No!” from the audience.

Watch the exchange between Lungren and his constituent:

Following the question and answer session, an independent filmmaker asked the constituent about his query. “[Lungren] …

A coal-fired power plant. (Photo credit: Public Domain Photos)

The Cleveland Plain Dealer has a story of how one group of workers lost out when Republican nominee for president Mitt Romney came to town for a routine campaign stop.

On August 14th, Romney visited the Century Mine near Beallsville, Ohio to “promote jobs” in the coal industry. For “safety and security” reasons, the mine was shut down during the candidate’s visit. Several coal workers employed by Murray Energy, which operates the mine, told local radio host Gary Blomquist that they were intimidated into appearing at the Romney event:

Blomquist said that he got multiple emails and phone calls from Murray Energy workers who felt that they were intimidated into attending Romney’s appearance. He said employees were told they’d have to forfeit the day’s pay unless they could make up their missed hoursAi??on overtime or weekends.

“If they shut the mine down, why should they lose a day’s pay? There are some guys that just want to go to work, feed their family and go home,” said Blomquist.

Ironically, Romney used the event to appeal to the coal lobby, blasting the supposed “war on coal.” If the details relayed by the workers at the mine are correct, it seems that these particular coal miners would’ve been better off had Romney never visited.

Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY)

In August of 2011, Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY) faced a town hall packed full of his constituents who opposed the controversial gas drilling process of fracking. Here’s an excerpt of a local news article at the time detailing how Reed defended the practice to his angry constituents:

Reed made no bones about his view on the subject ai??i?? heai??i??s in favor ofAi??frackingAi??the Marcellus Shale if it can be done cleanly and responsibly, which he believes it can.Ai??ai???I am a supporter of the industry, natural gas,ai??? Reed said.

His view drew ire from those in attendance.Ai??ai???Our town in Troy, Pa., is ruinedai??? because of gas drilling, one woman said. ai???I could tell you horror stories. The things we live every day … They call it Gastown now. It doesnai??i??t even have its name anymore.ai???

Reed’s constituents were enraged at his defense of fracking in their backyards. Ai??But maybe it wasn’t his constituents he was trying to appeal to. In the weeks and months following that town hall, gas lobbyists showered Reed withAi??sizableAi??donations from their political action committees (PACs):

– The National Fuel Gas Political Action Committee: This group gave Reed $2,000 on September 8th, approximately a week and a half after the town hall. This is the PAC of the National Fuel company, which not surprisingly has been operating in the Marcellus Shale area that Reed wants to expand drilling in.

– The American Gas Association Political Action Committee: This power-house D.C.-based group for gas companies and their lobbyists wrote Reed a $1,000 check exactly two weeks after the Natural Fuel Gas PAC donated to him.

– America’s Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA) Political Action Committee: This PAC gave Reed a $2,400 check on October 1st, 2011. ANGA …

An anti-ALEC protest in Minnesota last March. (Photo credit: Flickr user Fibonacci Blue)

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a powerful front group that works to pass corporate-friendly legislation in state legislatures. But since the backlash against voter suppression and Stand Your Ground laws, a flood of corporations have exited the group.

Today, Color Of Change announced that six more corporations are leaving ALEC.Ai??General Electric, The Western Union Company, Sprint Nextel Corporation, Symantec Corporation, and Reckitt Benckiser Group plc. have all announced that they have cut ties with ALEC.

Americans continue to slowly learn more about this secretive corporate front group. E-mails released earlier this month show the strong ties between the group and right-wing lawmakers. In Ohio, e-mails “were sent through … [a] lawmaker’s office last year to arrange free meals and other perks for legislators from lobbyists at events sponsored by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council.”

Join With PCCC And Tell AT&T To Drop ALEC

Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown likes to brag about how he helped pass the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Here’s a campaign commercial he put out about this claim:

But something curious happened exactly one week after he voted with the majority of the Senate to pass the bill. Morgan Stanley’s Political Action Committee gave him a $2,500 check.

If the Dodd-Frank bill was so tough, why is it that one of Wall Street’s most infamous institutions would give Brown a large check a week after he voted to pass it?

What Scott doesn’t mention in his boasting is that he was the swing vote in the Senate that worked to make the financial reform law more bank-friendly. He successfully forced Democrats to abandon a bank tax and weakened the Volcker Rule. He also voted against killing “naked credit default swaps,” a financial instrument that the European Parliament partially banned in 2011. Morgan Stanley famously lost billions of dollars in its dealings with credit default swaps.

“I’ll work with anyone to get things done,” Brown brags in the commercial above. “Anyone” apparently includes mega-banks like Morgan Stanley whose risky behavior caused a Great Recession we’re all still living with.

When you’re dealing with an unpopular, polluting technology like fracking, you’ve got to really work to get lawmakers to support it. So the fracking industry — natural gas suppliers and drillers — are doing everything they can to cozy with politicians. Here’s one small example:

The group calling itself Ai??”Cheap Natural Gas Now” (CNG Now) — which is made up of various gas and fracking interests like the American Gas Association and gas tycoon T. Boone Pickens’s Pickens Plan — has set up shop at the Republican National Convention. It’s inviting attendees to stop by and get some free espresso:

CNG Now also boasts on Twitter that natural gas shuttles are being provided at the convention. Right-wing media personalities S. E. Cupp and Geraldo Rivera also apparently stopped by the group’s booth today. Let’s hope they asked what that espresso was made out of before they took a sip.

ABC News’ Michael Falcone reports that just as Tropical Storm Isaac is on the verge strengthening into a full-fledged hurricane, a liberal advocacy group is attempting to turn the bad weather into an attack on Republicans as they kick off their convention on Monday. This morning the Progressive Change Campaign Committee unveiled a series of web ads that they intend hundreds of thousands of Floridians to see during the week of the convention. Those who click on the ads will be directed to a site that accuses GOP leaders, including Mitt Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, of voting to curtail funding for disaster relief.