News you may have missed...

Got an item about liberal lunacy? Conservative success? Send it in to ESR's Tidbits section! Several items originally appeared in publications by the National Center for Public Policy Research which can be found at http://www.nationalcenter.org

League of Private Property Voters names champions and enemies of private property in Congressional vote index

The League of Private Property Voters (LPPV) named 35 US Senators and 214 Representatives as Champions of Private Property Rights. It also named 34 Senators and 110 Representatives as Enemies of Private Property Rights.

The 1998 Vote Index rates the first session of the 105th Congress: Members of the House on twelve key property rights votes and Senators on' 6 key votes plus co- sponsorship of S 781, the Omnibus Private Property Rights Act.

Key House roll call votes were Endangered Species Act, Biosphere and World Heritage Programs, Forest Service Roads funding, National Monument Designation, United Nations Land Designation, Private Property Rights - Local Land Use Decision Appeals, and Grazing Fees/Rangeland Management. Key Senate roll call votes were RS 2477 Rights of Way, Hardrock Mining Depletion Allowance and Public Lands fees, Ninth Circuit Court reorganization, Forest Service Roads funding, and American Heritage Rivers Initiative funding.

"These scores show that the issue of private property Is a significant consideration as Members chose how to vote on legislation." said Chuck Cushman, chairman of LPPV. "As voters become more aware of how their private property rights are jeopardized every day in Congress, they pay more attention to how the Private Property Congressional Vote Index scores their elected officials. Being a Champion of Property Rights is becoming more important to Members of Congress with each congressional session."

To be named as a Champion of Property Rights, a Member must receive a 75 per cent score or better. Among the Senators named were: Allard (R-CO), Bennett (R-UT), Burns (R-MT), Campbell (R-CO), Craig (R-ID), Enzi (R-WY), Gorton (R-WA), Gramm (R-TX), Grams (R-MN), Hatch (R-UT), Helms (R-NC), Hutchinson (R-AR), Hutchison (R-TX), Inhofe (R-OK), Kyl (R-AZ), Lott (R-MS), Lugar (R-IN), Murkowski ' I (R-AK), Nickles (R-OK), Santorum (R-PA), Smith (R-OR), Stevens (R-AK), and Thomas (R-WY).

Among the Representatives named Champions were: Archer (R-TX), Armey (R-TX), Baker (R-LA), Bono (R-CA), Boswell (D-IA), Buyer (R-IN), Byrant (R-TN), Calvert (R-CA), Campbell (R-CA), Canady (R-FL), Cannon (R-UT), Chenoweth (R-ID), Coburn (R-OK), Condit (D-CA), Cox (R-CA), Crapo (R-ID), Cubin (R-WY), Danner (D-MO), Delahunt (D- MA), Doolittle (R-CA), Dunn (R-WA), Edwards (D-TX), Ensign (R-NV), Gallegly (R-CA), Gibbons (R-NV), Goode (D-VA), Hall (D-TX), Hansen (R-UT), Hastings (R-WA), Hayworth (R-AZ), Herger (R-CA), Hill (R-MT), Holden (D-PA), Kolbe (k-AZ), Largent (R-OK), McIntosh (R-IN), Metcalf (R-WA), Peterson (D-MN), Pickett (b-VA), Pombo (R-CA), Radanovich (R-CA), Riggs (R-CA), Ryun (R-KS), Sandlin (D-TX), Schaefer, D (R-CO), Schaffer, B (R-CO), Shadegg (R-AZ), Sisisky (D-VA), Skelton (D'-MO), Smith, B (R-OR), Smith, L (R-WA), Solomon (R-NY), Stenholm (D-TX), Sununu (R-NH), Tauzin (R-LA), Taylor (D-MS), Taylor (R-NC), Traficant (D-OH), Turner (D-TX), Wamp (R-TN), and Young (R-AK).

To be named as an Enemy of Property Rights, a Member must receive a 30 per cent score or lower. Among the Senators named were: Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Bumpers (D-AR), Chafee (R-RI), Collins (R-ME), Daschle (D-SD), Feinstein (D-CA), Gregg (R-NH), Jeffords (R-VT), Johnson (D-SD), Kerrey (D-NE), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Murray (D- WA), Reid (D-NV), Snowe (R-ME), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (I)-OR).

Among the Representatives named Enemies were: Allen (R-ME), Baldacci (D-ME), Blumenauer (D-OR), Capps (D-CA), Castle (R-DE), DeFazio (D-0@), Dicks (D-WA), Farr (D-CA), Fazio (D-CA), Gephardt (D-MO), Hinchey (D-NY), Hooley (D-OR), Leach (R-IA), Rahall (D-WV), Sanchez (D-CA), Sanders (I-VT), Saxton (R-NJ), Schumer (D-NY), Skaggs (D-CO), Smith, A (D-WA), Stupak (D-MI), Vento (D-MN), and Visclosky (D-IN).

LPPV and the Congressional Vote Index are non-partisan. The Senate has five Republicans counted among the Enemies of Property Rights, The House shows 23 Democrats as Champions and 15 Republicans that are Enemies of Private Property Rights.

LPPV formed in 1990 to track Congressional votes on property rights issues. This is the 6th Vote Index published, with almost half a million copies of the 1995-96 Vote Index distributed. LPPV plans to mail a million copies of the 1998 Vote Index. Over 600 grassroots private property rights and Wise Use groups belong to LPPV and co-sponsor the Vote Index.

Their dedication is inspiring...

In New York City, the Congress for Racial Equality discontinued an internship program aimed at disadvantaged youth after the state ruled that it must pay interns minimum wage.

El Nino? El loco!

Concerns among many climatologists that the recurring Pacific Ocean warming known as El Nino may lead to more catastrophic weather problems have attracted the attention of Vice President Al Gore. Though it is still a little-understood phenomenon of unknown risk, scientists generally agree that El Nino occurs every decade or so and tends to shift volatility of weather patterns from the Atlantic (where hurricanes are common) to the Pacific Ocean basin. This year, the westward ocean current targeting equatorial South America's Pacific coastline is particularly warm, leading to concerns over the magnitude of its effect on the weather.

After Gore warned California residents of potentially severe weather, the area's roofing repair business boomed and flood insurance sold at record rates under a taxpayer-subsidized program run by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. But critics call the FEMA program a Ponzi scheme, saying that the agency must promote it through ever-greater scare tactics to keep ahead of obligations, and charge that the subsidies encourage building in risky areas.

Gore also linked the El Nino phenomenon to global warming, claiming that the severity and frequency of the former has increased dramatically along with carbon dioxide emissions. (The Vice President, however, was compelled to concede there was no evidence for his assertion.) At the Kyoto climate conference, Gore cited insurance payouts as evidence of increased severity of weather events in general. The Vice President announced, "We have had many such [severe storms] in recent years. Our insurance industry encountered an event with losses of more than $1 billion only once prior to 1988. Since that time they have encountered 17 such events."

Actually, there have been only 10 such costly catastrophes since 1988, three of which (two earthquakes, one fire) were not weather-related. Of the remainder, the property-claims service division of the American Services Group, which certifies catastrophic occurrences for the insurance industry, offers a different interpretation: "Despite their economic impact, only Hurricane Andrew (#3) ranks among the top-10 most intense hurricanes during the period 1900-1996. In fact, only two storms since 1980 (Hugo 1989 and Andrew 192) rank among the most intense storms of the century." They add: "The apparent disparity of damage created by recent hurricanes and their intensity is a product of demographic shifts and escalating building values. Since 1940, population density in the 50-mile corridor within the U.S. coastline has increased from 44 people per square mile to over 140. More than half the U.S. population now lives within 50 miles of the coast."

No wonder why my mother wanted me to be a lawyer

Federal Circuit Judge Harold Jeffrey Cohen ruled against the state of Florida's $11.3 billion claim against tobacco companies, pointing out that if the $2.8 billion claim by its lawyers was accurate, they would have been working at $7 716 an hour for 24 hours a day for the 42 months the case lasted.

California...land of the moron? Well, a few anyway

Two entrepreneurs in Fountain Valley, California, wanted to open a cigar lounge featuring a gourmet menu, a full bar, and Internet access. When they applied for a business permit, however, the town's residents rejected the idea. While locals were concerned about the cancer-causing effects of cigars and worried over the availability of parking, they were mainly concerned with the effects of mixing alcohol and the Internet. "How are we going to protect our women after these guys get liquored up, look at pornography, and then roam the neighborhood late at night?" intoned one concerned citizen. Local police also opposed "uncontrolled Internet access."

Detective Sgt. Paul McGinnis commented, "I've never actually been on the Internet, but my understanding is that you can get just about anything you want on there."

Including Enter Stage Right!

Costa Rica elects conservative president

At the beginning of February, Costa Ricans elected Miguel Angel Rodriguez, a conservative economist, as their new president.

Rodriguez, 48, a wealthy businessman and economist, was seeking the presidency for the third time. He lost to the current president, Jose Maria Figueres, by only 20 000 votes in the 1994 election.

Rodriguez made the economy the cornerstone of his campaign, although he offered few specific proposals. He said he would privatize some state companies, but not all. And he said he would seek foreign investment "for the massive creation of jobs."

Most of all, he criticized what he called Figueres' mismanagement of the country's finances.

"Figueres' government started with an immense increase in public spending, then financed it with more taxes," Rodriguez said at a news conference the day after his win. "That took the country into a great recession."

During Figueres' term, production barely kept up with population growth, consumer prices rose 61 percent and inflation was 12 percent -- double the average rise in salaries. In a country of 3.4 million people, the budget deficit stands at $3.6 billion.

"What does the AFL-CIO have to hide?" Asks journalist thrown out of union press conference

In a move chilling to freedom of the press, operatives for the AFL-CIO forced Political Money Monitor Editor David W. Almasi to return documents originally given to him during a press briefing at the labor union's national headquarters.

"I find it very odd that an organization that just spent more than an hour lecturing journalists on a perceived threat to its First Amendment freedom would restrict my ability as a journalist to report on what they told us," said Mr. Almasi. "It makes me wonder what they are trying to hide?"

Political Money Monitor is a biweekly newsletter focusing on campaign finance issues. Mr. Almasi was attending the labor union's press briefing at its national headquarters on federal and state legislation and ballot initiatives to prohibit labor unions and employers from using money taken from employee paychecks to pay for political activity a contentious campaign finance reform proposal.

As Mr. Almasi tried to leave the union's briefing, two AFL-CIO staffers told him he would have to return the briefing materials given to him if he could not produce press credentials. Refusing to accept his business card, the staffers called AFL-CIO security personnel. Mr. Almasi chose to surrender the materials.

"During the briefing, union officials said that payroll protection measures on the ballot in California and in many statehouses were a direct threat to their freedom to communicate with their membership. Then they tell me, under threat of force, that I cannot communicate their message to my readership," said Mr. Almasi. "I find this behavior very disturbing."

Federal funds used against initiative

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) President William B. Gould IV, the head of the government agency charged with interpreting and enforcing federal labor law, publicly announced his opposition to Proposition 226.

During a February 4 speech in Sacramento, Gould declared, "As a Californian voting by mail. . .  I shall cast my ballot against [Proposition 226] because I think that it is designed to deny unions and working families a voice in our society."  A press release announcing Mr. Gould¹s opposition to Proposition 226 was prepared by the NLRB staff and distributed over the privately-operated PR Newswire service.

Mark Bucher, the co-chairman of the campaign to pass Proposition 226, sent a memo to congressional supporters to ask them to question Mr. Gould about his high-profile opposition against the Initiative and the "use of government resources to wage a political battle against payroll protection."  He added, "For a federal government employee to use his official position and taxpayer dollars to actively campaign against a proposed ballot measure is an outrage that Mr. Gould should be required to justify."

Bill seeks to take 100 000 IRS agents off the street...

Representatives Steve Largent (R-OK) and Bill Paxon (R-NY) have unveiled a plan that could take more than 100 000 IRS agents off the streets. The plan, the Tax Code Termination Act (H.R. 3097), would sunset the IRS Code on December 31, 2001. The bill, which already has some 114 co-sponsors, is being offered to curb abuses and waste by the IRS. The current IRS code is over 3 458 pages in length, twice the length of the Bible, and requires over 110 000 employees to administer and police at an annual cost of $9.8 billion. With so many people policing the tax collection system, with little accountability, it's no wonder so many people now fear the IRS.

The current IRS code is also incredibly inefficient. Its been estimated that taxpayers spend 5 billion hours each year and some $225 billion preparing their tax returns. "The Tax Code Termination Act eliminates the questions of 'if' and 'when' we end the current tax code," said Representative Largent. "It sets a date certain for the enactment of a new tax system, one that I hope will be simpler, fairer and applies one rate, one time, to all  taxpayers."

...and maybe bring them to Canada

Revenue Canada will begin watching out for people they consider tax cheats. Those people? The so-called "squeegee kids." Squeegee kids are those who wash vehicle windshields at busy intersections and take donations.

"I hate to sound like a scrooge on this because it's good to see people out there doing these kinds of things and taking the initiative," said Revenue Canada spokesman Gordon Luchia. "But that income is fully taxable."

Luchia said the teens are making money like any other self-employed individual who offers a service for a fee.

"They have to report income from all sources, like tips and gratuities," he said. "People are required to keep track of income and expenses and report them properly on their tax return."

So how much money are these kids making that Revenue Canada is worried about this problem? According to CP story, not much. One 18-year old in Calgary, Alberta said she would rather "wash windshields for $5 to $60 a day than beg."

The teen stated that she since she cannot obtain a business licence, she considers the money she receives a donation.

Calgary city counsellor Jon Lord is floored by Ottawa's move.

"I think it's extremely petty for Revenue Canada to pursue a couple of kids who may have panhandled."

News you may have missed...

Smallest U.S. government in 35 years? Not exactly

Boasting that the federal government is the smallest it has been in 35 years, President Clinton used his State of the Union address to call for a new wave of government spending on everything from subsidized baby-sitting to an expansion of the Medicare system. The Cato Institute's Steve Moore estimates that the President's complete package of new spending, if approved, would cost at least $200 billion over five  years.

Perhaps such a high level of new spending could be justified in the minds of many Americans if the President's claim about the size of government was correct. It's not. Federal expenditures -- one of the best measure of the size of government -- have increased from $106.8 billion in 1962 to more than $1.6 trillion in 1997, a close to 14-fold increase. Even as a percentage of GDP, federal expenditures have risen from 18.8 per cent of GDP in 1962 to 20.1 per cent of GDP in 1997. The best the President can claim is that the size of government is the smallest it's been since 1974. That was the last time federal spending as a percentage of GDP fell below 20.1 per cent, at 18.7 per cent. But even this modest achievement appears to have more to do with the end of the Cold War than any budgetary discipline exhibited by either the President or Congress. While defense spending declined from 9.3 per cent of GDP in 1962 to 3.3 per cent of GDP in 1997, all other spending skyrocketed from 9.5 per cent to 17 per cent of GDP during the same period. Now that the defense budget has been pared to the bone, the total size of government can be expected to rise.

A surprise member of the "vast right-wing conspiracy"?

From a recent edition of The Federalist Digest: Stranger than fiction, what do District of Columbia tag numbers 800 001 and 800 002 have in common.  Well, 002 belongs to Mr. Clinton, and is on his personal bulletproof limousine.  So, you’re thinking 001 belongs to Hillary?  Actually, believe it or not, 800 001 is on Ken Starr’s car.  Guess that makes Mr. Clinton #2 in the "vast right-wing conspiracy."

We had it wrong! What Hillary Clinton can teach Chinese Communists!

Around the world, Hillary Clinton“s ability to manipulate public opinion with "little or no substance and no reasoning" has been chosen as a model by the Chinese Communist Party . Yu Quanyu in an article in Ideological and Political Work Studies at Beijing“s Academy of Social Sciences, says that Mrs. Clinton“s methodology and style is an excellent example for his comrades. Certainly her "vast Right-wing conspiracy" claim in defense of her husbands infidelity is a shining example.

Support for Kempthorne ESA Bill weaker than claimed: Bill backers speak for organizations without their permission

Did you fall a few groups short of the number needed to make your newspaper advertisement look really impressive?  No problem, just make a few up.  That at least appears to be the view of the Endangered Species Coordinating Council, a timber industry- backed coalition group that supports Senator Dirk Kempthorne's Endangered Species Act bill.

On February 2, the Coordinating Council ran a full-page ad in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call listing over 200 organizations and companies as backers of Idaho Senator Dirk Kempthorne's Endangered Species Recovery  Act (S. 1180).  The only problem is that a number of the organizations listed do not support the bill.  One such group is the San Joaquin County Citizen Land Alliance.  The lesson here is that the timber industry's supporter lists should be viewed with a great deal of skepticism.

While support for the Kempthorne bill is apparently dwindling, opposition to the bill is picking up.  Opposing the bill are: California and New Mexico Cattlemen, and the California, Florida, Washington, Wyoming, and New Mexico farm bureaus.

Just how bad is the Kempthorne bill?  "It's so bad even [Secretary of Interior] Bruce Babbitt likes it... Instead of requiring the Secretary to compensate landowners when the ESA restricts the use of their property, S. 1180 requires landowners to compensate the Secretary for the right to use their own land," writes the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Ike Sugg in a just-released commentary.  "Yet Senator Kempthorne's office has the audacity to claim that his bill is actually a 'property rights bill of rights.'  This is Orwellian doublespeak akin to claiming the IRS code is actually a 'taxpayers' bill of rights.'"

We knew the Kyoto Conference was full of hot air... 2,559 tons of it

From the Relief Report: The Relief Report's thanks to People for the USA's January 1998 issue for this tidbit: During last December's global warming summit in Kyoto, Japan, conference delegates produced some 2,559 tons of carbon dioxide, according to A Seed Japan, a Japanese environmental group.  A Seed Japan further noted that this represents about half the yearly emissions of Kiribati, a small Pacific Island.   We told you the delegates were full of hot air.

Why my mother wanted me to be a lawyer II

In early February, a U.S.judge ruled that a $349 million settlement of a second hand smoke lawsuit will stand despite the fact that lawyers will collect $46 million while the plaintiffs will collect nothing!

The class action lawsuit, in which some 60 000 nonsmoking flight attendants sued the tobacco industry for secondhand smoke injuries, was settled last October.

The lawsuit alleged the cigarette makers knew the dangers to nonsmokers of cigarette smoke, and hid the health risks from flight attendants and other Americans. It was the first class-action lawsuit against the tobacco industry -- and the first suit addressing secondhand smoke -- to go to trial.

In the settlement, the tobacco industry agreed to pay $300 million to create a foundation to study the effects of cigarette smoke on flight attendants (now that's a foundation!), and to pay the legal fees and expenses of the flight attendants' attorneys.

While the settlement was in the flight attendants' favor, a small but growing number now feel the agreement was harmful because it left all 60 000 flight attendants out in the cold.

Their frustrations center on Stanley and Susan Rosenblatt, husband and wife attorneys who represented the flight attendants and negotiated the settlement.

The couple also saw to it that the tobacco industry would pay $46 million for their legal fees and expenses -- but again, not a penny to the actual plaintiffs!

Dade County Circuit Judge Robert Kaye said in his court order upholding the settlement, that it was "fair, reasonable, adequate and in the best interests of the class."

According to court documents, the approval of the settlement means the Rosenblatts will immediately receive their first payment, $3 million. They will receive the rest of the money, $40 million-plus, only if they successfully overcome objections to a suit in the appeals process.

I thought we already proved this methodology to be bogus

Let is be known that Enter Stage Right truly does believe that women receive far more than their fair share of sexual harassment and that we don't like it, but the following tidbit proves that bad "research" is still being done on behalf of people with agendas other than simply eliminating sexual harassment.

More than one-third of American female doctors say they have been sexually harassed, according to a survey that suggests the problem isn't disappearing from the medical profession.

Overall, 47.7 percent reported having been targets of gender-based harassment, and 36.9 percent reported having been sexually harassed, researchers say in a issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.

The 1993-94 nationwide survey did not ask women to specify what behavior they thought constituted harassment, only whether they believed it had occurred.

"Present thought characterizes sexual harassment as primarily a manifestation of power, rather than sexual attraction. The profession of medicine, particularly in academic settings, may be especially prone to harassment because of the importance of hierarchy," stated the authors.

Ah yes, hierarchy. Now we know what that other agenda is. And of course, the survey only polled one group. Guess who? If the esteemed editor of ESR had attempted to submit such a methodology in his thesis class several years ago, he would today be still working on that very same thesis...which also involved gender-based differences in hierarchical interactions in (yes, this is true) academic settings. I knew university would be useful.

Black Leadership Network outraged over snub of former congressman over school choice

Former Congressman Floyd Flake (D-NY) was abruptly uninvited to the Indiana Black Legislative Caucus Prayer Breakfast earlier in February because some members of the Caucus objected to his support of school vouchers, an issue which was to be mentioned in his speech.

Project 21 member Jackie Cissell, an associate with the Indiana Family Institute in Indianapolis, said, "Considering that 87 per cent of Black America support school vouchers, it is outrageous that the desire to empower parents in the education of their children is not on the agenda of some of Indiana's Black legislators. Because the content his speech could not be dictated, he was thrown off their plantation. The leadership is so out of touch at the detriment of our children."

Censoring Representative Flake is unacceptable, says the Black leadership network Project 21. Members agree with Rev. Flake that progress for the black community is found in education and community empowerment, not government programs. Project 21 also agrees with the ex-lawmaker that many black Democrats are too beholden to special interest groups (particularly labor unions), and that most black leaders are mired in the protest politics of the civil rights era and waste precious energy advocating welfare and affirmative action.

Rev. Flake is the pastor of the 9,000-member Allen A.M.E. Church and founder of the highly successful 480-student Allen Christian School in Jamaica (Queens), New York. He has emerged as one of America's most prominent black proponents of federally-funded vouchers for private schools, angering other African American leaders. Rev. Flake, who often criticized the Republican Party for everything from minimum wage increases to advocating the elimination of the Department of Education, blames the poor performance of many black public school students on what he sees as a complicated set of social realities ranging from low expectations of white teachers for black students to teacher union interference to substandard expectations some blacks set for themselves.

"You can't claim to represent the Black community and work to silence dissenting voices in the community," said Indiana resident and Project 21 member Maurice Broaddus. "Black leadership had better catch on to the fact that we can't continue to ignore the sorry state of education in our community. We have got to learn to prepare for the future if we as black people are to have a future at all. That starts with the best education we can give our children -- not petty black politics."

"I'm not surprised," said Rev. Mike Ramey, an associate minister of the Greater St. Mark Baptist Church in Indianapolis, Indiana and Project 21 member. "Members of the Indiana Black Legislative Caucus and the hit movie 'Titanic' have a lot in common. The builders of the Titanic said it wouldn't sink, and Caucus members are saying the same thing about the issue of public education in that they are more interested in how nice the deck chairs feel rather than paying attention to the sounds and sights of the water coming into the boat."

Upping the ante for political choice in Nevada; voters to consider paycheck protection amendment to state constitution

Nevada voters will go to the polls this November to decide whether or not employers and labor unions can involuntarily use employee payroll deductions for politics.

Specifically, the "Payroll Protection Initiative" (PPI) will amend the Nevada Constitution to make it illegal for employers and unions to "compel or require a worker to make a political contribution as a condition of employment, a condition of contract or as a condition of membership in a labor organization." Workers choosing to participate in a payroll deduction system would be required to give annual written approval.

Because the PPI is a constitutional amendment, Nevada law requires it to be approved twice. Therefore, a victory in November would require a similar campaign in 2000. Passage a second time would put it into effect immediately.

Recent polls by Opinions of Nevada and the Nevada Republican Party both found 74 per cent approval for the PPI. The GOP poll found 70 per cent support in union households. PPI organizers say there "should be no problem at all" collecting the signatures of 46,764 Nevada voters by June 16 to qualify for the ballot.

The Nevada State AFL-CIO has already created a political action committee to oppose the PPI, and says it plans to at least match pro-PPI campaign spending. It is also collecting signatures to run competing ballot initiatives in an attempt to blunt the PPI's popularity.

AFL-CIO to earmark $20 million to fight paycheck protection

When the AFL-CIO Executive Committee meets in Las Vegas, Nevada on March 18, they are expected to approve a $20 million political budget that will be spent primarily on attempts to defeat paycheck protection legislation and ballot initiatives at the state and federal level. AFL-CIO officials have already said they plan to spend $8-10 million in the state of California alone to defeat Proposition 226, which would require labor unions to obtain annual permission from every member before using his or her's dues money for political activity. Union leaders are also talking about making more political donations to Republican candidates at the federal level in an effort to stop federal paycheck protection legislation. In a switch from giving almost exclusively to Democratic candidates in past elections, Roll Call quoted an unnamed top labor official who said, "We are willing to work with anyone who works with us."

Current Issue

Archive Main | 1998

E-mail ESR




© 1996-2020, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.