Saturday, May 27, 2023

Oil


  • BP returned to Iraq in 2009 after a 35-year absence and was awarded a significant interest in the country’s largest oil field near British-occupied Basra
  • BP has pumped 262m barrels of Iraqi oil since 2011
  • Sir John Sawers, the UK’s first special representative to Iraq after invasion, has banked £1.1m since joining BP’s board in 2015
  • Other UK oil “supermajor” Shell also won Iraq contract in 2009 as lead operator developing “super-giant” Majnoon oil field

BP has pumped oil worth £15.4bn in Iraq since 2011 when it began production in the country for the first time in nearly four decades, new analysis shows.

The new information comes on the 20-year anniversary of the beginning of the invasion of Iraq, which was judged to be illegal by the UN. However, neither US president George W Bush nor British prime minister Tony Blair, the leaders who prosecuted the war, have been subjects of a criminal investigation. 

The invasion began in March 2003 and unleashed a catastrophic humanitarian disaster with an estimated 655,000 Iraqis killed in the first three years of conflict, or 2.5% of the population. 

It was widely denounced as a war for oil on the part of the US and UK: Iraq holds the world’s fifth largest proven oil reserves. Iraq had no connection to the September 11th terrorist attacks which had taken place 18 months before and initiated the so-called “War on Terror”. 

The data on BP’s post-invasion production in Iraq comes from the company’s annual reports and was calculated using the average annual price for a barrel of oil for each year of production. 

From 2011-22, BP pumped 262m barrels of Iraqi oil.


Of course it was about oil.


Alan Greenspan, the consummate Washington insider and long-time head of the US central bank, has backed the position taken by many anti-war critics - that the invasion of Iraq was motivated by oil.

His claim comes in his newly published autobiography, The Age of Turbulence, in which he also castigates George Bush's administration for making "grave mistakes" in economic policy.

Sounding more like an activist than a lifelong Republican who worked alongside six US presidents, Mr Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman, said in an interview with the Guardian that the invasion of Iraq was aimed at protecting Middle East oil reserves: "I thought the issue of weapons of mass destruction as the excuse was utterly beside the point."

Mr Greenspan said it was clear to him that Saddam Hussein had wanted to control the Straits of Hormuz and so control Middle East oil shipments through the vital route out of the Gulf. He said that had Saddam been able to do that it would have been "devastating to the west" as the former Iraqi president could have just shut off 5m barrels a day and brought "the industrial world to its knees".

In the book Mr Greenspan writes: "Whatever their publicised angst over Saddam Hussain's 'weapons of mass destruction', American and British authorities were also concerned about violence in the area that harbours a resource indispensable for the functioning of the world economy. I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."

Asked to explain his remark, he said: "From a rational point of view, I cannot understand why we don't name what is evident and indeed a wholly defensible pre-emptive position."



On September 24, 2007, Amy Goodman (DEMOCRACY NOW!) hosted a debate between Alan Greenspan and Naomi Klein:

NAOMI KLEIN: Well, I’m just wondering if it troubles Mr. Greenspan at all that wars over resources in other countries are actually illegal. Mr. Greenspan has praised the rule of law, the importance of the rule of law, in his book. But in his statements about the reasons why this has not been publicly discussed, he has said that it’s not politically expedient at this moment. But it’s not just that it’s not politically expedient, Mr. Greenspan. Are you aware that, according to the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Conventions, it is illegal for one country to invade another over its natural resources?

ALAN GREENSPAN: No. What I was saying is that the issue which, as you know, most people who were pressing for the war were concerned with were weapons of mass destruction. I personally believed that Saddam was behaving in a way that he probably very well had, almost certainly had, weapons of mass destruction. I was surprised, as most, that he didn’t. But what I was saying is that my reason for being pleased to see Saddam out of office had nothing to do with the weapons of mass destruction. It had to do with the potential threat that he could create to the rest of the world.

NAOMI KLEIN: Yes, I realize that, but he was not simply deposed. The U.S. invaded Iraq, occupied it and took control over its resources. And under international law, that it is illegal to wage wars to gain access to other countries’, sovereign countries’, natural resources.

ALAN GREENSPAN: Yes. No, I’m fully aware of the fact that that is a highly, terribly important issue. And as I said in other commentaries, I have always thought the issue of what essentially amounts to what is often called preemptive, preventive action on the part of some countries to secure resources or something else like that, it’s an issue that goes back to the Cold War, when we had the very difficult moral dilemma of what do you do when you think a missile is coming in our direction and you’re not sure whether it’s an accident or not an accident. And that is a problem which I think is a deep moral problem in civilized society. And the issue is one which I don’t think we’re going to resolve very easily. And as you point out, yes, I am a believer in the rule of law, and I think it is a critical issue, not only for domestic economies, but for the world economy as a whole.


It was not about liberation.  It was not about freedom.  It was not about compassion or caring or humanitarian issues.  It was about oil.


Sara* is one of the many survivors of the Islamic State's mass enslavement of Yazidis in northern Iraq and, since being rescued in 2017, still lives in a roadside tent as part of an informal IDP camp.

With limited support from the authorities, Western NGOs have become a lifeline for Sara and other displaced people.

However, there are now increasing concerns that a number of these NGOs have another purpose beyond merely providing aid - proselytising the Christian faith.

“The Christians teach us English in the camp and take us to a Duhok church for two hours between classes,” said Sara.


Not really sure what to say to that.  The Yazidis were targeted by ISIS.  We noted that in real time.  However, when their representatives began recruiting support in DC, we also noted that they were getting in bed with the wrong people.  It was the Christian NGOs.  So, maybe, the rank-and-file need to speak to their representatives about trades they made for support back in 2014.

Tensions are all over Iraq these days.  There are some who are bothered by the kingdom of Jordan's decision to allow the Baath Party to participate in the political process.  In Iraq, Saddam Hussein was the figurehead for the Baath Party.  The Baath Party always existed outside of Iraq -- it was a pan-Arab movement.  In Iraq and Syria, it took hold.  In other Arab countries, it might not have dominated but it was politically active.  THE CRADLE notes:

The Iraq’s Islamic Dawa Party described the decision of the Jordanian authorities to allow the Baath Party to resume political activities in Jordan as a “hostile and provocative act,” Iraqi Shafaq News reported on 26 May.

The Shia Dawa Party’s political office said in a statement that, “The Iraqis were surprised, shocked, and outraged by the news of the Jordanian government’s permission for the (Saddam’s Ba’ath) party to engage in political activity.”

On May 14, the Independent Electoral Commission in the Kingdom of Jordan approved the political participation of 27 new political parties, including the Arab Socialist Baath Party, whose Iraqi branch was led by long-time Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.



Iraqi political parties have expressed indignation after the Baath party’s licence was renewed in neighbouring Jordan. 

The Iraqi Islamic Al-Dawa party, which is the party of Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, expressed “shock and outrage” at Amman’s move. 

Jordan’s Independent Electoral Commission on 14 May approved the political participation of 27 political parties, including the Arab Socialist Baath Party, after changes to its electoral law required all existing political groups to be re-licensed to resume political activities in the country. 



Dawa is usually identified with former prime minister and forever thug Nouri al-Maliki but, yes, the present prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Saudani is also a leader of Dawa.  He differs from Nouri in at least one regard -- Mohammed never fled Iraq.  Unlike the cowards before him, he didn't flee the country and didn't have to wait for the US military to invade in 2003 in order to return to Iraq.

The following sites updated:


 

Posted by at

Gay actor George Maharis has died (Stan)

Stan just posted this at his site and he asked me if  I would repost it here (I will gladly):


Gay actor George Maharis has died

 

George Maharis has died.  He was many things.  But I've read the obit at THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER and at DEADLINE and they both ignore the man was gay. 


I knew he was gay when I was a kid.


It was the eighties.  I was watching one of my favorite programs and all excited because it was a two-parter and that meant that the next day there would be another episode with the storyline.


The next day?  It was in syndication.  It was a 70s show.  THE BIONIC WOMAN -- a great show starring a great actress Linsday Wagner.  I liked THE SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN but I loved THE BIONIC WOMAN.  Jamie was so cool and so friendly and bionic.  


So I'm bragging about this episode at dinner and my aunt was at dinner because she was staying with us while her house was being painted (inside of the house).  So she watches the second part with me the next day.  She enjoys it too and I'm thinking maybe Bob Welton, the police officer on the show, we'll be back for another episode later on.


Probably not, my aunt said.


Why?  


He's gay, the actor is gay, said my aunt.  


The actor playing Bob Welton in that two-parter who had such great chemistry with Lindsay Wagner.  This was in the 80s.


It's now 2023 and they can't note that the man who just died was gay?


I called C.I. to make sure and she said, yeah, he was gay.  She was surprised it wasn't in the obits.


But it's not.  Which is why I'm calling y post "Gay actor George Maharis has died" -- gay actor to burn the closet down.


My aunt knew, in the 80s, that he was gay and that he wouldn't get a continuing part on the show -- or any other -- because of it.

WIKIEPDIA notes:


In 1960, Maharis appeared as Buz Murdock in the TV series Route 66, which co-starred Martin Milner. Maharis was 32 at the time the series started, although the character he was playing was only 23. He received an Emmy nomination in 1962 for his continuing performance as Buz.

Maharis departed without completing his third season of the series, which saw him with health problems, including hepatitis.[3][4]

  

Maharis said he left Route 66 for health reasons, because of long hours and grueling conditions while shooting on location. "I have to protect my future", Maharis said in a 1963 interview. "If I keep going at the present pace, I'm a fool. Even if you have $4,000,000 in the bank, you can't buy another liver."[5]

Series producers Stirling Silliphant and Herbert B. Leonard disputed Maharis' stated position, arguing that he desired to break his contract in order to make movies.[5] Maharis biographer Karen Blocher wrote that "the producers felt betrayed and duped when they learned of Maharis's sexual orientation, and never trusted him again," and she speculated "in a less homophobic era, they might have communicated better, and worked things out."[6] After Maharis' departure, the show's appeal declined. Glenn Corbett acted in the role of Milner's new sidekick, Linc Case. A year later Route 66 was canceled.[citation needed] 

 

It's a single sentence ("sexual orientation" and "homophobic era") and nothing else in the entire entry.

 

 Back in 2020, David Ehrenstein wrote:



George Maharis has enjoyed a long career. But for all the different roles he’s played on stage and screen, he’s most famous for the TV series Route 66. It was obviously inspired by Jack Kerouac’s On the Road. But Maharis and co-star Martin Milner played the most buttoned-down “bohemians” ever seen — riding their sports car from place to place and interacting with people in a style more like that of friendly grocery clerks than beatniks.

Strikingly handsome as is clear from this photograph…

WalterFilm.com - George Maharis

10 x 8″ (25 x 20 cm.) photo, fine.

Maharis had a difficult time being his gay self, being obliged, as all actors were at that time, to stay in the closet. Arrested twice for having sex with men in restrooms (1967 and 1974), Maharis still managed to secure work up until 1993. At 92, he is officially retired and is still quite the looker.

 

 In 2012, GAY INFLUENCE noted:


Hollywood actor George Maharis (b. 1928) was arrested November 21, 1974 and charged with committing a sex act with a male hairdresser in the men's room of a gas station in Los Angeles. 46 years old at the time, Maharis was booked on a sex perversion charge and released on $500 bail. Six years earlier Maharis had been arrested by a vice squad officer for lewd conduct in the restroom of a Hollywood restaurant; the officer said Maharis made a pass at him.

Well, now that we have that out of the way...

Best known for his role as Buz Murdock on the hit 1960s CBS television series Route 66, Maharis had just posed nude for Playgirl magazine the year before his 1974 arrest. Route 66 was a 1960-1964 series about two guys and a Corvette who roamed the country together – often dressed in coats and ties, for no apparent reason. I kid you not. Maharis received an Emmy nomination for this role in 1962. However, Maharis left the wildly popular show before it ended its run, and there has been much speculation as to why.

 Maharis told the story that he had contracted infectious hepatitis in 1962, and that the shoots were so grueling that to continue would risk his health. He asked the producers to give him a less arduous schedule, but they refused, and he left the show, to be replaced by Glenn Corbett in the role of  Lincoln Case. However, others relate a different scenario. Route 66 producer Herbert B. Leonard found out that Maharis was gay and was having a hard time keeping his star’s sexual activities away from the press. Maharis also used the illness, Leonard said, as an excuse to break his contract so that he could get into movies. Co-star Martin Milner (in the role of Tod) and a Route 66 writer-producer confirm this version.

Maharis eventually did break into movies, but they were all forgettable B-grade films. Maharis also played stage roles, but nothing ever matched his success as Buz on Route 66, and the TV show never recovered from Maharis’s departure.

According to Karen Blocher, who is working on a book about Maharis and has interviewed him for the project, the reality of why Maharis left Route 66 is a combination of the two. She writes, “The producers felt betrayed and duped when they learned of Maharis's sexual orientation, and never trusted him again. Maharis, for his part, started to feel that he was carrying the show and was going unappreciated. So when he got sick, and came back, and started griping about the working conditions, the producers assumed it was all a ploy to either get more money or else get out of his contract and go make movies. In a less homophobic era, they might have communicated better, and worked things out instead of letting each other down.”

Maharis also had a singing career, releasing seven albums between the years 1962 and 1966, a time period that overlapped his appearance on Route 66. Maharis regularly appeared in Las Vegas nightclubs during the 1980s. Video below.

 

From 2016, here's another from GAY CULTURE LAND:

 

With his Mediterranean good looks and his charisma, this actor/singer/painter was leading man material. He didn't have the career that he deserved though. Perhaps the fact that he never cared to carefully conceal the fact that he is gay played a major part in this.

Tall, dark and handsome, not to mention a charismatic rebel of 60s Hollywood, actor George Maharis (real Greek family name is Mahairas) was born in 1928 in Astoria, New York as one of seven children. His immigrant father was a restaurateur. George expressed an early interest in singing and initially pursued it as a career, but extensive overuse and improper vocal lessons stripped his chords and he subsequently veered towards an acting career.

Trained at the Neighborhood Playhouse with Sanford Meisner and the Actor's Studio with Lee Strasberg, the "Method" actor found roles on dramatic TV, including a few episodes of "The Naked City," and secured an early name for himself on the late 1950s's off-Broadway scene, especially with his performances in Jean Genet's "Deathwatch" and Edward Albee's "Zoo Story". Producer/director Otto Preminger "discovered" George for film, offering the actor a choice of five small roles for his upcoming film Exodus (1960). George chose the role of an underground freedom fighter.

One of the episodes George did on the police drama "The Naked City" series ("Four Sweet Corners") wound up being a roundabout pilot for the buddy adventure series that would earn him household fame. With the arrival of the series Route 66 (1960), the actor earned intense TV stardom and a major cult following as a Brandoesque, streetwise drifter named Buzz Murdock. Partnered with the more fair-skinned, clean-scrubbed, college-educated Tod Stiles (Martin Milner, later star of Adam-12 (1968)), the duo traveled throughout the US in a hotshot convertible Corvette and had a huge female audience getting their kicks off with "Route 66" and George. During its peak, the star parlayed his TV fame into a recording career with Epic Records, producing six albums in the process and peaking at #25 in the US, in 1962, with the single Teach Me Tonight.

During the middle of the Route 66's third season peak, Maharis abruptly left the series. Maharis told the story that he had contracted infectious hepatitis in 1962, and that the shoots were so grueling that to continue would risk his health. He asked the producers to give him a less arduous schedule, but they refused, and he left the show, to be replaced by Glenn Corbett in the role of  Lincoln Case. However, others relate a different scenario. Route 66 producer Herbert B. Leonard found out that Maharis was gay and was having a hard time keeping his star’s sexual activities away from the press. Maharis also used the illness, Leonard said, as an excuse to break his contract so that he could get into movies. Co-star Martin Milner and a Route 66 writer-producer confirm this version.

According to Karen Blocher, who is working on a book about Maharis and has interviewed him for the project, the reality of why Maharis left Route 66 is a combination of the two. She writes, “The producers felt betrayed and duped when they learned of Maharis's sexual orientation, and never trusted him again. Maharis, for his part, started to feel that he was carrying the show and was going unappreciated. So when he got sick, and came back, and started griping about the working conditions, the producers assumed it was all a ploy to either get more money or else get out of his contract and go make movies. In a less homophobic era, they might have communicated better, and worked things out instead of letting each other down.”

For whatever reason, Maharis left. His replacement, ruggedly handsome Glenn Corbett, failed to click with audiences and the series was canceled after the next season. Back to films, the brash and confident actor, with his health scare over, aggressively pursued stardom with a number of leads but the duds he found himself in - Quick Before It Melts (1964), Sylvia (1965), A Covenant with Death (1967), The Happening (1967), and The Desperados (1969) prime among his list of disasters - hampered his chances. The best of the lot was the suspense drama, The Satan Bug (1965), but it lacked box-office appeal and disappeared quickly.

Moreover, a 1967 sex scandal (and a subsequent one in 1974) could not have helped. In 1967 Maharis had been arrested by a vice squad officer for lewd conduct in the restroom of a Hollywood restaurant; the officer said Maharis made a pass at him. On November 21, 1974, Maharis was arrested and charged with committing a sex act with a male hairdresser in the men's room of a gas station in Los Angeles. 46 years old at the time, Maharis was booked on a sex perversion charge and released on $500 bail.

To be honest, I saw The Happening as a child and I liked it. What was not to like: it contained one of my favorite songs by the Supremes, there were three very good looking men (Maharis, Michael Parks and Robert Walker Jr.), the star was an actor I liked (Anthony Quinn), it was Faye Dunaway's second movie part (the following one would be Bonnie and Clyde) and she was gorgeous and the rest of the cast also included some excellent actors like Martha Hyer, Milton Berle, Oskar Homolka, Jack Kruschen and Clifton James. Was it a good film? Probably not. I haven't watched it since to really have an opinion. However, there's no way I'm not including the song by the Supremes.

 

Here's his top ten hit "Teach Me Tonight."

 

And here he is performing the song.

 

 

 

He was incredibly talented.  I can remember that two-parter of THE BIONIC WOMAN to this day.  He should have had a lot more work.  Homophobia had a big impact on his career.

 

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

  

Posted by at

Farewell to SFGN: Jason Parsley Reflects on the Last Edition in Unapologetically Queer Interview

Posted by at

The Racist History Of Tipped Workers

Posted by at

Affirmative Action and White Assumptions

Posted by at

Judy Blume’s best piece of advice for parents of young readers

Posted by at

Shaggy & Kes Perform New Summer Anthem “Mood” on “Tamron Hall”

Posted by at

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Biden, America and 2024

Posted by at

Diana Ross ⭐️ Live 2023**Full Concert**(Chicago Area 5/5/23)

Posted by at

Legendary Champion Jim Brown Dies at 87

Posted by at

Billionaire Harlan Crow speaks on relationship with Justice Thomas in new interview

Posted by at

Diana Ross/Eaten Alive Why America snubbed this album while it went to gold in Europe !

Posted by at

Roy Wood Jr. Reflects on Hosting the Correspondents’ Dinner, Taking Jabs at Biden & Trump & More!

Posted by at

King: A Life

Posted by at

AOC Grills the Republican Party For TRIFLING Act

 

Posted by at

Three Is A Trend: "I'll Raise Your Wages To At Least $20 An-Hour" Is *THE* Winning Message


Three Is A Trend: "I'll Raise Your Wages To At Least $20 An-Hour" Is *THE* Winning Message

On Winning The Ohio Senate Race—And Beyond.

[THANK YOU to those who became part of “the team” by subscribing after the previous issue came out! Consider subscribing…for just five bucks a month, or fifty for the whole year. I’ve set the paywall for free-to-all posts at 3 months, figuring that should be a fair amount of time for readers to have a look and a dive and, then, decide whether to invest.]

Upgrade to paid

You’ve read the rhetoric. I’ve got the data!

I’ve been making a similar argument—with solid data—for a long time, as have others: winning a statewide or national election, and in many cases, local or Congressional races, can be done with a single, simple message:

I will raise your wages!

Nothing else* (teensy caveat coming).

It helps to have a specific number—say, raising the minimum wage to $20-an-hour—but, at least, the pitch needs to evoke in peoples’ minds an idea that will help pay the bills. THAT is what folks think about every single day—especially, the mysterious “independent” voter, not to mention the legions of people who aren’t particularly motivated to go to the polls (or vote by mail) for the vanilla-packaged candidates.

Today, I’ll briefly re-up two examples I’ve given in the past on wages-over-candidates vote trends in order to lay the foundation for the “three is a trend”.

A few meta points first:

  • (here is the teensy caveat)* I am not saying entirely ignore abortion rights, equality, homelessness, or Ukraine—or other important issues. A candidate needs to have positions, a vision and coherent answers, about a set of issues s/he might be asked about during the course of a campaign...

  • …Having a complete vision, across the many tough issues, is different than what a candidate wants people to mainly remember about about what s/he stands for…

  • …Which goes to the heart of a reality, perhaps upsetting to the wonks amongst us: 85 percent of voters (maybe I’m understating) never remember a full platform, or even 3 planks…

  • …most voters remember how the candidate made them feel.

First example re-up: After the 2022 mid-term elections, using the U.S. Senate race in Nevada as the template, I laid out a full-proof roadmap to making the Republican Party a rump party in every state in the country, including the entire southern swath from so-called “red” Florida all the way west to Texas and up the eastern seaboard through the Carolinas.

In the Nevada election, a ballot initiative to raise the state minimum wage to $12-an-hour OUTPERFORMED, without exception, the incumbent Democrat, Catherine Cortez Masto’s total in every single county; she squeaked out a statewide victory.

In every single county, Masto received fewer votes than the ballot measure.

The logical conclusion: it did not matter if you were a Democrat, Republican or independent, voters were enthusiastic to embrace something that would put more money in their pockets, even if they did not support Masto’s re-election.

Second example re-up: going back even further in ancient history (all of two additional years), I wrote in this publication in November 2020 that a full-on Joe Biden populist would have won Florida IF he had put a wildly popular ballot initiative to raise the state minimum wage (Amendment 2) at the forefront of his campaign.

Which he failed to do.

In 2020, in virtually every county in Florida, Amendment 2 outperformed Biden’s numbers—in some cases, by a lot (20-70 percent)—and that was true in counties that voted for Trump and even in counties where Amendment 2 lost but still tallied more votes than Biden. (I have the full county-by-county comparison in the original post for the truly wonky amongst you)

Then, consider:

  • The vote in favor of the Florida minimum wage initiative was overwhelming: 6,377,444 in favor (60.8 percent) and 4,111,094 opposed (39.2 percent) [votes cited were as of November 11th 2020; I assume the totals shifted a bit with late votes/corrections]. That is a winning margin of over 2.2 million votes. A blow-out, relatively speaking.

  • The presidential election results: Trump 5,658,847 (51.2 percent) versus Biden 5,284,453 (47.9 percent). That is a winning margin of just 374,000 plus votes out of more than 10.9 million votes. A squeaker.

You can’t forecast with 100 percent certainty a different outcome by asserting “what if”—different stuff can happen—but I think it’s a reasonable argument to make that, given the difference in margins in the minimum wage initiative compared to the presidential race, Florida was winnable with a posture of unreserved economic populism, and the minimum wage ballot initiative was the perfect vehicle to ride at that moment. And that’s a lesson for competition in Florida and other so-called “red states”.

Upgrade to paid

So, let’s fast forward to today. I’ve spent some time over the past couple of years looking at various state ballot initiatives on economics, especially on raising minimum wages (I’ll write more about some other aspects of this research in the future).

Today, the focus is on Ohio. As many of you know, Sherrod Brown, the Democratic incumbent senator, is up for re-election in the state in 2024. I’m interested in this race for two reasons. First and foremost, If you’ve got issues with the Democratic Party (waving my hands vigorously as one in that crowd), Sherrod stands out as one of the best, and he has been solidly progressive since he served in the House, on issues of trade, banks, wages and unions.

Second, I live in what is somewhat a contradictory world: the Democratic Party is truly weak and disappointing on a daily basis AND the idea that Mitch McConnell might become the majority leader again after the 2024 election is an unacceptable outcome because the latter means a lot of real, immediate damage to millions of people. So, Sherrod’s re-election is crucial to maintain a slim majority of sanity (and, yes, the current Senate majority leader is cringe-worthy, at least as a messenger to voters)

To understand Ohio a bit, let’s spin the time machine back to November 2006. That was the year Sherrod ran for the seat for the first time. He ran against the two-time incumbent, Mike DeWine (who is currently Ohio’s governor).

Also on the ballot in 2006 was Ohio Issue 2, a constitutional amendment to raise the state minimum wage from $5.15-an-hour to $6.85-per hour on January 2007, and, then, index future increases in the minimum wage to the inflation rate.

So, what happened:

  • Brown won the race 56.16% to 43.82%

  • The minimum wage hike passed $56.65% to $43.35%

That is, the minimum wage ballot initiative margin of victory was about half-a-percentage point better than Brown’s victory over Dewine (note: the overall vote totals show that roughly 5 percent of those who voted in the Senate race just skipped the minimum wage question).

In more than half of the 88 counties in Ohio—49, to be exact—the minimum wage initiative:

  • Got more votes than Brown, including in counties in which the “No” vote on the minimum wage was larger than the “Yes” vote;

  • AND/OR Dewine polled more votes in those counties than the “No” vote on the minimum wage ballot initiative (that is, some people voted Republican, perhaps simply out of habit, but still voted in favor of the minimum wage hike).

  • AND/OR Dewine won counties where the “Yes” vote out-polled the “No” vote, especially in the smaller, rural counties where Republicans have to run up their totals to offset big urban counties, principally Cuyahoga (Cleveland).

Obviously, one can’t draw an exact one-to-one vote voter connection between the Senate race and the ballot initiative. But, in the context of other such measures, and results, including the two previous ones I’ve charted, I think it’s reasonable to see some relationship: Clearly, people who might opt, for whatever reason, to vote for a Republican who opposed the minimum wage ballot initiative, still voted FOR the minimum wage ballot initiative…

…BECAUSE it meant more money in their pockets and, perhaps, for some, it appeared to be a question of fairness.

In 2024, there is a ballot initiative proposal to put before voters in Ohio to hike the state minimum wage—it would increase the wage to $12.75-an-hour starting Jan. 1, 2025 and, then, to $15-an-hour in 2028 with specific dollar-per-year hikes, followed by future increases after indexed to inflation. The proposal is even more dramatic for tipped employees, who earn $5.50-an-hour—it would move wages up until they are paid the full minimum wage, plus tips, starting Jan. 1, 2029. It still must gather signatures to qualify for the ballot but I’m fairly certain proponents will be successful meeting the threshold.

I would say—and, I suspect that Sherrod and his team are on to this—if you look at what happened in 2006, that his path to victory next year, in what is almost certain to be a very close race, is to wrap his arms in a strong embrace with the minimum wage initiative.

Yes, November 2024 will be close to two decades since that 2006 election. But, things have only gotten worse for those people working for the minimum wage—which, I will remind everyone, should be at least $22-$24-an-hour based on productivity over the last four decades.

Translation: there has been an obscene theft of peoples’ labor. Well, you’all knew that! And, more important, even if they can’t cite a statistic, people feel that in their daily lives.

The conclusion I would draw:

Put hiking the minimum wage on every single state ballot in 2024 (in any state that has such a process) and campaign from coast-to-coast, in every single community, even where there isn’t a specific proposal to vote on (because the law doesn’t provide for ballot initiatives), on this one idea:

I will raise your wages!

Say it it every speech.

Promote it in every single piece of paid media and on every single social media platform.

Make it THE slogan of every campaign.

As I suggested in the posts from before, this is a national strategy as well. A candidate for the presidency—I will refer to her as Rosie the Riveter—could run a campaign with this theme: “I will accept your nomination under one condition—it shall be the position of the party in its platform that every single state party will spearhead a ballot initiative to raise the minimum wage to $20-an-hour, to take effect on the day I am sworn into office and I will campaign in every state on that issue alone. And where a state party refuses to make this its singular focus, it will be the policy of the national party that every official holding party office in that state will be removed and replaced. I will make this initiative my signature, overriding issue of my campaign as a matter of morality and smart economics.”

Upgrade to paid

Share Working Life Newsletter

Leave a comment

Thank you for reading Working Life Newsletter. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

You're currently a free subscriber to Working Life Newsletter. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Upgrade to paid

© 2023 Jonathan Tasini
POBox 11094, Portland, OR 97211


 

Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)