Robert B. Reich's Blog, page 61

The Triumph of the Oligarchs

The Republican tax plan to be voted on this week is likely to pass. “The
American people have waited...

A Guide to Why the Trump-Republican Tax Plan is a Disgrace (for When you Confront Your Republican Uncle Bob During the Holidays)

Here are the 3 main Republican arguments in favor of the Republican tax plan, followed by the...

The Meaning of Doug Jones’s Upset Victory

Common sense and decency have prevailed in Alabama. It was a vote not just against sexual abuse but...

TELL THE FCC NOT TO END NET NEUTRALITY!The FCC is voting...

TELL THE FCC NOT TO END NET NEUTRALITY!

The FCC is voting Thursday on whether to repeal the “Net Neutrality” rule adopted in 2015.

Since its creation, the internet has been an open exchange of ideas and information, free from
corporate control and influence. But corporations could soon have tremendous
power over what we can access and share online, ending the internet as we know
it.

In 2015, the FCC
passed a landmark rule that prevents internet service providers from favoring some sites over others –
slowing down connections or charging customers a fee for streaming or other
services. It gave Americans equal access to all the content that’s available on the internet –
videos, social media, e-commerce sites, etc – at the same speeds.

Now, though, Donald Trump’s
handpicked chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Ajit Pai, wants
to abolish “Net Neutrality.” He wants to give telecommunications giants like Comcast, Verizon
and AT&T the upper hand. 

Pai – himself a
former Verizon executive – defends the rollback by “Under my
proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the internet.” Baloney. His plan would be a huge gift to cable companies. It would:

1. Drive up
prices for internet service.
Broadband providers could charge customers higher rates to access certain sites, or raise
rates for internet companies to reach consumers faster speeds. Either way,
these prices hikes would be passed along to you and me.

2. Give corporate executives free reign to slow down and censor news or websites that don’t match
their political agenda, or give preference to their own content – for any
reason at all. 

3. Stifle innovation. Cable companies could severely hurt their competitors by blocking
certain apps or online services. Small businesses who can’t afford to pay
higher rates could be squeezed out altogether. 

Broadband
providers claim that Net Neutrality rules actually hurts consumers because
it  discourages investment in their networks.

Rubbish. Since Net Neutrality was adopted, investment
has remained consistent. During calls with investors, telecom executives
themselves have even admitted that Net Neutrality hasn’t hurt their
businesses.

In the modern age,
unfettered access to the internet is essential to a vibrant democracy and
strong economy.

There’s still time. Please help stop this corporate power grab over what we can say
and do online.

SLAPP LAWSUITS: THE BIGGEST THREAT TO THE RESISTANCE YOU NEVER...

SLAPP LAWSUITS: THE BIGGEST THREAT TO THE RESISTANCE YOU NEVER HEARD OF

Have you heard of SLAPP lawsuits? You soon will.

SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public
Participation.” It is a lawsuit brought by big corporations intended to censor,
intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the overwhelming costs
of a legal defense until they’re forced to abandon their criticism or
opposition. And it may be the biggest threat to the resistance you’ve never
heard of.  

Here’s an example: Resolute Forest Products, one of Canada’s
largest logging and paper companies, has sued, in a U.S. court, environmental
groups that have been campaigning to save Canada’s boreal forest. 

Resolute based its lawsuit on a U.S. conspiracy and racketeering law (RICO) intended to
ensnare mobsters. Resolute alleged that the environmental groups have been
illegally conspiring to extort the company’s customers and to defraud their own
donors. 

The suit wasn’t designed to win in court. It was designed to distract and
silence critics. This is punishment for speaking out. Thankfully, a federal
court agrees and a judge just dismissed Resolute’s claims. But other
corporate bullies are still trying to use this playbook.

Here’s another example: Remember the indigenous led movement at
Standing Rock, when hundreds of nations and their allies came together and
stood up against the destructive Dakota Access Pipeline? 

In August, Energy
Transfer Partners, the company behind that pipeline, filed a similar RICO case
against Greenpeace entities and two other defendants over Standing Rock. The
suit accuses them of participating in a sprawling criminal conspiracy to
disrupt business and defraud donors. The lawsuit even alleges they support
eco-terrorism and engage in drug trafficking.

The lawsuit claims Greenpeace cost the company $300 million. Since
RICO claims entitle plaintiffs to recover triple damages, the case potentially
could cost Greenpeace $900 million. That would be the end of Greenpeace.

But, again, winning isn’t necessarily the goal of SLAPP suits. Just by filing the suits, Energy Transfer Partners and Resolute are trying
to drain environmental groups of time, energy, and resources they need, so they
can’t continue to fight to protect the environment.

Connect the dots, and consider the chilling effect SLAPP suits
are having on any group seeking to protect public health, worker’s rights, and
even our democracy. 

Who’s behind all of this? Both the lawsuits I just mentioned
were filed by Michael Bowe. He is also a member of Donald Trump’s personal
legal team. Bowe has publicly stated that he’s in conversations with other
corporations considering filing their own SLAPP lawsuits.

If the goal is to silence public-interest groups, the rest of us
must speak out. Wealthy corporations must know  they can’t SLAPP the
public into silence.

Why Making American Corporations More Competitive Doesn’t Help Most Americans

Trump and
congressional Republicans are engineering the largest corporate tax cut in
history in...

Corporation and Nation

Trump and
congressional Republicans are engineering the largest corporate tax cut in
history in...

The True Path to Prosperity

It’s often thought that Democrats care
about fairness and not economic growth, while Republicans...

Fools or Knaves?

One of the most
dangerous consequences of this awful period in American life is the denigration
of...

The New Poll Tax Hundreds of thousands of Americans are being...

The New Poll Tax

Hundreds of thousands of Americans are being denied the right to vote because they are poor.

In nine states, Republican legislators have enacted laws that disenfranchise anyone with outstanding legal fees or court fines. For example, in Alabama more than 100,000 people who owe money – roughly 3 percent of the state’s voting-age population – have been struck from voting rolls. 

This is unconstitutional. In 1964, the 24th amendment abolished the poll tax, a Jim Crow tactic used to bar poor blacks from voting.

These new laws are a modern reincarnation of that unconstitutional system, disproportionately disenfranchising people of color.

Income and wealth should have no bearing on the right to vote. Many Americans are struggling to make ends meet. But they still have a constitutional right to make their voices heard.

Preventing people from voting because they owe legal fees or court fines muzzle low-income Americans at a time in our nation’s history when the rich have more political power than ever.

These state laws are another form of voter suppression – like gerrymandering, voter ID requirements, and bars on anyone with felony convictions from voting.

We must not let them stand.