Tag Archives: labor

A U.S. Battery Recycler Says We Should Keep the Lead In

by Myrna Posted on July 18, 2013

The head of a lead smelting company calls for an industry cleanup but also an end to policies that send lead-containing batteries, and related pollution problems, to poorer nations. Source – A U.S. Battery Recycler Says We Should Keep the Lead In Related Articles Dot Earth Blog: ‘A Girl With a Book’ – Malala’s Day at the United Nations Iridescent Rivers, Then (Hudson Valley) and Now (Bangladesh) ‘A Girl With a Book’ – Malala’s Day at the United Nations

See original article here:

A U.S. Battery Recycler Says We Should Keep the Lead In

Posted in ALPHA, alternative energy, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, PUR, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A U.S. Battery Recycler Says We Should Keep the Lead In

The Senate Avoids the Nuclear Option—and Saves the Filibuster

by cuppyteen Posted on July 16, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The US Senate doesn’t appear to be going “nuclear,” after all.

On Tuesday morning, senators were close to a deal, brokered in part by Republican John McCain of Arizona, to prevent Majority Leader Harry Reid from changing the rules of the Senate with a simple majority vote—a tactic called the nuclear option. For years, Reid has been frustrated by Senate Republicans, who have used filibusters to block votes on 16 of President Barack Obama’s nominees for executive-branch positions. (Only 20 executive-branch nominees were filibustered under all previous presidents combined.) Unless Republicans allowed votes on Tuesday on a handful of key nominees, Reid threatened to use the nuclear option to change Senate rules so that nominees could be approved with just 51 votes instead a filibuster-proof 60.

But it looks like there will be no nuclear option. Instead, Senate Republicans say they’ll drop their opposition and allow votes on five nominees, including Richard Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Tom Perez to the Department of Labor, Gina McCarthy to the Environmental Protection Agency, Fred Hochberg to the Export-Import Bank, and current National Labor Relations Board chairman Mark Gaston Pearce. In exchange, Obama will toss out two other NLRB nominees, Richard Griffin and Sharon Block, and replace them with two new people. Labor unions will reportedly get a say on who Obama nominates.

On the status of deal, Reid said at noon on Tuesday: “We have a few little Is to dot and Ts to cross. Everything’s doing well.”

The Senate’s compromise comes after days of brinkmanship, nasty rhetoric, and intense talks between Democrats and Republicans. On Monday night, all 100 members of the Senate met in the Old Senate Chamber to hash out some sort of deal to avoid using the nuclear option. No specific deal was reached then, but those talks appeared to have laid the groundwork for Tuesday’s compromise. “I hope that everyone learned the lesson last night: that it sure helps to sit down and talk to each other,” Reid said on Tuesday.

This is not the first time senators have threatened to go nuclear. In 2005, a group of 14 senators cut a deal to vote on several of President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees after the GOP leadership threatened to use the nuclear option.

In an appearance at the left-leaning Center for American Progress think tank Monday, Reid chalked up the GOP obstruction to wanting to gum up the government while also undercutting agencies like the NLRB and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “We have a situation where Republicans have created gridlock, gridlock, gridlock,” he said. “And it has consequences. It’s not only bad for President Obama; it’s bad for the country. The status quo won’t work.”

With a compromise in the works, the Senate moved ahead to vote on the Obama administration’s nominees. The Senate voted 71 to 29 to allow a full vote to confirm Richard Cordray, whom Obama nominated to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau during a recess period two years ago. That’s a good sign that Cordray’s nomination will be approved. It’s also a tough vote for Senate Republicans, 43 of whom pledged to block any nomination—including Cordray’s—to run the CFPB because they oppose how the CPFB functions.

So where does this leave the Senate? Reid may have backed down from using the nuclear option this time, but there’s nothing stopping him from threatening to use it again. And if—really, when—Republicans retake control of the Senate, they can threaten to use it, too. As Ezra Klein at the Washington Post explains, “This will be the new normal.”

More: 

The Senate Avoids the Nuclear Option—and Saves the Filibuster

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Senate Avoids the Nuclear Option—and Saves the Filibuster

The Beginning of the End of LGBT Workplace Discrimination?

by Judith Kimbers Posted on July 10, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the shadow of the marriage equality debate, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would protect LGBT workers from workplace discrimination, has been languishing in legislative obscurity for almost 20 years. But on Tuesday morning, the ENDA passed the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee by a 15-7 vote, marking its furthest advancement in the Senate in 17 years and potentially correcting a glaring oversight in LGBT rights.

“The pure fact is that I can show up in a dress in more than half of the states in America, and just for that one reason I can be fired on the spot,” said Kristin Beck, the former Navy Seal who has recently become a leading transgender spokesperson, in a press call with the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) on Tuesday. “I fought for life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and all that—land of the free. And I am not free. There’s massive prejudice, still, against these groups of people in America.”

Currently, LGBT workers lack comprehensive workplace protection in 32 states. According to the most recent data, 90 percent of transgender people reported some form of harassment or discrimination, 47 percent had been skipped for promotions, fired, or not hired at all, and trans people are unemployed at a rate roughly twice the national average. Fourteen percent of trans people reported earning less than $10,000 per year, compared to just four percent of the general population.

So why have anti-discrimination laws taken a backseat to marriage equality in the fight for LGBT rights? “We just have to acknowledge that there is a class bias in every social movement, and the LGBT movement is funded by people for whom marriage equality is a much higher personal priority for them.” said Mara Keisling, NCTE’s executive director. “It has seemed easier to say, ‘Oh look at these two people in love,’ than it is to say, ‘Don’t fire them.'”

All of the Senate committee’s 12 democrats voted for the bill, and were joined by Republicans Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who is a co-sponsor, Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). Advocates for ENDA claim to have secured 53 votes in the Senate for when the bill does make it to the floor, and are working to secure the seven more it would need to pass a filibuster. According to Keisling, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a co-sponsor of the bill, has agreed to schedule the bill for a floor debate after the August recess.

Visit site – 

The Beginning of the End of LGBT Workplace Discrimination?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Pines, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Beginning of the End of LGBT Workplace Discrimination?

What’s Behind the BART Strike?

by graptorm Posted on July 2, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Commuters were scrambling on Monday morning as the main transit system for one of the largest metropolitan regions in the US came to a halt because of a labor strike. Here’s a closer look at what unionized workers are demanding and why you should care:

Who’s on strike?

Workers for Bay Area Rapid Transit, more commonly known by its acronym BART. After contracts with the agency’s two largest unions, Service Employees International Union Local 1021 and the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555, expired and renewal talks broke down, the unions announced they would strike. This morning, instead of reporting for work, BART employees picketed the rail system’s stations. It’s BART’s first strike since a six-day protest in 1997.

Continue Reading »

See original: 

What’s Behind the BART Strike?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on What’s Behind the BART Strike?

Will dumping Australia’s climate-savvy prime minister help the climate?

by h0rt67bx11 Posted on June 28, 2013

Will dumping Australia’s climate-savvy prime minister help the climate?

By John Upton

Alpha

Kevin Rudd is Australia’s new prime minister, again. Now he has to defend that job from an opposition leader who once called climate science “crap.”

In terms of climate policy, Australians face a choice between fairly good and downright evil in an upcoming federal election.

The face of evil belongs to climate skeptic Tony Abbott, leader of the opposition Liberal Party (which, in topsy-turvy Down Under fashion, is in fact conservative).

And the face of relative good is … in some disarray at the moment. Power brokers in the Labor Party, which narrowly holds power in the country, this week stripped the prime ministership away from Julia Gillard and handed it back to former leader Kevin Rudd. They believe this move will help them win the election, which is tentatively scheduled for September.

The stakes are high. Australia is among the world’s worst per-person contributors to climate change. The country is a huge producer of coal, exporting a lot and consuming a good bit itself. And it’s been suffering heavily from climate change in recent years, enduring epic heat, drought, wildfires, and floods.

But lately, the country been trying to mend its ways, and setting a global example in doing so. Over the last six years, under first Rudd and then Gillard, the Labor Party has introduced policies and taxes designed to battle and adapt to climate change. Reports are confirming that the new taxes and policies are doing what they were intended to do: curb power plant carbon emissions and accelerate investment in renewable energy.

But Labor’s been flailing in the polls and weighed down by infighting. Rudd had been agitating for the top job for months, destabilizing the party. Now, after he was sworn in as prime minister on Thursday, Labor’s members of parliament are vying against each other for positions in his new cabinet, instead of focusing on their reelection campaigns.

The conservatives have not hidden their glee at the pre-election upheaval within the governing party:

Labor’s move was a desperate one, and it might very well backfire. But many in Australia just couldn’t see Gillard leading her party to another victory.

As a stubborn champion of new taxes on the powerful fossil fuel and mineral sectors, and as a tough-as-steel woman leading a country still plagued by machismo and misogyny (and as an unmarried atheist without any kids, to boot), Australia’s first female prime minister was the target of ruthless and incessant attacks on her character and leadership. She had sandwiches thrown at her by men making the statement that a woman’s place is in the kitchen. Political rallies supported by Abbott were held to “ditch the witch.” Guests at a political fundraiser were served “Julia Gillard Kentucky Fried Quail,” described on the menu as “Small Breasts, Huge Thighs & A Big Red Box.”

Now, with Rudd back in Kirribilli House, pundits are busily analyzing how the new prime minister’s climate policies might differ from the old one’s. He might change rules on how the prices for carbon emissions are set, for example.

Rudd, a nerdy policy wonk, once described climate change as the “great moral, environmental and economic challenge of our age.” He led the party during most of the first of its two consecutive terms in power, introducing climate-friendly policies before he was replaced by Gillard amid similar turmoil prior to the last election.

Gillard, though, had the courage to introduce climate taxes that had made Rudd hesitate (some would say wisely, politically speaking).

But while there are differences between the two leaders in their approach to climate and energy issues, they won’t matter if Labor loses the election. This week’s savage bloodletting was all about trying to avoid that outcome.

David Jackmanson

Tony Abbott, opposition leader and climate denier.

Abbott, for his part, once described the science behind climate change as “crap.” He has since recanted, but, as we explained in April, he has nonetheless pledged to eliminate the new carbon and mining taxes, dismantle a federal department of climate science advisers, and take other steps that would see the country retreat to its unbridled climate-changing ways of decades past.

Rudd now has until August or September to steady the Labor Party and navigate it to political victory (or thereabouts — as prime minister, he has the power to set the election date, which can be no later than Nov. 30). That won’t be easy amidst a political maelstrom of his own creating. But if his party can rediscover some unity, it won’t be impossible.

If Rudd does win, he’ll have a moral obligation to mull the environmental consequences of Australia’s substantial coal exports. But, then, that’s a world-warming beast that no leading Australian politician has shown any willingness to wrangle.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

See the original post:

Will dumping Australia’s climate-savvy prime minister help the climate?

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Will dumping Australia’s climate-savvy prime minister help the climate?

If the Economy Is Back, Why Are Wages Still So Low?

by Christinef76 Posted on June 14, 2013

Mother Jones

Five years after the Great Recession began, the US economy appears to be rebounding a bit. But two recent bits of evidence suggest that the impact of the recession on ordinary workers may have been even worse than we thought—and that the impact of future recessions might be worse too.

First off, a new paper by a trio of researchers confirms some old news: Adjusted for inflation, wages began stagnating for both men and women 10 years ago. Men’s wages have actually decreased slightly since 2000, while women’s wages, which had been rising steadily for decades, flattened out nearly to zero. But it could have been worse. Economists have long known that there’s a floor to wages because employers don’t like to reduce nominal wages. If you make $10 per hour, they won’t cut your wage to $9 per hour. They’ll just hold it at $10 and let inflation eat it away. This phenomenon is called wage stickiness.

But in “Wage Adjustment in the Great Recession,” these researchers have found that wage stickiness, which is driven mostly by social convention, not economic law, might be dying out. During the Great Recession, employers were increasingly willing to cut nominal wages. Among hourly workers, the usual number who experience wage cuts is around 15 percent. That had risen to 25 percent by 2011. Among nonhourly workers, the number rose from about 25 percent to nearly 35 percent. Increasingly, it seems, wage stickiness isn’t acting as a barrier against wage losses.

So what does this mean in the real world? Economist Jared Bernstein points us to the chart below. It shows growth in nominal wages, growth in benefits, and growth in total compensation (wages plus benefits). The news is grim. Total compensation (the gray line) grew at about 3 to 4 percent per year during most of the aughts. Since the Great Recession hit, that’s dropped to 1 to 2 percent. This is less than the inflation rate, which means that even when you account for benefits, real compensation has been declining since 2008.

Bottom line: Wage stickiness is disappearing, and with it a social convention that prevented wages from dropping too harshly even during recessions. As a result, wages are getting cut in bad times and never catching back up in good times. This is the world we live in today.

Read article here: 

If the Economy Is Back, Why Are Wages Still So Low?

Posted in FF, GE, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on If the Economy Is Back, Why Are Wages Still So Low?

Harry Reid: Obama’s Pick for Labor Secretary Will Get a Vote Soon

by muistenam Posted on May 15, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Much news has been made of the dozens of judicial slots left vacant due to the constant roadblocks set by Senate Republicans. But Republicans have also blocked or delayed an unprecedented number of cabinet-level presidential nominees during the Obama administration, including most recently labor secretary nominee Thomas Perez, the assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Justice Department, a progressive whose confirmation vote Republicans have repeatedly derailed.

“Now they’re double-teaming him,” Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid complained during a Wednesday morning meeting with reporters at the Capitol. “They’re holding hearings in the House as to how he’s doing in his present job.”

House Republicans have scrutinized Perez’s alleged role in preventing a St. Paul housing discrimination case from reaching the Supreme Court, and his use of a personal email address to conduct official business. That, Reid said, was done “just to deflect attention from the fact that he’s being held up in the Senate.”

To push back, Senate Democrats plan to force committee votes on three cabinet-level nominees, including Perez. Reid’s office expects Perez to be voted out of committee on Thursday, after which Reid plans to schedule a confirmation vote in the near future. Senate Democrats, including Harry Reid, have also floated the possibility of using the nuclear option, which would change Senate rules through a simple majority vote to prevent filibusters on nominees.

The only cabinet-level nominee who has arguably faced harsher resistance from Republicans was former Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Republican himself who was confirmed as secretary of defense in February after facing a filibuster unprecedented for his cabinet position.

Republicans have also been using procedural maneuvers in the Senate to block two other cabinet-level nominees: Obama fundraiser Penny Pritzker as commerce secretary, and Gina McCarthy as head of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Reid also said he planned to schedule a vote soon for Richard Cordray, an uncontroversial lower-level nominee picked to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. If Republicans block his nomination, Talking Points Memo reports, it could strengthen the case for filibuster reform.

“I’m going to make sure he’s going to have a vote next week, and we’ll see what happens after that,” Reid said of Cordray. “But my point is, this obstruction can’t go on. This is not good for the country.”

Earlier this year, Reid disappointed allies craving real filibuster reform when he declined to pursue major Senate rules changes. He said he has no current plans to take on filibuster reforms, such as one that would weaken Senators’ ability to block nominees, but is considering doing so “very closely” as Republicans continue to threaten filibusters against Obama nominees.

“Whether it’s Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton that’s the next president, I don’t think they should have to go through what we’ve gone through here,” Reid said.

Continue reading here – 

Harry Reid: Obama’s Pick for Labor Secretary Will Get a Vote Soon

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Harry Reid: Obama’s Pick for Labor Secretary Will Get a Vote Soon

4,693 People in America Died on the Job in 2011

by pawel Posted on May 7, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Workplaces dangers have been in the news more than usual lately, from the deadly explosion at the West, Texas, fertilizer plant to the garment factory collapse in Bangladesh, where the death toll is now more than 700. In light of the latter, there is the temptation to say that what happened in Texas was an anomaly, and that conditions in US factories are so much better than in the developing world. But not so fast: A new report from the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, the nation’s largest affiliation of unions, shows that 4,693 people died the job in the US in 2011 (the most recent year for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has released figures).

According to the “Death on the Job” report, the most dangerous occupations in the US in 2011 were in the agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting sectors; mining and transportation were also near the top of the list. The average fatality rate across all occupations was 3.5 deaths per 100,000 workers.

While the numbers are much lower than they were back in 1970, when 13,800 employees died on the job, the AFL-CIO notes that that fatality rate has not improved since 2008. And another estimated 50,000 workers die each year from work-related diseases like cancers and lung ailments.

Part of the issue, the AFL-CIO concludes, is that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) remains underfunded and understaffed, and that penalties are too low to deter violations:

Because of the underfunding, federal OSHA inspectors can only inspect workplaces once every 131 years on average, and state OSHA inspectors would take 76 years to inspect all workplaces.
OSHA penalties are too low to be taken seriously, let alone provide deterrence. The average penalty is only $2,156 for a serious federal health and safety violation, and only $974 for a state violation. Even in cases involving worker fatalities, the median total penalty was a paltry $5,175 for federal OSHA and $4,200 for the OSHA state plans. By contrast, property damage valued between $300 and $10,000 in the state of Illinois is considered a Class 4 felony and can carry a prison sentence of 1 to 3 years and a fine of up to $25,000.
Criminal penalties under OSHA are also weak. While there were 320 criminal enforcement cases initiated under federal environmental laws and 231 defendants charged in FY 2012, only 84 cases related to worker deaths have been prosecuted since 1970.

Read the full report here. Also be sure to check out the Center for Public Integrity’s reporting on workplace safety in the chemical, steel, and fishing industries.

Link:

4,693 People in America Died on the Job in 2011

Posted in alo, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on 4,693 People in America Died on the Job in 2011

The Temp Agencies Taking Immigrants for a Ride in Chicago

by dtynpwb Posted on April 30, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story originally appeared in ProPublica.

Ty Inc. became one of the world’s largest manufacturers of stuffed animals thanks to the Beanie Babies craze in the 1990s.

But it has stayed on top partly by using an underworld of labor brokers known as raiteros, who pick up workers from Chicago’s street corners and shuttle them to Ty’s warehouse on behalf of one of the nation’s largest temp agencies.

The system provides just-in-time labor at the lowest possible cost to large companies—but also effectively pushes workers’ pay far below the minimum wage.

Temp agencies use similar van networks in other labor markets. But in Chicago’s Little Village, the largest Mexican community in the Midwest, the raiteros have melded with temp agencies and their corporate clients in a way that might be unparalleled anywhere in America—and could violate Illinois’ wage laws.

Continue Reading »

Read this article – 

The Temp Agencies Taking Immigrants for a Ride in Chicago

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, ProPublica, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Temp Agencies Taking Immigrants for a Ride in Chicago

GOP Takes Another Shot at Derailing Obama’s Progressive Labor Nominee

by ghd12australia Posted on April 25, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Republicans have been trying for weeks to block President Barack Obama’s nomination of Thomas Perez, the chief of the civil rights division at the Justice Department, to run the Labor Department. They haven’t succeeded yet. But they’re still at it.

Politico’s Josh Gerstein reports that Democrats have delayed a vote on Perez nomination that was originally scheduled for Thursday. The Dems moved to postpone the vote after Republicans said they would use an unrelated Senate subcommittee hearing on workplace safety to feature a witness likely to be critical of Perez. Republicans wanted to call Frederick Newell, a St. Paul man whose $180 million lawsuit against the city over its failure to properly dispense federal grants meant for low-income residents was undercut by an agreement Perez helped arrange. The workplace safety hearing has now been postponed as well, with Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) accusing Republicans of trying to exploit the hearing to attack Perez and possibly derail his nomination.

As Mother Jones reported in March, in exchange for the Justice Department not joining Newell’s lawsuit, St. Paul agreed last year to withdraw a fair housing case before the Supreme Court. Liberals had feared that the conservative justices on the high court would have used the St. Paul case to significantly narrow the ability of the federal government to hold financial institutions accountable for discrimination against minorities.

Republicans were frustrated by the missed opportunity to weaken the Fair Housing Act, a key civil rights law. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) worked hard to convince GOP legislators on the Senate labor committee that Perez acted inappropriately when he helped broker that deal with St. Paul. The House oversight committee, which Issa chairs, released a report last week that accused Perez of shady behavior but failed to detail any specific legal or ethical violations. (Perez consulted with internal ethics monitors at Justice to ensure that the deal was appropriate). Republicans brought up the report during Perez’ confirmation hearing last week but there were no fireworks.

Newell is angry about the St. Paul deal for a very particular reason of his own. This St. Paul small business owner spent years putting together evidence that the city of St. Paul wasn’t meeting its federal grant obligations. The city entered into an agreement in 2010 with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to ensure it would meet those obligations in the future, and HUD told Mother Jones in March that St. Paul has complied so far.

Though the underlying issue that Newell sued over seems to have been resolved, he didn’t get anything out of the deal. Had the lawsuit proceeded and he won, he would have pocketed between 15 and 30 percent of the sum the judge decided St. Paul owed. But it’s not clear Newell would have won his case if the Justice Department had joined. The US attorneys in Minnesota thought he had a good case, yet the experts in the civil division believed he did not. When the Justice Department declined to join Newell’s lawsuit, it meant that the case would most likely be dismissed, and it was.

So the problem was taken care of, but Newell lost his chance to collect a lot of money. Given all the hard work he put in, it’s understandable he’s ticked off at Perez. But the fact that Newell didn’t get his money doesn’t mean Perez did anything improper.

See original article here – 

GOP Takes Another Shot at Derailing Obama’s Progressive Labor Nominee

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on GOP Takes Another Shot at Derailing Obama’s Progressive Labor Nominee