From the Coalition on Human Needs: Human Needs Report (March 5)

CHN just released another edition of the Human Needs Report, with the latest on Congress's spending and budget work, immigration proposals, gun control measures, and much more.     IN THIS EDITION Appropriations Work Continues as Congress Approaches March 23 Deadline Appropriators continued negotiations through the weekend to try to complete a spending package to fund the federal government for the remainder of the fiscal year before the current funding runs out on March 23. House and Senate appropriators hope to complete work on an omnibus bill by March 14 to give Congress time to pass it before the deadline, but many obstacles remain. READ MORE » FY19 Budget Planning Begins in the House As part of the regular congressional budget development process, several House committees are making known their spending needs for programs under their jurisdiction for the coming fiscal year. There are also 12 budget-related hearings scheduled for this week, nine of them in the House. In addition, House and Senate leadership have appointed members to the Joint Select Committee on Budget and Appropriations Process Reform called for in the Bipartisan Budget Act. READ MORE » Advocates Rally for Dream Act as DACA Deadline SlidesAdvocates rallied in Washington, D.C. on March 4 and 5 to urge Congress to pass a clean Dream Act to provide a pathway to permanent residency and eventual citizenship for Dreamers, people who were brought to the U.S. as children. Their fate remains in limbo, as Congress has failed to enact legislation to protect them and cases challenging the end of the program make their way through the courts. READ MORE »  Changes May Make it Harder for Immigrants to Receive AssistanceThe Trump administration is considering new rules that would make it harder for immigrants to come to or stay in the U.S. if they or anyone in their family - including their U.S. citizen children - use any number of public benefits they are legally entitled to, such as SNAP/food stamps or Head Start. Advocates believe these proposed rule changes to the "public charge" provisions of immigration law are a back door way for the Trump administration to restrict family immigration and deter families from securing critical services. READ MORE » Gun Control Measures Disputed in CongressSeveral gun control measures are being debated in Congress and with the White House following the tragedy in Parkland, Florida. It is uncertain if any of these proposals have the 60 votes required to pass in the Senate, though there is some talk of trying to attach gun legislation to the must-pass omnibus spending package to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year. READ MORE » Supreme Court Hears Case Challenging Labor Unions On Feb. 26, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that could adversely affect millions of working Americans. The case, Janus vs. AFSCME, centers on unions' rights to collect "fair share" or "agency" fees from non-union members. Advocates believe a ruling against AFSCME would weaken unions, the democratic-making process in the workplace, and public sector middle-class jobs. READ MORE » House Moves on Anti-Consumer, Pro-Payday Lender LegislationIn a blow to consumers, some in Congress are moving to repeal the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's payday lending rule which requires lenders to verify a borrower's ability to repay a loan before one is made. The rule, put forth by the CFPB after five years of research and input, was put in place to curb the ability of payday and car title lenders to trap consumers in a cycle of debt. READ MORE » For the latest news, analysis and updates, subscribe to our blog, Voices for Human Needs.

From The Young Turks: Heitkamp, Backing Deregulation Bill, Owns Stock in Financial Firms that Stand to Profit

Heitkamp, Backing Deregulation Bill, Owns Stock in Financial Firms that Stand to Profit (Alex Kotch, TYT)

This week, the U.S. Senate will consider a bipartisan bill to massively roll back regulations put in place to prevent the risky financial practices that led to the 2008 economic crisis. As David Dayen reported at The Intercept, S.2155, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, would aid big banks by expanding an exemption from certain Dodd-Frank financial regulations to include many of America’s big banks, among other favorable provisions. 13 Republicans, 12 Democrats and one Independent are sponsoring the legislation.

The provisions led Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to characterize the bill as the #BankLobbyistAct on Twitter.

One of the bill’s chief architects, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), and her husband have nearly $1 million invested in two of the bill’s biggest winners, J.P. Morgan Chase and Berkshire Hathaway, according to a 2016 financial disclosure document reviewed by TYT Investigates.

Heitkamp and her spouse collectively own between $100,001 and $250,000 of corporate securities stock in J.P. Morgan, as well as an additional up to $45,000 in a J.P. Morgan fund. Heitkamp alone owns between $215,000 and $550,000 worth of Berkshire Hathaway stock, and including joint investments, she and her husband have up to $600,000 invested in the company. Together, the Heitkamps could have up to $895,000 invested in the two firms.

For the senator, whose net worth was roughly $4.5 million in 2015, according to an estimate by the Center for Responsive Politics, these J.P. Morgan and Berkshire Hathaway investments potentially account for a substantial portion of her assets.

Clayton Homes and Vanderbilt Mortgage, the nation’s largest mobile-home empire and its lending operation, both subsidiaries of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, formerly pressured minority borrowers into unfavorable loans with hidden fees, and repossessed the homes of those who couldn’t pay. The Intercept reported that Section 107 of S.2155 would allow manufactured home sellers to push borrowers into bad loans once again.

Several other S.2551 cosponsors have large investments in financial firms. As of 2016, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) owned up to $50,000 and Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) owned up to $100,000 in J. P. Morgan corporate securities stock.

In 2016, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) owned two corporate bonds, each worth up to $15,000, with J. P. Morgan and Berkshire Hathaway as part of his individual retirement account, and up to $15,000 in Prudential Financial stock, while his spouse owned between $15,000 and $50,000 in U.S. Bancorp stock. As of September 2017, Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) had up to $100,000 invested in Regions Financial Corporation.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), worth roughly $238 million in 2015, has between $5 million and $25 million invested in J.P. Morgan’s Strategic Income Opports I mutual fund. Primary sponsor Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, and his spouse have up to $80,000 invested in J.P. Morgan mutual funds.

“The lobbyists have been fighting these regulations literally since the day the rules were passed,” said Warren in a recent video. “And now Congress is about to give the banks and their lobbyists their fondest wish.”

J.P. Morgan lobbied Congress during the last quarter of 2017 on S.2155 and “issues related to the treatment of custody in capital and liquidity requirements.” The Manufactured Housing Institute, which represents numerous Berkshire Hathaway subsidiaries, hired two different firms to lobby Congress on S.2155 as recently as 2017’s final quarter. Reports for early 2018 are not yet available. Over 100 additional companies have reported lobbying specifically on S.2155 in 2017.

Lobbying isn’t the only method that financial and loan companies employ to influence legislators. Heitkamp is the commercial banking industry’s number one recipient of campaign donations in the current election cycle, having reported receipts of $157,000 from banks’ employees and political action committees. Her fellow cosponsors, Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and Sen. John Tester (D-Mont.) come in second and third, respectively, on that list. JPMorgan’s PAC donated $2,000 to Heitkamp in 2017.

Companies don’t stop at campaign committees, however. The J.P. Morgan PAC also gave $5,000 to Heitkamp’s leadership PAC, the Dakota Prairie PAC.

Citigroup, which will reap huge, targeted gains from the legislation, donated $1,500 to Heitkamp through its political action committee in 2017.

“Our big money campaign finance system not only means that Congressional candidates are dependent on deep-pocketed financial interests to get elected, but that Congress itself is a millionaire’s club where it is not uncommon for members to have six-figure investments in the industries they regulate,” Brendan Fischer, director of the Federal and FEC Reform Program at the Campaign Legal Center, told TYT.

The North Dakotan, a moderate, is facing a tough reelection battle this year in her conservative state, which the Cook Political Report considers a toss-up. She and several other vulnerable red-state Democrats including Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Donnelly and Tester are some of the most likely Democrats to vote with their Republican Senate colleagues. All are S.2155 cosponsors.

Despite what watchdogs might say about the appearance of corruption, Heitkamp is not breaking Senate ethics rules, which are very specific. The Senate Ethics Manual reads, ‘‘No Member, officer, or employee shall knowingly use his official position to introduce or aid the progress or passage of legislation, a principal purpose of which is to further only his pecuniary interest. . . . Both the ‘principal purpose’ and the ‘limited class’ test must be met before the paragraph precludes a Senator’s involvement in a legislative proposal. As noted, the history states that ‘legislation may benefit a Senator significantly, but if it also has a broad, general impact on his state or the nation, the prohibitions of the paragraph would not apply.’ In other words, lawmakers can write and vote on bills that benefit a class of people or a group of companies, but they can’t participate in legislation that directly aids themselves, their family, or one specific company in which they are financially invested.

“In order to even consider running for office, a candidate needs a network of wealthy associates and to be comfortable asking those rich folks for money—which gives an advantage to candidates who are themselves wealthy,” said Fischer. “So it perhaps isn’t surprising that the members of Congress who are leading the charge to deregulate Wall Street are both dependent on Wall Street cash for their reelection and also have six-figure investments in the entities that stand to benefit. We don’t know whether these members are acting in the interest of their donors, or in their self-interest, but it is unfortunate that we even need to be asking these questions.”

Heitkamp’s office, Warren’s office, J.P. Morgan, and Berkshire Hathaway did not return requests for comment.

Alex Kotch is an investigative reporter whose work has previously appeared in International Business Times, Vice.com, and Exposed by CMD. Follow him on Twitter.

From the CBPP: The Scoop on SNAP (February 23)

When members of Congress return to Washington on Monday, they’ll start a four-week sprint that may include introduction of the first major legislative threat to low-income assistance programs: the House version of the 2018 Farm Bill.

The Farm Bill, which is renewed every five years, includes SNAP (formerly known as food stamps), our nation’s largest and most effective anti-hunger program. If the House Farm Bill—like the President’s budget proposal released last week—contains cuts to SNAP benefits and eligibility, nearly every type of SNAP participant could be hurt, including the elderly, individuals with disabilities, low-income working families with children, and those struggling to find work. Traditionally, Farm Bills are bipartisan efforts that do not pose serious threats to SNAP. However, we are concerned that House Agriculture Committee Chairman Conaway has been making statements that suggest he is open to deep cuts in SNAP benefits.

The other concern is that SNAP cuts in the House Farm Bill could be the opening volley in a larger effort to take away food, housing, health care, and other basic necessities from people who are struggling, under the misleading banner of “workforce development.” In other words, more legislation with harmful cuts or changes to anti-poverty programs could be coming.

Everything you’ve been doing over the last several weeks—including the most recent work to generate strong and swift opposition to the cuts and changes proposed in the President’s budget—has been laying the groundwork for us to push back against and ultimately defeat legislative proposals such as SNAP cuts and harmful changes in the House Farm Bill.

We understand that some of you may be new to SNAP, so today’s Scoop provides more information on the program and what we’re worried about in the 2018 Farm Bill. We will provide additional resources in the coming weeks to help you prepare for and respond to the House Farm Bill release. For now, we suggest the following:

If you haven’t worked on SNAP before:

• Get up to speed on SNAP using this issue of The Federal Scoop and CBPP’s Policy Basics, state fact sheets, and talking points.
• Reach out to food banks, food pantries, or other anti-hunger advocates in your state to find out what they are preparing for the Farm Bill and how you can become involved.

 
If you’re a longtime SNAP advocate (or after you’ve done the above):

• Reach out to your House representatives and their staff to educate them about the importance of SNAP, the value of state options like categorical eligibility and time-limit waivers (more on those state options below), and your concerns about the possibility that the House Farm Bill could contain harmful cuts to SNAP. You can reference the SNAP proposals in the President’s budget as a “hook” for sharing your concerns.
• Submit op-eds and letters to the editor in your local papers with the messages reflected in these talking points.
• Create a rapid-response plan that you can deploy when the House Farm Bill comes out. For example, will you issue a press statement and share it with the press and on social media? Will you send an action alert to your email list encouraging them to call or email their representative? If appropriate, will you and your coalition send a letter to your senators laying out the problems with the House Farm Bill so they are informed and engaged to prevent the Senate from following suit?

 
Today’s Scoop also explains the other issues Congress could address in this four-week legislative period, including appropriations for non-defense discretionary (NDD) programs.
 
Lastly, for those of you who are counting the weeks, that means Congress will be home for recess again March 24–April 8. Mark your calendars for this critical two-week recess period! As you know, that’s a prime time to request in-district meetings with your members of Congress and their staff, hold or attend public events, and secure earned media.
 
Onward,
Louisa, Victoria, Deborah & the CBPP Team
 
As a reminder, the information in these Scoop emails is meant only for you and other state-based advocates who work on these issues. Please do not share or forward these emails to press or any legislative staff.
 

Today’s Scoop

• A primer on SNAP and the Farm Bill
• Tentative timing and process for the Farm Bill
• What to watch in the 2018 House Farm Bill
• Other issues Congress may work on in February and March

A primer on SNAP and the Farm Bill

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, is our nation’s most effective anti-hunger program. In a typical month in 2017, SNAP helped more than 40 million low-income Americans pay for their groceries and afford a nutritionally adequate diet. (See our state fact sheets to find out how many people it helped in your state.)
 
The most important thing to know is that SNAP works. As we lay out in our recent talking points, SNAP fights poverty and is good for the economy and public health. To dive into more detail on SNAP, check out CBPP’s SNAP Policy Basics and our updated chartbook.
 
SNAP is part of the Farm Bill, a piece of legislation that is renewed (aka “reauthorized”) every five years. Spending on SNAP and other nutrition programs makes up approximately 80 percent of the Farm Bill. The rest of the Farm Bill includes food and agriculture programs such as crop insurance and subsidies and rural development. To learn more about the Farm Bill, we recommend this Farm Bill primer from the Food Research & Action Center.
 
Back to top
 

Tentative timing and process for the Farm Bill

The Farm Bill needs to be reauthorized by September 30, 2018. In the last few Farm Bill cycles, the House and Senate have passed their own versions of the Farm Bill (which are written by the respective Agriculture Committees). Then the House and Senate must come together to reconcile their differences and pass one identical version. We expect the same process to play out this year, with the House Agriculture Committee moving first with their version.
 
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway of Texas has said he intends to introduce the House version of the Farm Bill in the next few weeks. He hopes the Farm Bill would come up for a full House vote before the next congressional recess, which begins on March 24, but the timing of the floor vote may slip until April. The Senate Agriculture Committee has not specified a detailed timeline, but we anticipate that they would not introduce their version of the Farm Bill before late spring or early summer. Of course, as with most predictions in Congress, this timing is subject to change.
 
Back to top
 

What to watch in the 2018 House Farm Bill

We are concerned that the House Farm Bill could include some of the SNAP cuts in the President’s budget. While we do not believe the Farm Bill will include the ridiculed “Blue Apron” proposal in which the government provides SNAP participants with boxes of groceries, we are concerned that the House Farm Bill could include some of the Trump Administration’s proposed cuts to benefits and eligibility. Our paper on the SNAP proposals in the President’s budget is a comprehensive resource for what to watch. In today’s Scoop, we wanted to flag three specific issues.
 
1. Expanding the three-month time limit for SNAP participants without minor children and making it harsher. Under current law, SNAP participants between the ages of 18 to 49 who are not raising minor children cannot receive benefits for more than three months in a 36-month period unless they work 20 hours a week. Some call this provision a work requirement, but “time limit” is more accurate because the provision does nothing to help someone get or keep a job; it just takes away their food assistance after a certain amount of time. The President’s budget would make two notable changes to the time limit, which we worry could also appear in the House Farm Bill:
 

• Raise the maximum age for those facing the time limit to 62, which would expose 2 million more individuals to the limits, including older Americans who face additional obstacles to work.
• Make it harder for states to exempt people from the time limit, such as those in areas with high unemployment or those who lack a high school diploma or face other high barriers to employment.

 
2. Eliminating a state option that protects poor working families, seniors, and people with disabilities from abruptly losing most or all of their SNAP benefits when they slightly improve their financial situations. The President’s budget would eliminate a state option known as “categorical eligibility,” which allows states to adjust income cutoffs and asset limits so that working families don’t abruptly lose much of their SNAP benefits when they earn slightly more. Allowing states to adjust the asset limit also helps seniors and people with disabilities by removing the savings disincentive in SNAP. If this option were eliminated, households could lose their food assistance if they saved more than the federal limit ($3,500 for households with an elderly member or person with a disability, $2,250 for other households).
 
3. Making additional benefit cuts that would affect working families and seniors. Chairman Conaway has not made his plans clear, and he routinely describes his goals on the Farm Bill as working towards the best “policy,” as opposed to achieving a budget target. We are honestly in a tea leaf-reading situation here: We worry that this framing means he may take some of the savings from benefit cuts and reinvest it in other SNAP policies. Taking away food assistance from the unemployed, working families, and seniors is not the way to pay for improvements in SNAP.
 
Back to top
 

Other issues Congress will work on in February and March

We are watching three other issues that Congress is likely to work on in the next four weeks, before the March 24–April 8 recess:

1. Implementation of the recent budget deal on Fiscal Year 2018 discretionary spending. Remember, the budget deal reached earlier this month only set the topline levels of spending for non-defense discretionary (NDD) programs, which includes important services and investments such as schools, child care assistance, rental assistance, water treatment plant construction, police and fire departments, and much more. Now Congress must write a 2018 omnibus appropriations bill to specify funding levels for individual programs. The current deadline for that omnibus appropriations bill is March 23. To learn more, read our blog roundup about funding priorities and an explanation of how the appropriations process and budget deal relate to the President’s budget released last week.

2. Negotiations to stabilize health insurance markets. As you may recall, Senate Majority Leader McConnell promised Sen. Collins (R-ME) that the Senate would pass two Affordable Care Act (ACA) market stabilization proposals based on the Alexander-Murray legislation to address cost-sharing reduction payments to insurers and the Collins-Nelson reinsurance proposal, in exchange for Collins’ support of the tax bill. Those proposals are expected to be included in the omnibus appropriations package that Congress is working to pass by the March 23rd deadline. We are watching carefully to help ensure that no harmful changes to the ACA or harmful health offsets are added. To learn more, read our recent blog posts about the Alexander-Murray plan and funding for state reinsurance programs.

3. House committee hearings on the opioid crisis. Starting next week in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the House will hold legislative hearings aimed at crafting legislation to address the opioid crisis. The Wall Street Journal reports that two additional hearings will be held in March and the House is trying to pass legislation by the end of May. Bipartisan action on the opioid epidemic could be promising, but we’ll have to watch out for harmful offsets or other negative health care proposals that could latch onto the legislation.

Another hearing we’ll be watching next week is a subcommittee hearing titled “Strengthening Access and Accountability to Work in Welfare Programs.” This hearing could be the start of an effort by House leaders to lay the groundwork for a “workforce development” bill that would take away basic assistance from people in need instead of helping people find and keep a good-paying job.

From The Coalition on Human Needs: Resources on the President's Fiscal Year 19 Budget

In case you missed it... this week the Voices for Human Needs blog covered resources from our members and our latest Human Needs Report, all focused on President Trump's FY19 budget blueprint. Subscribe to the blog and share with your networks!   This week on the blog... Resources from around the Coalition: Trump FY19 budget edition February 22 On Feb. 12, the Trump administration released its Fiscal Year 2019 budget request. Since then, CHN's members have been busy analyzing the proposal and pointing out the many ways it would slash basic human needs programs and harm low-income people. In this blog, we cover a few of the analyses and resources; these and many more are also available on CHN's FY19 budget resource page. READ MORE » The Human Needs Report: President Trump's FY19 Budget Request Special Edition February 20 CHN released a special edition of the Human Needs Report focusing on President Trump's FY19 budget request. In addition to an overview of the budget itself and the budget process, we compiled many of the program cuts and policy changes in the Trump administration's budget that are most damaging to low-income people from select departmental budgets, including the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Labor, Housing and Urban Development, and Agriculture. We also included proposed cuts and changes to other areas of note. READ MORE »

From Inside Sources: The Bank of North Dakota: A solution to Municipal Financing After Divestment?

The Bank of North Dakota: A Solution to Municipal Financing After Divestment?

Posted to Energy February 23, 2018 by Erin Mundahl

• Email
 
• Print

• Share This
 
• Tweet This

First it was Seattle, which voted to divest city accounts from Wells Fargo early last year. Then Davis, California, Minneapolis, San Francisco, and other cities followed, citing a range of reasons, including a recent fees scandal and the bank’s support of energy infrastructure development projects, such as the Dakota Access Pipeline. After voting for divestment, city councils are left with a knotty problem: where to put the city’s accounts? To begin, few banks are large enough to handle the size of the deposits most cities need to make, and many of those that are have also invested in fossil fuel development. As a result, more and more city councils have been floating the idea of a municipal bank, a project that would likely be modeled after the Bank of North Dakota.

Considered by many to be America’s only “socialist” bank, the Bank of North Dakota was founded in 1919 by an act of the state legislature. At the time, a party called the Non-Partisan League that united labor organizers and farmers had captured the governor’s office and the state House. Organized by A.C. Townley, a former member of the socialist party, the Non-Partisan League was created specifically to support the social and economic position of the farmer, as opposed to banks in places like Minneapolis and Chicago, which had raised interest rates on farm loans to as high as 12 percent.

Members of the Non-Partisan League believed that the creation of a publicly-owned bank and grain mill would protect them from price gouging. When it opened, on July 28, 1919, the Bank of North Dakota held about $2 million in capital. Its holdings have grown, but its primary deposit base remains the state of North Dakota itself.

Throughout its history, the bank has been focused on the well being of the state. During the 1940s, for example, it sold back farmland that had been foreclosed on during the Great Depression, often to the same families. In 1961, Governor William Guy took office with the belief that the bank should function as an engine for economic development. As a result, he began the process of partnering with other commercial lending groups to extend its loan outreach.

As part of this program, the Bank of North Dakota also offered the first federally-insured student loan in the United States in 1967.

Today, the Bank of North Dakota functions primarily as a “banker’s bank,” offering loans in partnership with other financial institutions. This allows the Bank of North Dakota to expand the lending potential of smaller credit institutions in the state. The Institute for Self-Reliance, a group supporting environmentally and socially sound community development, says that North Dakota has one of the strongest networks of community banks in the country.

“By helping to sustain a large number of local banks and credit unions, BND has strengthened North Dakota’s economy, enabled small businesses and farms grow, and spurred job creation in the state,” the Institute writes.

The only service it sells directly to consumers is student loans, which comprise about a third of its loan portfolio. In part, this reflects a conscious decision on the part of regulators not to allow the state bank to become a competitor with local lending institutions, but rather to serve in a support role. As a result, much of the Bank of North Dakota’s loan portfolio is comprised of loans that originated in other banks or credit unions, but for which the state bank provided a portion of the funds.

Even so, the Bank of North Dakota operates on a scale much smaller than most of the cities would need. In 2016, the bank set a new record high for its profits, which reached a lofty $136.2 million, up roughly four percent from the year before. When the bank turns a profit, a portion revenues are returned to the general fund, in this case to help the state to handle a budget shortfall.

As cities explore divestment, North Dakota’s example has been brought up more and more.  Its utility may rest on an understanding of how the goals of the projects relate. While places like San Francisco and Seattle are concerned about support for fossil fuels and want control of the loans their deposits are used to fund, North Dakotans were worried about interest rates and created a bank to promote lending. So far, cities rushing into divestment have few clear plans for what to do after making such a drastic move.

Follow Erin on Twitter.

About the Author

Erin Mundahl

Erin Mundahl is a reporter with InsideSources.

From ND AFL-CIO: February 26 Update

Hundreds of union supporters rally at Minnesota Capitol Hundreds of union members, including teachers, nurses and construction workers, rallied inside the State Capitol in St. Paul on Saturday to draw attention to a Supreme Court case that could deliver a major blow to organized labor. The Working People’s Day of Action rally was organized in response to the Janus vs. AFSCME Council 31 case, scheduled to be heard by the high court on Monday. Arming teachers isn't the solution It has now been more than a week since the tragic events unfolded at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. There, 14 students and three staff members were killed and many others were injured, some seriously. At North Dakota United, the news of this Valentine’s Day massacre hit all of us very hard. Children, after all, are at the heart of everything we do. From teaching children to providing the public services that strengthen their families, NDU is undeniably child-centered. So like millions of families across the nation our NDU family stopped what they were doing and tried to make sense of what we were seeing on the news. How after Columbine, after Sandy Hook could this be happening again? Zaleski: Senate race will be down, dirty as it gets Congressman Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., now a wannabe U.S. senator, has never won a tough election. He's been in only two that were real tests, both against Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., (1996 and 1998), and Cramer handily lost both. One of those losses was distinguished by Cramer's odious concession speech in which he spat into the camera, "I will be watching you, Earl Pomeroy." He shredded decency and good manners, opting instead for an angry poor-loser performance that exposed a streak of smarmy nastiness. Letter: Why should we give Cramer a promotion? Rep. Kevin Cramer announced he's running for Senate, which left us thinking — why should we give him a promotion? Cramer's record in Congress has been dismal. So why is he trying to jump jobs when he can't even do the one he has? Just last month, he said it was best for North Dakota if he stayed in the House. He said he couldn't be an effective congressman if he had to run a Senate campaign. Video: ND AFL-CIO President on Harold Hamm as Rep. Cramer Campaign Finance Chair Labor Town Hall: Unions, Politics & Power - Bismarck Edition The North Dakota AFL-CIO will host a town hall-style meeting with the theme of "Unions, Politics and Power" for union members and their families at the Bismarck Labor Temple on Feb 27th at 6:00 pm. Come learn and discuss how we can use our freedom to join together to build better lives for North Dakota union families and to build a better North Dakota for all workers. Pizza, Pop, Coffee and Cookies will be served. NOTE: This discussion will be geared specifically towards North Dakota union members, retired union members and union family members. Similar Labor Town Halls for the general public are forthcoming. Locations for Grand Forks, Minot TBA. Stand Up for SNAP! On any given day 54,000 North Dakotans rely on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) to put food on their table. SNAP is set to be reauthorized in the 2018 Farm Bill. Based on past Farm Bills and what we are hearing from Congress, we expect the program will be at risk of significant cuts and damaging policy changes. Mobile Messaging for North Dakota Workers! We are happy to introduce a new tool in the fight for workers' rights in North Dakota! Text NDLABOR to 235246 to join our new mobile messaging service and stay up-to-date on upcoming actions and events for working people!

From the CBPP: Weekly Update

This week at CBPP, we focused on the federal budget, state budgets and taxes, Social Security, food assistance, federal taxes, housing, health, poverty and inequality, and family income support. On the federal budget, we released a number of pieces on President Trump’s 2019 budget. Robert Greenstein released a statement on the stark vision of America the budget offers. On the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Dorothy Rosenbaum, Stacy Dean, Ed Bolen, Elizabeth Wolkomir, Brynne Keith-Jennings, Lexin Cai, and Catlin Nchako found that President Trump’s budget would cut food assistance for millions and radically restructure the program, and Dean summarized these findings. On health, Peggy Bailey, Matt Broaddus, Shelby Gonzales, Hannah Katch, and Paul Van de Water found that the health proposals included in the President’s budget would reduce health insurance coverage and access to care for millions. On housing, Douglas Rice pointed out that President Trump’s budget slashes aid for families already struggling to pay rent. Sharon Parrott, Aviva Aron-Dine, Rosenbaum, Rice, Ife Floyd, and Kathleen Romig explained how the President’s budget would make cuts to health, housing, and other assistance for low- and moderate-income families deeper than any ever enacted. LaDonna Pavetti warned that the welfare-to-work proposal in the Trump budget would unravel major federal programs. David Reich laid out how President Trump’s budget would cut non-defense programs deeply in 2019 and beyond. Michael Leachman argued that states can’t afford massive new costs that President Trump’s budget would shift to states and localities. We rounded up our continuing coverage of the president’s budget. Jacob Leibenluft pointed out that President Trump’s new infrastructure plan is a mirage and that his budget will actually cut federal support for infrastructure investment. Arloc Sherman explained why policymakers should boost 2018 funding for the 2020 census. On state budgets and taxes, Liz McNichol warned that President Trump’s plan to cut federal infrastructure funding would put badly needed improvements at risk. Leachman submitted testimony to the Kansas legislature’s Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs on why the state should reject a call for a constitutional convention. On Social Security, Kathleen Romig highlighted how the bipartisan agreement to raise the caps on discretionary spending in 2018 and 2019 gives policymakers another chance to fund technology improvements for the program and reduce Social Security’s disability backlog. On food assistance, we updated our backgrounder on SNAP. On federal taxes, Chuck Marr called on congressional appropriators to make adequate funding for the Internal Revenue Service a top priority. On health, Jessica Schubel warned that Kentucky’s Medicaid waiver will increase uncompensated care for hospitals and safety net providers. On poverty and inequality, Chad Stone, Danilo Trisi, Arloc Sherman, and Roderick Taylor updated our guide to statistics on historical trends in income inequality. On family income support, Tazra Mitchell and Pavetti updated their rebuttal of a fundamentally flawed study praising Kansas’ harsh TANF work penalties. Chart of the Week – Trump Budget Proposes Deep and Growing Cuts to Medicaid and ACA Marketplace Subsidies. A variety of news outlets featured CBPP’s work and experts recently. Here are some highlights: Idaho Blue Cross Jumps Into Controversial Market For Plans That Bypass ACA Rules Kaiser Health News February 14, 2018 ‘We would literally not survive’: How Trump’s plans for the social safety net would affect America’s poorest Washington Post February 14, 2018 Trump’s ‘Harvest Box’ Isn’t Viable in SNAP Overhaul, Officials Say New York Times February 13, 2018 White House Budget Calls For Deep Cuts To HUD NPR February 13, 2018 Trump’s New Infrastructure Plan Is Kind Of Underwhelming Huffington Post February 12, 2018 Don’t miss any of our posts, papers, or charts — follow us on  Twitter,  Facebook, and Instagram.