Sen. Warren Faults Too Big to Fail Banks

AP Photo

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) 

Won Tuesday.

Federal Reserve rejects the "living will plans" for too-big-to-fail Wall Street banks.

Barclays, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan Chase 

all had their plans rejected.* (Hooray)

The concept of living wills was born of the financial crisis, when regulators and politicians realized that they had no orderly way of unwinding systemically important banks that had failed. They didn't want to see another Lehman bankruptcy that would take three years to resolve.

The wills then became a part of Dodd-Frank, so banks were legally required to write their own strategies for the "rapid and orderly resolution in the event of material financial distress or failure of the company."

The Fed on Tuesday made it clear that it did not feel the wills that banks submitted last month (now in their second iteration) were capable of doing that — something Warren had been shouting about.

When Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen testified before the Senate last month, 

Warren completely grilled her on JP Morgan's living will, which she said was not enough to cover the bank's $2.5 trillion in assets.

"I almost couldn't believe this when I read it," Warren told Yellen.

Yellen said the Fed was continuing to review the wills and that it was a complicated process.

Warren wasn't satisfied:

I think the language in the [Dodd-Frank] statute is pretty clear. That you are required, that the Fed is required to call it every year on whether these institutions have a credible plan. And I remind you, there are very effective tools that you can use if those plans are not credible. Including, forcing these financial institutions to simplify their structure, or forcing them to liquidate some of their assets. In other words, break them up.

The Fed said the wills the banks presented were "unrealistic" and that firms lacked significant structural changes necessary to carry them out.

From the Fed's release:

The agencies will require that the annual plans submitted by the first-wave filers on or before July 1, 2015, demonstrate that the firms are making significant progress to address all the shortcomings identified in the letters, and are taking actions to improve their resolvability under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. These actions include:

-establishing a rational and less complex legal structure that would take into account the best alignment of legal entities and business lines to improve the firm's resolvability;

-developing a holding company structure that supports resolvability; amending, on an industry-wide and firm-specific basis, financial contracts to provide for a stay of certain early termination rights of external counterparties triggered by insolvency proceedings;

-ensuring the continuity of shared services that support critical operations and core business lines throughout the resolution process; and -demonstrating operational capabilities for resolution preparedness, such as the ability to produce reliable information in a timely manner.

The next wills come out in July 2015. Let's see if those satisfy Warren and the Fed.

*An earlier version of this story reported that Bank of America's plan had been accepted. It had not. The bank's capital plan, revised from April, has been accepted.

Link to the original article from Business Insider.

Read 1077 times

Warren Acts to Stop Corp Inversion Tax Tricks

Warren, Durbin, and Reed demand executive action on inversions

byJoan McCarterFollow

The latest corporate tax dodge to hit the news is the practice of inversions, big corporations either merging with other corporations or buying a company and then claiming that they are based in that country, thereby avoiding paying corporate taxes in the U.S. The Joint Commission on Taxation has estimated that the U.S. could lose as much as $19.5 billion in tax receipts in the next decade because of this growing practice. Senate Democrats have introduced the Stop Corporate Inversions Act to curtail the practice, but recognize that this legislation isn't going anywhere fast in this Congress. 

So Sens. Dick Durbin, Elizabeth Warren, and Jack Reed have written to President Obama, asking him act on his own on the issue.

“The coming flood of corporate inversions justifies immediate executive action,” says the letter, spearheaded by Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, and signed by Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Jack Reed of Rhode Island. […]

Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew said at a conference in New York last month that he did not believe he had the power to act alone on the issue. But Mr. Obama recently delivered a speech decrying inversions, and administration officials had been evaluating the legality of unilaterally limiting them.

“They’re looking at what they can do on their own,” Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said in an interview last week. “They want to do it. The president really dislikes the inversions, and if they feel they have a strong legal ability to do it, they will.”

The practice is increasing, with two large pharmaceutical companies and a national drug store chain (giant AbbVie, based in Illinois, Pennsylvania generic manufacturer Mylan, and Walgreens) all either just moving overseas or threatening to. President Obama focused on the issue in a speech last month in Los Angeles, saying, "I don’t care if it's legal. It's wrong. […] You shouldn't get to call yourself an American company only when you want a handout from the American taxpayers."

One of the Obama administration's former Treasury officials, Stephen Shay, thinks that it is within the President's power to act on this unilaterally under existing tax law. Three U.S. senators agree.

Sign the petition: Walgreens must not cheat American taxpayers out of $4 billion by becoming a Swiss company

N.B. Walgreens buckled under massive outpouring from patriotic Americans.  Staying in USA.

CA Assembly Visit Central America

California lawmakers conclude 

July 14-23, fact-finding mission

By CYNTHIA MORENO

Vida en el Valle

SACRAMENTO — Central American leaders are not oblivious to the tide of young children and their mothers who paid up to $10,000 to risk a perilous, two-week journey in an effort to avoid gang beatings and killings in their home countries.

While most in Congress have joined President Obama in finding out how to quickly deport the estimated 57,000 minors from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, six California lawmakers (all Democrats— visited those Central American countries to see what the state can do to meet the humanitarian challenge.

"It was a very eye-opening experience," said Assemblymember Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville.

Alejo — who was joined by state Sens. Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento, Ellen Corbett of the East Bay; and, Assemblymembers V. Manuel Pérez of Coachella, Henry T. Perea of Fresno, and, José Medina of Riverside — confirmed the migration was due to crime and safety, and not for education or work.

"It was certainly true that many cities in El Salvador — 19 to be exact — are facing serious gang problems and a lot of violence, but that is not true for most of the country," said Alejo.

"However, the majority of minors who are leaving those 19 cities are also the ones leaving the country," he said.

Sexual violence and human trafficking, gangs and other types of violence are the reason so many children are leaving El Salvador.

"Those who stay in these communities face one of two things: either join the gangs or become a victim of sexual abuse or sexual assault," said Alejo.

The July 14-23 fact-finding mission has been in the works before the refugee crisis erupted last month.

"We were interested in meeting with the leaders of those countries and discussing economic development, water, energy, and trade and of course, immigration," said Pérez. "However, it was immigration that became front and center."

El Salvador looking for solutions

The delegation's first stop was El Salvador, where the group spoke to President Salvador Sánchez Cerén. The leader who said his country was aware of the migration, and pointed to the efforts being made to address issues like violence and poverty.

The Salvadoran government has been and is addressing efforts to minimize the violenceand making "great strides" in helping their country meet the needs of its citizens, said Alejo.

"In the last five years, El Salvador created a first breakfast program in schools for children, has implemented the use of school uniforms, has created a system to grant small grants and loans to farmers with the hope of reinvigorating efforts to export corn, beans and rice; and they have implemented after-school programs to keep children out of violence," said Alejo.

Cerén, said Alejo, recognizes there is more work to be done. The government has hired more police officers and has implemented new training procedures to minimize violence. Officials are working with the U.S. to solve the gang problems. Legislation has been passed to prevent political corruption.

"They have started to build medical clinics in rural areas so that those who are under-served have more access and opportunities. They want to expand public education which is really important," said Pérez. "Overall, the leadership in El Salvador is making great progress in making their country a better place."

El Salvador wants the voiceless to have a voice.

"The country wants a better, more peaceful future and they are taking all the steps necessary to ensure they can carry out their goals for the country. However, they do need the support of the United States," said Alejo.

The situation in Guatemala is in sharp contrast, said the lawmakers.

"There is political corruption at the highest of levels," said Pérez. "About 25 families control the economy of the country and there is no left-leaning political party for people to vote for.

"Not a single party exists that represents the voice of the people, the vulnerable or the indigenous."

Additionally, Guatemala has no tax system. Most of the countries elite, who own the majority of the land, pay no property taxes. There are also high levels of poverty in the highlands region of Guatemala, where a majority of indigenous groups, like the Mayas, continue to live.

"Most of the people, who are leaving Guatemala, are the indigenous from these communities, especially the young children because they do not have access to an education and there is extreme poverty," said Alejo. "They come to America because there is hope that they can at least get an education and have something to eat."

Honduras worse off

Honduras has a more difficult situation, according to the lawmakers.

"It faces the toughest situation. It's somewhat of a nation-state where there are a lot of criminal gangs, a lack of opportunities and a lot of violence against women," said Pérez.

"Both the governments of El Salvador and Guatemala recognize that Honduras is in a much more challenging position to move forward," he said.

The migration problem, said Pérez, can be solved if the U.S. can get comprehensive immigration reform.

"The No. 1 reason why so many children are coming to our borders is because of family reunification," said Pérez. "Many of the children who find themselves in a position where they are old enough to travel, have had family members who left them a few years ago to make a life for themselves in the United States and now that they have saved enough money, they are hiring coyotes and other smugglers to bring their children across."

Coyotes and other smugglers charge exorbitant fees — between $5,000 and $10,000 — with the promise of getting their children into the U.S. Abuse by police and even death can await the children, but families are often desperate to reunite with their children.

Of the Central American children who have arrived at the U.S. border, few have been deported back to their country of origin. Those who have, do so out of choice.

"Most of them have no relatives in the United States or are weary of leaving their children in the hands of the U.S. government so they return with their children," said Alejo.

"But what is waiting for them when they get back? Absolutely nothing. There are no social services in Guatemala, no job opportunities, nothing. They go back to the same conditions and the reason why they first fled in the first place."

Immigration reform needed

Migration to the United States will continue said both state lawmakers, so long as the United States does not take a proactive approach in both recognizing that the reason for so many of the troubles that plague Central American countries has been a direct result of American intervention during the early 1980s and 1990s that left the countries in long and bloody civil wars.

"We have a responsibility, in my opinion, to do what we can to build up the economies of these countries by supporting them with resources as we did in the past when we intervened instead of supporting progressive, leftist parties," said Pérez.

"We have to understand that the reason we are facing the humanitarian crisis and the reason why these countries continue to struggle has been a direct result of our interventions and when we acknowledge and accept that, then can we take a more proactive approach in helping these countries achieve economic, political and social stability," said Pérez.

"They want to change, they want to provide better opportunities for their people, but they need our help."

For those reasons, will migration come to a standstill. Otherwise, "those who are deported will continue to find a way back to the United States," said Alejo.

However, Central American countries are trying to keep people from migrating because of the dangers.

"They are beginning a public campaign to discourage people from making the trip to the U.S. and are presenting public service announcements highlighting the dangers. The El Salvadorian government understands the key to stopping the migration is to provide better educational opportunities, jobs for their people, and security," said Assembly member Henry T. Perez, D-Fresno.

Why? Because the United States-in the eyes of so many Central American's-continues to be "the land of opportunity and fulfilling the American Dream," said Perez.

Addressing the humanitarian crisis

The delegation wants to find solutions. When the Legislature convenes this month,lawmakers plan to introduce bills that will help the Central American countries.

"We have a few pieces of legislation brewing, but first and foremost we have to ensure fair treatment of the children who are already here; that they are treated with dignity and respect and are allowed due process and access to a lawyer and the courts," said Pérez.

A few days ago, Steinberg, the state Senate leader, announced his office would provide pro bono legal representation to undocumented and unaccompanied children arriving in California from Central América.

His policy director Anthony Williams and senior policy consultant Margie Estrada will participate in the Los Ángeles County Bar Association's Legal Assistance Project in conjunction with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) Southern California Chapter.

"These children face a daunting immigration process in a foreign legal system without any legal representation. A kid is a kid, and should be shown compassion regardless of where they were born," said Steinberg in a statement.

Send e-mail to:

cmoreno@vidaenelvalle.com

Citizen Justice Over NSA Surveillance State

What Crack Cocaine Teaches Us About NSA Reform

07/31/2014

• Print
• Email
• RSS
• Facebook
• Twitter
• See more sharing options

NSA

By Laura W. Murphy, Director, ACLU Washington Legislative Office 

This piece originally ran at POLITICO Magazine.

This week, Patrick Leahy, the Democratic Senator from Vermont, introduced a revised version of the USA Freedom Act, a bill to finally start pulling the reins on America's out-of-control surveillance state. The ACLU supports the measure, though it is not a perfect bill. To understand why, it helps to think about something seemingly unrelated: crack cocaine.

During the first term of President Ronald Reagan's administration, hysteria over the crack "epidemic" led Congress to enact strict sentencing laws that punished crack offenses much more severely than powder cocaine—at a 100 to 1 ratio. Two pennies worth of crack would land you as much jail time as half a kilo of powder.

The ACLU thought that was wrong, and so started fighting that fight in the early 1980s. It took us more than two decades, but in 2010 we finally had a compromise reform bill on the floor that actually stood a shot at passage. Unfortunately, it didn't eliminate the disparity altogether, but only reduced the ratio to 18 to 1.

Reform advocates were at a crossroads. Maximalists urged opposition despite the fact the bill would, in a very real way, make life better for thousands of people and begin to reduce the severe racial and ethnic inequality in our prison system. Pragmatists, fearing that opposition to the bill would preclude any reform at all, urged support.

It was a painful compromise, but the ACLU ultimately supported the bill. It passed, astoundingly, with overwhelming support in both chambers.

And then something amazing happened. Conservative lawmakers, concerned about government waste, increasingly came to the table to support criminal justice reform. Liberals realized they could vote their conscience on criminal justice without accusations of being "soft on crime." It has not been easy and there have been many steps backward, but in recent years, we've seen greater public opposition to mandatory minimum sentences and real movement on things like reducing penalties for low-level drug offenses.

Which brings us to the USA Freedom Act. It's not a perfect bill. As with virtually any law, there are ambiguities in the text, which, in this case, could be read abusively to allow the collection of a large amount of sensitive information on many innocents.

But it is a vast improvement on the legislation that passed the House in May, which was weakened at the last minute, leading many privacy advocates and technology companies to pull their support. Leahy's bill would reduce the overall amount of private information being collected by the National Security Agency and other government agencies, which would, much like the Fair Sentencing Act, pay real privacy dividends for real people.

Passing the USA Freedom Act would also present a clear inflection point in the surveillance debate. For almost 20 years, going back even before the Patriot Act to a 1996 law passed in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, the freight train has resolutely barreled toward unchecked surveillance authority. Here, the proponents of surveillance reform who pulled support can take a lot of credit for the progress made in the Senate, which will give them real leverage in the next fight.

In Washington, progress begets progress. It's exceedingly rare that a maximalist strategy on any issue—from reproductive freedom and LGBT rights to immigration reform and pay equity—succeeds in creating immediate, dramatic change. To give just one example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, often and rightly seen as the watershed in the movement, wouldn't have passed Congress without the groundwork laid by the weaker civil rights acts of 1957 and 1960.

That said, as with all of these examples, it's crucial not to rest on any laurels. Not only should Congress pass the USA Freedom Act, but much more needs to be done to address the erosion of checks and balances on government surveillance and other national security authorities.

Specifically, Congress must next tackle the NSA's use of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to scoop up vast quantities of emails, phone calls, text messages and other international communications of individuals suspected of no wrongdoing, and then search them without a warrant. Congress and the president must also reform Executive Order 12333, the Reagan-era measure that governs the collection of intelligence overseas. As some have argued, the significant power claimed under 12333 may be an even greater threat to America's democratic institutions than the programs we've learned about in the past year.

Despite many more battles to be fought on surveillance reform, we must seize the opportunity before us. Since the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001, the NSA's exponential surveillance buildup seemed like something huge and seemingly unstoppable—driven resolutely forward by fear, congressional and executive branch support, unlimited funding, voter inertia and the shroud of secrecy. But right now Congress has powerful legislation that can chart us on a new course. The oft-heard saying "a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step" applies here. That first step begins with Congress passing the USA Freedom Act.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/nsa-reform-crack-cocaine-109545.html#ixzz393hPAqO6

Learn more about government surveillance and other civil liberties issues: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook

A.L.E.C. Protest in Texas

Protests Greet Lawmakers, Corporate Officials Gathering in Dallas as New Arm of ALEC Is Announced

Saturday, 02 August 2014 09:52By Candice Bernd, Truthout | Report

• 157
• font size   
• Print 
• Email

Protesters dropped a banner from the upper stories of the Hilton Anatole hotel early Thursday, July 31, 2014, to greet legislators and corporate officials attending ALEC's 41st annual meeting in Dallas, Texas. (Photo: Candice Bernd)

Two grassroots activists from North Texas locked themselves inside the lobby of the Hilton Anatole in Dallas, Thursday morning, as another two dropped a banner from the upper stories of the hotel to greet lawmakers and corporate officials gathered for the 41st annual meeting of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

Joshua Carmona from Dallas locked himself to a tree inside the lobby of the Hilton Anatole as hotel security arrives on the scene. He was removed and released without charges Thursday, July 31, 2014. (Photo: Candice Bernd)

Protesters Whytney Blythe and Joshua Carmona were removed by hotel security, within about an hour after they chained themselves inside, and released without charges.

State legislators and corporate lobbyist members from across the country will sit on task forces designed to review and vote on conservative "model" legislation that will likely travel from the Dallas Hilton Anatole's luxury conference rooms to official state house chambers, as lawmakers often pass off ALEC model bills as their own.

ALEC has generated legislation that advances the interests of its corporate members throughout state legislatures in the United States, as has been well documented, by organizations such as the Center for Media and Democracy. More than 98 percent of the organization's funding comes from corporations and corporate foundations, with the infamous petrochemical billionaire brothers, Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries, serving as some of the organization's largest donors.

ALEC media relations staffers refused to issue a credential to this reporter to attend and cover this week's meeting in Dallas, citing the following specific portion of ALEC's media relations policy:

ALEC does not allow journalists to register as media for the purpose of writing a personal blog, or for persons whose news outlet is funded by an individual; political candidate or party; nonprofit; or activist/lobbying organization.

Truthout meets this criterion however, as a nonprofit whose classification as a 501(c)(3) was granted because Truthout has not affiliated with any political, lobbying or activist organizations, as opposed to nonprofit organizations that engage in political campaigning, widely classified as 501(c)(4) organizations. It remains unclear why this reporter was not granted access to this week's meeting.

Task forces are expected to consider model bills that would make Medicaid unobtainable for many across states and broaden the privatization of public education through the expansion of charter schools.

ALEC's Climate Agenda

ALEC also plans to host panels this week on topics including teaching its members "How to Think and Talk About Climate and Energy Issues," and how to bolster exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG), as well as on the EPA’s proposed carbon emissions rules and GMO food labeling proposals. Speakers include Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Texas Attorney General and Republican gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott and Newt Gingrich.

Much of ALEC's agenda for this week's meeting is returning to the organization's focus on promoting the extraction, production and exportation of fossil fuels while putting up roadblocks for renewable energy initiatives where it can. LNG exports have come to the forefront as a priority for ALEC during this week's meeting, according Steve Horn a research fellow with DeSmogBlog.

"The two areas that ALEC is pushing . . . are LNG exports and compressed natural gas vehicle model legislation. Both of these have already passed in some state houses, so it's kind of a reverse in a way, where ALEC will take bills they like from other states and introduce them to be templates for the 50 states," Horn said during a press call.

According to ClimateProgress, ALEC has invited a representative from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, a group funded by the Heartland Institute, to deliver the group's recent report on questioning the current scientific consensus on the issue of climate change during this week's meeting. The Heartland Institute is well known for openly denying the existence of anthropogenic climate change and questioning the findings of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

"We do expect that ALEC will double down this year to try to undermine or even completely undo the EPA's clean power plan," said Aliya Haq, who directs climate change special projects for the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC), referring to the EPA's proposal to cut emissions from power plants released last year.

She pointed to a previous annual meeting last December, in which ALEC members participated in workshops on how to obstruct the EPA's proposal months before the actual proposal was released. The NRDC tracked resolutions and bills from ALEC that emerged in state houses, after the meeting, designed to obstruct a state's ability to reduce carbon pollution. ALEC's environmental task force agenda for this week's meeting includes a new draft resolution opposing the EPA's clean power plan.

"That new draft has rhetoric like, 'the regulation of electricity is a sovereign state function' . . . there's a lot of kind of blustery language that they'll be pushing again once state legislators get back into swing," Haq said during a press call.

Protesters Greet ALEC in Dallas

As lawmakers schmoozed with corporate officials during the day's panels and luncheons, hundreds of protesters lined the streets outside the Hilton Anatole to oppose ALEC's agenda on issues ranging from labor rights, environmental policy, political spending, public education and health care.

Organizers greet ALEC attendees during a rally outside the Hilton Anatole Wednesday, July 30, 2014. (Photo: Candice Bernd)

Organizers erected a giant inflatable pig to represent ALEC during a rally outside the Hilton Anatole Wednesday, July 30, 2014. (Photo: Candice Bernd)

A coalition of activists, including many union organizers and grassroots groups, under the banner "TEXposeALEC" arranged buses for up to 500 demonstrators, who rendezvoused at the Hilton Anatole for a rally Wednesday afternoon, themed "Don't Mess With Texas." Demonstrators also attended ALEC's welcome reception at Eddie Deen's Ranch later on in the day.

"[ALEC] is going to continue to push an anti-worker narrative," said Pamela Reséndiz, mobilization coordinator with the Dallas AFL-CIO. "Whether it's right to work, or whether they're trying to take away pensions from workers, or whether it is to cut out overtime pay . . . their policies affect everyone, regardless of whether you're in a union or not."

But as protesters rallied outside, ALEC officials inside revealed new plans to expand their organizations reach at the local level.

ALEC Could Be Coming to Your City Soon: 

The American City County Exchange

ALEC announced Wednesday the launch of a new offshoot that will apply ALEC's modus operandi of courting legislators with corporate lobbyists to draft model bills advancing corporate interests - to the local level.

This new arm of ALEC, the American City County Exchange (ACCE), held its first meeting Wednesday at the Hilton Anatole. ACCE will work in conjunction with ALEC to influence elected representatives in city and county council positions, while ALEC focuses on state legislatures. The Guardian reports:

IN ACCE’s very first workshop under the simple title: "Privatization" - though in the final version the wording had been sanitized into: "Effective Tools for Promoting Limited Government."

A later workshop scheduled for Thursday is called: "Releasing Local Governments from the Grip of Collective Bargaining."

The Guardian also revealed through internal documents last year that ALEC started work on a "prodigal son project" meant to regain corporate donors that fled their affiliation with ALEC in the aftermath of George Zimmerman's not guilty verdict in the shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. ALEC public relations image took a massive hit for its promotion of "stand-your-ground" laws across the United States.

But as ALEC works toward expanding its reach at all various level of government, progressives are beginning to forge a counterpart to ALEC with their very own legislative policy network, albeit using a different set of tactics entirely.

A Progressive ALEC?

A Progressive ALEC could be in the birthing stages with the announcement of a merger of the American Legislative and Issue Campaign Exchange (ALICE) and the Progressive States Network. The groups hope to build an organization that would move progressive policies through state legislatures.

"For nearly a generation, conservatives have outpaced us at the business of movement-building in states. They have focused hard on it, poured resources into it, and have been ruthlessly efficient at it. Starting now, we will do the same," wrote Nick Rathod, executive director of ALICE, and Iowa State Sen. Joe Bolkcom, board chair of Progressive States Network, in a joint statement.

But unlike ALEC, the group hopes to embrace a more democratic decision making process and a transparent approach, by shunning the use of lobbyists and making their model policy publicly available, according to the Washington Post. The group's database already boasts 1,800 examples of model legislation progressives can get behind.

There's evidence to suggest the group may be forming at an advantageous time for progressive policy in the states. As Congress stalls in raising the minimum wage, a policy backed by a clear majority of Americans, 10 states and the District of Columbia passed minimum wage hikes just this year, according to the Post. It's with examples like this that ALICE and the Progressive States Network hope will spark momentum for their new group's initiatives.

But while there may be possibility for a progressive counterpart to ALEC on the horizon, progressives should keep in mind that ALEC is far from isolated in its scope and influence.

ALEC's Extended Family: The State Policy Network

"It's important to recognize that ALEC is really the center of a network," said Connor Gibson, a researcher with Greenpeace's investigation team, during a teach-in panel attended by many ALEC protesters in Dallas Wednesday.

ALEC played a role in founding the State Policy Network (SPN) in November 1991. SPN extends ALEC's reach far beyond its corporate and legislative members, comprising an ALEC-sponsored family that includes affiliated think tanks and trade associations in every state, as well as national members such as the Heritage Foundation, Americans for Prosperity and the Cato Institute.

The groups are well organized in the way they coordinate to support ALEC’s conservative agenda to promote the privatization of the public sector, to attack renewable energy policies, and public employee unions and policies ALEC opposes.

Gibson said many of the think tanks and organizations involved in SPN are overwhelmingly funded through dark money groups and that some of these organizations disseminate faux news backed anonymously by corporate interests.

One SPN-affiliated organization is the Texas Public Policy Foundation, which has been focused on pushing ALEC's agenda in Texas to undermine public education in the state through the expansion of charter schools.

ALEC's Agenda in Texas

"Texans for Education Reform and some of these other groups are coming at us harder than ever, and ALEC is right in there with them," said Louis Malfaro, who is secretary-treasurer of the Texas American Federation of Teachers (AFT).

The Texas AFT is working alongside other unions and groups such as the Texas Organizing Project to push back against efforts to create "home-rule" charter schools in the Dallas Independent School District, an effort that has been lead by Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings.

But ALEC's agenda is Texas, executed through local legislators, goes beyond the privatization of public schools. ALEC's agenda to eviscerate worker protections in  Texas has taken the form of the state's deceptive "miracle economy," in which Texas created more minimum wage jobs, with little benefits and no upward social mobility, than any other state in the aftermath of the Great Recession.

"Sure, corporations are doing very well here in Texas," Jim Hightower, a former Texas agriculture commissioner, told Truthout. "But the working day people are being driven to the ground, rolling over in the ditch, small businessmen and family farmers too. [Perry] hasn't lifted a finger for them."

Jim Hightower outside the Community Beer Company brewery after a demonstration against ALEC in Dallas Wednesday, July 31, 2014. (Photo: Candice Bernd)

Hightower drew the connection between the dubious Texas "miracle economy" and this week's ALEC conference.

"[ALEC] is a direct pipeline from corporate America into our state legislative bodies, and then, right into law," he told Truthout.

Hightower also spoke about how the ALEC energy agenda greatly impacts oil- and gas-rich Texas, specifically citing a recent announcement by Exxon-Mobil, a long-time member of ALEC, that the company will double the size of its export facilities located at Beaumont and Port Arthur.

"They sell this stuff on the basis that this 'is going to solve our energy-dependence problem,' " he said. "Except that the energy is not going to stay in America, it's going to be exported to China, it's going to be exported to Brazil."

He also noted that claims by oil giants such as Exxon-Mobil that they help to boost the state economy are false because a great majority of the jobs they offer are temporary construction positions.

"There's a rebellion that's building in Texas over this - fracking, the tar sands pipeline, this is mostly happening to people who are a-political, conservative and largely Republican," he said.