The Wire

Breaking: Koch Industries’ Outsourcing and Job Loss

In a recent television advertisement Koch Industries touted the growth of the company to create “60,000 American jobs.” The true story paints a picture of Koch Industries’ long history of job losses and outsourcing, resulting in nearly 3,000 American jobs sent overseas.

Outsourcing

Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) is a federal job training program that provides assistance to workers who lose their jobs as a result of competing foreign imports or direct outsourcing.  An analysis of TAA cases, news articles, shipping records, and layoff notices revealed examples of outsourcing at 13 Koch Industries facilities, and potential outsourcing at additional facilities.

  • In 2003, Koch laid off 150 employees at a KoSa plant in Shelby, North Carolina.  In 2004, the Department of Labor certified that a portion of 150 employees who had been laid off at a plant in Shelby, NC, were eligible for TAA as a result of outsourcing to Mexico.  Former employees at the Shelby facility later filed suit against Koch claiming that the company pushed workers to, according to a former worker, “leave gracefully” or “be victims of downsizing.” (Source)
  • In 2004, Koch outsourced 175 jobs from an Invista plant to Mexico, less than a month after purchasing the plant. Koch Industries had promised to retain all employees.  In late 2006 and early 2007 more workers jobs were outsourced to Mexico, as detailed by the US Court of International Trade. (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4)
  • In 2004, some 35 workers were laid off at an Invista plant in Athens, Georgia.  In 2006, they were certified eligible for TAA because of outsourcing to Mexico. In 2008, the plant laid off an additional, 50 employees. (Source)

Seven Things You Should Know About Tea Party Radical David Brat

Here’s what you should know about David Brat, the Tea Party radical who blindsided House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) in a primary challenge on Tuesday: He is a right-wing candidate who opposes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, supports radically reshaping our heath care system, and event wants to scale back the regulatory powers of the FDA.

Don’t take our word for it? See the research below.

1. Brat supported radically altering the American health care system.

Brat Supported Radically Altering The American Health Care System, Said “‘We Need To Also Scrap Employer-Based Health Insurance.” According to Culpeper Star-Exponent “Of course, the first question I asked him was what should be done with Obamacare? ‘It needs to be scrapped,’ he replied without hesitation. ‘Completely.’ So I asked him what should take Obamacare’s place, and to understand his answer, you have to know some history… When I asked him what should take Obamacare’s place, his answer was, ‘We need to also scrap employer-based health insurance, and give those incentives to individuals to carry their own portable health insurance.’ He went on to say, ‘If we did that, the issue of pre-existing conditions largely goes away.’” [Culpeper Star-Exponent, 3/31/14]

2. Brat called bankers “the solution, not the problem” in regards to the financial crisis.

Brat On The Financial Crisis: ‘Bankers Are The Solution, Not The Problem,’ According to The News & Advance “David Brat says that’s the state of today’s economy, and says everything we know about what is being termed a recession is wrong… The global economy is overleveraged. Ultimately, he said, pointing to the European debt crisis, the country’s economy is headed for disaster if changes aren’t quickly made. And the answer, he said, is not in economics, but ethics. ‘Bankers are the solution, not the problem,’ he said, adding, ‘[Washington] D.C. knows this.’” [The News & Advance, 1/25/13]

3. Brat is radical on immigration.

Brat Opposed Any Kind Of Immigration Reform; Ran To The Right On Eric Cantor On Border Security. According to Watchdog.org, “Cantor, in Brat’s view, is flunking badly on border security. Indeed, the congressman even applauded President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address outlining a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. On Friday, Cantor said on the House floor that ‘immigration reform could be an economic boon to this country.’ Brat is having none of it. He calls the imminent GOP cave-in on immigration an exercise in ‘crony capitalism.’” [Watchdog.org, 2/6/14]

  • Brat: “A Change In Immigration Policy Means Amnesty.” According to Watchdog.org “‘At every turn, the GOP establishment is favoring the elites,’ Brat declares. ‘A change in immigration policy means amnesty.’” [Watchdog.org, 2/6/14]

Bridge President Brad Woodhouse on GOP Rebrand: New year, same old party

Following the shellacking Republicans took in 2012, the party conducted a much-hyped autopsy in the hopes of identifying the cause of the GOP’s recent demise. One year later, Republicans are congratulating themselves on the “progress” they’ve made. Who are they kidding? Back in reality, nothing has changed. The autopsy depicted a Republican Party whose policies and rhetoric were anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, and anti-middle class. One year later, the Republican Party is still anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, and anti-middle class.

Cuccinelli clings to Tea Party extremism in final debate

At tonight’s debate, Ken Cuccinelli returned to his roots by embracing the extreme agenda of the Tea Party at every turn.

Virginians are seeking a mainstream leader to boost the Commonwealth’s economy and create jobs, so it’s no surprise that voters are rejecting a candidate who made a name for himself by waging unpopular fights to further his extreme agenda.

After three debates, voters know who Cuccinelli is and what he stands for:

When you stack up that extreme record next to the mainstream, bipartisan approach of Terry McAuliffe, it’s easy to see why Virginians are rejecting Ken Cuccinelli.

MEMO: Cuccinelli’s “All In” Debate Strategy Backfires

To: Interested Parties
From: Chris Harris, American Bridge Communications Director
Date: October 24, 2013
Re: Cuccinelli’s “All In” Debate Strategy Backfires

Earlier this year, Ken Cuccinelli issued forth a challenge: wherever two or more Virginians gathered, there he would debate Terry McAuliffe. It was exactly the strategy one would expect from a campaign bold enough to release fake polls and featuring a day-to-day messaging strategy with the focus of that dog from Up.

From the beginning of the campaign, Cuccinelli’s strategy hinged on definitive debate victories. Debates are where they would win the hearts and minds of Virginians. They went “all in,” so to speak.

Cuccinelli’s campaign has reassured supporters and the press that debates would be where he would turn it all around. In their minds, the debates would serve as the Republican’s big moment, where millions of Virginians would instantly fawn over the once-in-a-lifetime leader that is Ken Cuccinelli.

Unfortunately, the campaign forgot one little detail: the more voters learn about Cuccinelli, the less they like him.

With even the conservative Rasmussen poll showing Ken Cuccinelli trailing Terry McAuliffe by 17 points, not even a new RRR poll can swing the momentum in Cuccinelli’s favor at this point. His radicalism rejected by Virginians, the Cuccinelli campaign has incoherently vacillated between reviving his strategy of hiding his extreme social agenda and embracing every Santorum, Huckabee, and Duggar that wanders through his state.

We don’t know which Ken Cuccinelli will show up at tonight’s debate. It could be the false moderate who pretends he didn’t try to kill the bipartisan transportation compromise. Or it could be the extremist who wants “more Ted Cruzes” in the United States Senate. Either way, just like his previous debate performances, it won’t be enough to rescue his floundering campaign.

BACKGROUND:

The Cuccinelli Campaign Created Expectations that the Debates Would Turn the Race Around

Cuccinelli Strategist Chris LaCivita Said Before The Debate, “We Have A Belief That The More People That See Ken Cuccinelli And Hear From Him Directly, The Greater The Likelihood He’ll Be The Next Governor. The McAuliffe Campaign Has The Exact Opposite View Of Their Candidate.” According to Politico, “If Republicans are upbeat about one thing in the race right now, it’s that their candidate has a much longer record of succeeding in high-stress environments than the Democrat does. ‘We have a belief that the more people that see Ken Cuccinelli and hear from him directly, the greater the likelihood he’ll be the next governor. The McAuliffe campaign has the exact opposite view of their candidate,’ said Cuccinelli senior strategist Chris LaCivita. ‘At times, they almost seem embarrassed.’” [Politico, 7/19/13]

Cuccinelli Strategist Chris LaCivita Said The Debate “Represents An Important Moment In The Campaign – When The Contrast Between The Candidates Became Abundantly Clear.” According to a Cuccinelli campaign press release, Cuccinelli strategiest Chris LaCivita said, “Ken Cuccinelli was the decisive winner of tonight’s debate because he was the only candidate on the stage able to articulate a serious, credible plan to grow Virginia’s economy, ease burdens for families and create 58,000 new jobs. […]Tonight’s debate represents an important moment in the campaign – when the contrast between the candidates became abundantly clear and Ken Cuccinelli stepped forward as the right person to lead the Commonwealth.” [Ken Cuccinelli For Governor Press Release, 9/25/13]

Washington Examiner: Cuccinelli “Has Relished The Opportunity To Go Toe-To-Toe With McAuliffe.” According to the Washington Examiner, “The candidates will have a chance to question each other. Cuccinelli, a more seasoned politician and a notably skilled debater, has relished the opportunity to go toe-to-toe with McAuliffe, challenging his opponent to 15 debates (though Cuccinelli has also turned down a traditional debate hosted by AARP and the League of Women Voters). National Democrats tempered the expectations for McAuliffe this week with a memo noting Cuccinelli’s experience in these forums.” [Washington Examiner, 7/20/13]

The Cuccinelli Campaign Dismissed Poll Numbers Prior To The Debate, Saying, “Our Campaign Feels Very Good About Our Position” And Noting The Number Of Undecided Voters. According to a Cuccinelli campaign press release, communications director Richard T. Cullen said, “Coming off a week in which Ken Cuccinelli secured one of the most important business endorsements in Virginia while Terry McAuliffe was exposed for having misled Virginians about critical policy details and his continued involvement with GreenTech Automotive, our campaign feels very good about our position heading into Wednesday’s pivotal Fairfax Chamber of Commerce Debate.” [Ken Cuccinelli For Governor Press Release, 9/23/13]

Cuccinelli Press Release: “We […] Are Confident The Contrast Between The Candidates’ Seriousness And Ability To Articulate A Positive Vision For Virginia’s Future Will Be Abundantly Clear.” According to a Cuccinelli campaign press release, communications director Richard T. Cullen said, “We look forward to this evening’s debate and are confident the contrast between the candidates’ seriousness and ability to articulate a positive vision for Virginia’s future will be abundantly clear.” [Ken Cuccinelli For Governor Press Release, 9/25/13]

Cuccinelli has Attempted to Distance Himself from his Record During Debates

Cuccinelli Denied That He Tried To Ban Several Forms Of Contraception In The July Debate. According to the Washington Post:

MODERATOR JUDY WOODRUFF: “And on contraception, would you again seek to make several forms, common forms, of contraception illegal, as you did several years ago?”

CUCCINELLI: “Well, I certainly didn’t do that several years ago. My focus in this race is on growing jobs for the middle class, and supporting them and not the well-connected. There are people, like me, who sincerely hold beliefs about protecting life, and I certainly bring those with me into the governor’s race.” [Washington Post, 7/23/13]

  • The Washington Post Gave Cuccinelli’s Statement “Three Pinocchios,” Saying A Contraception Ban “Likely Would Have Been The Practical Effect Of The Bill He Co-Sponsored.” According to the Washington Post, “In any case, the 2007 proposal Cuccinelli co-sponsored appears to be even more conservative than the 2012 one, as it defines life as beginning at “fertilization.” There are various ways to interpret the impact on birth control, but some methods might be affected because there are birth control methods that prevent a fertilized egg from implantation in the wall of the uterus. We were told we would receive a response from the Cuccinelli campaign, but never got one. Cuccinelli’s answer was too cute by half, perhaps an effort to soften some of his conservatism. While he might not have specifically sought to ban contraception, that likely would have been the practical effect of the bill he co-sponsored.” [Washington Post, 7/23/13]

Cuccinelli Claimed He Only Backed Fetal Personhood Bills That Contained Language Requiring The State To Comply With Supreme Court Decisions; PolitiFact Rated His Claim “False.” According to PoliticFact, “Cuccinelli said all the bills he’s supported defining life as beginning at conception have contained language saying measures are intended to comply with Supreme Court rulings on abortion rights. Cuccinelli has backed two bills during his career; one had the qualifying clause he described and the other — which Cuccinelli cosponsored — did not. We rate his statement False.” [PolitiFact, 8/10/13]