[biztech-discussion] (no subject)

  • From: Bruce Hartford <bruceh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: biztech-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:21:16 -0500

At 05:15 PM 6/20/04 -0700, Al Weinrub wrote:

>#1 Bruce Hartford is researching and writing up material on governmental 
>support for offshoring. If you have info or want to help, contact Bruce 
>at <bruceh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>.

After researching this issue I believe that we need to refocus this
component, at least for the initial stages of the campaign. 

It turns out that at the federal level government support/subsidy for
offshoring is an extremely complex issue involving deferral of foreign
profits, international tax-shifting, deduction of (and definition of)
"foreign" expenses, offshore incorporation, the FSC (Foreign Sales
Corporation tax), OPIC (Overseas Private Investment Corporation), the
Export-Import Bank, specific detailed clauses of trade agreements such as
WTO, and so forth. Unless you're an accountant or business wiz (I am
neither) this stuff is so arane it is very hard to understand, much less
explain to others. 

Instead I think we need to re-focus this campaign element on the
off-shoring of government contacts paid for by our tax dollars. This is an
easy concept to understand and explain to others, and there is already
significant concern about it. There is clear, easy to understand, existing
legislation we can support, or urge amendments to, and clear concepts that
we can propose legislation on. Moreover, this issue is being fought on both
the state and federal level which means that in states where we have
significant membership we can mobilize and lobby on the state level which
is much easier for us when we are just starting a campaign. (That is, we
have better chance of arranging meetings with state legislators, and making
progress with them, than we do with U.S. Senators and Representatives.)

Having done two sucessful legislative campaigns for the NWU (one federal,
one state), my experience is that direct lobbying (meeting with)
legislators by our members is very effective and empowering. It not only
has effect in influencing legislation but it helps build and strengthen our
locals. But it is very difficult to get our members to participate in
direct lobbying, particularly when they do not feel totally confident that
they know all aspects of the issue and can handle any question. It will be
far easier to involve our members around the "no offshoring of work paid
for by our taxes" issue than around the federal support of offshoring issue. 


Other related posts: