LAW & POLICY
“Pittsburgh Delays Vote to Tax Tuition.” By Ian Urbina. New York Times. December 17, 2009. In a sudden change of course, Pittsburgh’s mayor asked the City Council Wednesday to postpone a vote on the nation’s first tuition tax on college students, holding out hope that the city’s 10 colleges and universities will agree to provide economic help voluntarily. University officials and students, who have been asking for weeks for the mayor to drop his proposed 1 percent tuition tax, hailed the decision as a victory. State lawmakers are considering a bill that would explicitly prevent municipalities from enacting such measures. The proposal was being watched closely by other cities struggling with similar budget gaps. Students and college officials in Pittsburgh have argued that the tax would set a bad precedent in altering the tax-exempt status of nonprofit organizations and pose an unfair burden on institutions that already contribute substantially to the city.
“Don’t Blame the Billionaires; Who cares about the excesses of the rich? It’s the fate of the poor that matters.” By Dalton Conley. American Prospect. December 15, 2009. . If we break down this 90-to-10 ratio into two parts — how the top is doing relative to the middle and how the middle is doing relative to the poor — we find that the growth in inequality has been almost all concentrated in how much better the top percentiles are doing than the middle. The poor have for the most part kept pace with the middle class (whose incomes have been fairly stagnant), but both those groups have watched their proportional share of national wealth dwindle as the upper end has broken records for income growth. However, the rising share of national wealth held by the richest 10 percent of Americans has recently hit a wall and declined from the 2007 peak (which matched the 1929 peak). But should my mother cheer this news? Are we better off? It’s the fate of the middle and lower classes that should concern progressives, not how many private jets the super rich can afford.
“Law Blocking Acorn Funding Raises Constitutional Question.” By Nomaan Merchant. Wall Street Journal. December 18, 2009. — After the community-organizing group Acorn was caught up in a storm of controversy, Congress chopped off its federal funding. But in trying to thwart what it sees as unethical conduct, Congress might have violated the Constitution by singling out a group, some legal experts say. At issue is the Constitution’s prohibition of bills of attainder, which punish a specific person or group without due process or other rights that courts provide.
Related Story:
“DOJ appeals lift on ACORN cash ban.” Politico.com. December 17, 2009.