Comments on: Monday Q&A: Creigh Deeds for governor

By: Creigh Deeds Failed To Run As A Progressive | No Bull. news service.

Creigh Deeds Failed To Run As A Progressive | No Bull. news service. — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:43:41 +0000

[...] would have created a fairer path toward unionization for workers — saying it would “put us at a competitive disadvantage” and reasserting the false right-wing claim that EFCA would eliminate the secret ballot in [...]

By: rusty

rusty — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:04:24 +0000

How about no state tax on military retirement. Wow think of how many more votes.

By: Tom Lawrence

Tom Lawrence — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:55:24 +0000

Good article Al. Maybe a follow up to let Mr. Deeds tell us exactly how his tax credit for worker hires plans will function and who will be the targeted receipiants of the increase in GOF funds.

Also important is his position on state contract set asides for all firms. Instead of deciding who are the economic winners and losers to be by skin color, gender, national origin. and lobbists budget, he could pioneer a program that would allow companies to compete according to size and resource. Sort of a equal economic opportuntiy approach rather than the more traditional political one.

Would this not be the best opportunity for Mr. Deeds, the people’s party candidate to move Virginia away from fostering classes of business with special “priviledges” and grant equality of opportunity to all of its qualified citizens. Who knows the possibilities this would create.

Now that would be “Change” we could believe in.

By: Roger Clegg, Center for Equal Opportunity

Roger Clegg, Center for Equal Opportunity — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:09:02 +0000

“RBS: You propose expanding the contracting program for small minority- and woman-owned business. Tell me why.

“CD: What I know is that 75 to 85 percent of job growth comes from small business, and a lot of action these days seems to be in minority-owned small business. We ought to do what we can to encourage growth there and help those businesses like any other business succeed. The reality is state contracting is a big source of business for a lot of people. The government has set a 40 percent goal for state SWaM contracts. I will exceed that goal because I think it is good policy to promote small businesses growth in our economy.”

But why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all in deciding who gets awarded a contract? It’s fine to make sure contracting programs are open to all, that bidding opportunities are widely publicized beforehand, and that no one gets discriminated against because of skin color, national origin, or sex. But that means no preferences because of skin color, etc. either–whether it’s labeled a “set-aside,” a “quota,” or a “goal,” since they all end up amounting to the same thing. Such discrimination is unfair and divisive; it costs the taxpayers money to award a contract to someone other than the lowest bidder; and it’s generally illegal to boot (see 42 U.S.C. section 1981 and comments we submitted to the Colorado DOT here: http://www.ceousa.org/content/view/655/86/ ).