Page 2
The
The INDEPENDENT, April 18, 2012
INDEPENDENT
Published on the first and third Wednesdays of each month
by The Independent, LLC, 725 Bridge St.,
Vernonia, OR 97064. Phone/Fax: 503-429-9410.
Deadline is noon the Friday before each issue.
Publisher Clark McGaugh, clark@the-independent.net
Editor Rebecca McGaugh, rebecca@the-independent.net
Printed on recycled paper with vegetable based dyes
Opinion
Is incarceration working?
Who are the violent criminals in the U.S.? It might be
reassuring to think that most violent crime is commit-
ted by strangers. But, that’s not the reality. In 2008,
70% of women who were victims of violent crime were
harmed by someone they knew. Nearly 3 in 4 stalking
victims know the person stalking them. In 2007, almost
75% of abused children (in Oregon) were abused by
one of their parents. Every year, about 22 Oregonians
are killed as a result of domestic violence. Some esti-
mates say that less than half of violent crimes commit-
ted are reported.
Measure 11 was supposed to improve those statis-
tics with longer mandatory sentences for violent crimi-
nals. Even as that measure was becoming law, crime
rates in Oregon, Washington, California and New York
dropped by similar amounts, but Oregon’s incarcera-
tion rate tripled while the other three states did not. In
2009, Oregon had a 30 year low in the overall crime
rate. Oddly enough, states with lower than average in-
carceration rates, experienced a larger reduction in
crimes than other states.
Who is the world’s leader in incarceration? Us. Yep,
we’re #1, followed by China, the Russian Federation
and Brazil. In 2011, nearly 2.4 million people were in
our jails, state prisons, or federal prisons.
Since over 90% of those in prison will be released, it
makes sense to look at ways to keep people out of
prison in the first place, or from going back. Washing-
ton state found that investing in programs such as
Head Start, drug and alcohol treatment, and mental
health programs saved them a billion dollars (over
building prisons) and led to lower crime rates. Esti-
mates are that more than 50% of people in prison have
serious mental illness.
Other countries use alternative means to handle
crimes and criminals. Finnish police do a lot of commu-
nity policing. When San Diego chose a neighborhood
policing strategy, “quality of life” (like graffiti and loiter-
ing) crime rates and arrests dropped. Switzerland uses
The Four Pillars approach to drug use: prevention,
treatment, harm reduction and enforcement (in that or-
der); while Canada adds job preparation. When Cali-
fornia tried drug treatment, instead of incarceration, for
nonviolent offenders, they saw a five year drop in drug
incarceration of 34.3%.
There are other, and cheaper, ways to reduce crime.
Isn’t it time Oregon tried some of them?
Out of My Mind…
by Noni Andersen
The income tax dead-
line has passed, so you
can breathe a sigh of re-
lief – unless you used an
extension of time to file.
Today, let’s take anoth-
er look at those 30 For-
tune 500 corporations
that paid no net federal in-
come tax from 2008
through 2010. They are all big, profitable, inter-
national businesses; many of them earn billions
in federal contracts so, surely, they aren’t still
able to avoid federal income taxes.
Not so surprisingly, new information for 2011
shows that all but four of the 30 companies have
extended their tenure in the no-federal-income-
tax category by another year, from 2008 through
2011.
Over the four years:
• 26 of the 30 companies continued to enjoy
negative federal income tax rates. That means
they made more money after taxes than before
taxes, over the four years!
• Of the remaining four companies, one paid
a four year effective tax rate of 0.2%, the other
three paid 2.0%, 3.8%, and 10.9%.
• In total, 2008-11 federal income taxes for
the 30 companies remained negative, despite
$205 billion in U.S. pretax profits. Overall, they
enjoyed an average effective federal income tax
rate of -3.1 percent over the four years.
Had these 30 companies paid the full 35 per-
cent corporate tax rate over the 2008-11 period,
they would have paid $78.3 billion more in feder-
al income taxes. To put it another way, over the
four years, the 30 companies received more
than $78 billion in total tax subsidies. Wells Far-
go alone received $21.6 billion in tax subsidies
over the four years, followed by General Electric
at $10.6 billion, Verizon at $7.7 billion, and Boe-
ing at $6.0 billion.
The taxes you pay are subsidizing these big,
profitable corporations. It makes no economic
sense, and it contributes to budget deficits.
Looking at just 2011, instead of the four-year
figures, 24 of the 30 companies paid effective
tax rates of less than 4 percent, including 15 that
paid zero or less in federal income taxes in that
year. For all 30 companies, the average 2011 ef-
fective federal income tax rate was a paltry 7.1%
— only a fifth of the statutory 35 percent federal
corporate tax rate. (Middle class Americans pay
an average effective tax rate of 25%.)
Over the past three fiscal years, corporate
taxes have fallen to 1.2 percent of our gross do-
mestic product (GDP). That’s lower than at any
time since the 1940s, except for one year during
President Reagan’s first term. By comparison,
corporate taxes averaged almost 4 percent of
GDP during the 1960s.
Eliminating corporate tax subsidies that allow
widespread tax avoidance needs to be part of
any deficit-reduction program. Tax reform that
increases revenues would also make it easier to
fund needed improvements in education and to
repair our crumbling roads and bridges — key
Please see page 3