People Before Profit blog

Caucuses unite behind public health insurance option

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:56:00 +0000

WASHINGTON — In an unprecedented initiative, the leaders of four prominent groups in Congress — the Progressive Caucus, the Black Caucus, the Hispanic Caucus and the Asian Pacific American Caucus — have sent a joint letters to President Obama and the Democratic leadership of the House and Senate stressing that “our support for enacting legislation this year to guarantee affordable health care for all firmly hinges on the inclusion of a robust public health insurance plan like Medicare.”

Together, 117 members of the House and Senate belong to at least one of these four congressional caucuses. Their unity in pushing for inclusion of a public health insurance plan like Medicare as part of comprehensive health care reform legislation is a formidable development in the unfolding policy debate inside and outside of Congress.

“As the debate on health care moves forward, we stand together with one voice for the communities that most need this reform,” said Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.), chairwoman of the 24-member Congressional Hispanic Caucus. “With one out of every three Hispanics in our country likely to be uninsured and with so many Latino small business owners, we have to provide all Americans with the choice of a public health insurance plan.”

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus, said, “The United States is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not provide universal health care. In a nation with 46 million uninsured individuals, it is time we put in place high quality comprehensive care for all. As we develop health care reform legislation, a public health insurance plan like Medicare and Medicaid must be included in order to guarantee equal access to quality affordable health care for everyone.”

“The importance of this issue is shown through the unity of the four caucuses,” Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said. “We represent the most underrepresented communities, in which livelihoods are paralyzed due to health care being set as a privilege. We stand united to ensure health care is a right. A right that is fair and guaranteed for all.”

Rep. Lynn Woolsey, co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, said, “The American people are united in declaring that our health care system is broken, and that we need to fix it.” She declared, “With this letter, more than a 100 members of Congress are sending a message that we share the public’s outrage, and that we are committed to confronting this problem and developing a health care system that doesn’t leave anyone out. That's why we need to make certain that any final health care reform legislation includes the option of a public health insurance plan to ensure that everyone has access to high quality, affordable care.”

“For too long, insurance companies have dictated the quality, quantity, and accessibility of healthcare to the American people,” said Rep. Mike Honda, chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. “A robust public health insurance plan will ensure true competition with those companies that reap egregious profits, and will present the opportunity to make deep, lasting changes in our healthcare system. A public plan will also provide a framework to eliminate racial and ethnic health disparities in some of the most underserved communities.”

Apple apologizes for Baby Shaker iPhone app

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:27:00 +0000

Parents whose children died or were permanently injured due to their babies being shaken protested outside an Apple store about an application called Baby Shaker.

Apple has apologized this week for the 'deeply offensive' iPhone application, which made a game of quieting crying babies by shaking them. The application was pulled earlier.

According to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Shaken Baby Syndrome or Abusive Head Trauma is the leading cause of death from childhood maltreatment.

Outraged by the perceived callousness, Patrick Donohue and Jennipher Dickens, parents of a baby shake victims, organized a demonstration outside an Apple store in New York recently. Donahue signed an open letter to the board of directors of Apple, Inc. and AT&T, Inc.

Donohue – the founder of The Sarah Jane Brain Foundation – named after his daughter said he was “shocked, appalled and angered” at the corporate irresponsibility. Dickens is the foundation’s communication director.

“While we are glad public outcry forced Apple to pull the application, the cynical way it was pulled without any explanation, any apology or any plans to rectify the damage they have already caused can only lead me to one explanation: this was a purposeful public relations effort coinciding with their campaign to promote their 1 billionth application download during Child Abuse Awareness Month and Shaken Baby Prevention week!”

Perhaps more cynical than the pulling of the application were the reaction by tech journalists to the parents’ aggressive media campaign.

“Apple displayed extreme recklessness in launching this application and the results were immediate and disturbing. Below are a few quotes from journalists and editors based on our press release who prove the seriousness of your actions,” the letter said.

'I know! That baby shaker thing is so funny! We’ll mention your support in the review.' wrote John Biggs, editor-in-chief, CrunchGear;

'Uh, it’s a joke.' said Ken Layne, managing editor, Wonkette.com;

'Learn to take a joke,' snapped Richard Nalley, senior editor, ForbesLife;

And then, the ever so serious The New York Times, which likened the campaign to get rid of Baby Shaker, not to a group that can’t take a “joke,” but “censorship.”

'I couldn’t disagree with you more. The Apple App store is like a bookstore. It needs to be open to all the most repulsive ideas or we will have a regime of censorship. The next thing you know some corporate executive will decide that it is not politic to allow an app that furthers an idea you care deeply about,' said Saul Hansell, The New York Times technology reporter to the parent activists.

Shocking reactions to a serious issue, the app critics say.

The parents are demanding a “complete accounting as to who was responsible for the vetting and launching of this sick application” and for the companies “to develop a significant plan to reverse the damage they have caused.”

The open letter also threatened to hold more demonstrations on May 3 if they do not “receive an adequate response.”

The foundation is holding a 15-city tour to raise money for its righteous cause, which is to self described as to “create a model system for children suffering from all” pediatric brain injuries.

It’s not surprising that a foundation, dedicated to researching developmental treatments for children suffering from brain injuries, would utilize the release of a “sickening” iPhone application to bring attention to its cause.

But Don Tennant of ComputerWorld writes “I have all the respect in the world for the work the foundation is doing in support of families that suffer as a result of brain injuries. But I find myself agreeing in large part with the view of CrunchGear Editor in Chief John Biggs, who wrote this in an e-mail exchange with me this morning:

‘I think the entire issue has been blown out of proportion by an organization whose sole mission is to prevent baby shaking and hence is enjoying a boost in the news cycle this week. This is simply another permutation of ‘family' organizations blaming video games - in this case a crude simulation of violent behavior that I find abhorrent - for the violent actions in real life. ...The funds - however meager - spent on their press outreach efforts in order to capitalize on someone's harmless bad taste could be better put into more bedside education for new mothers.’'

Tennant continues, “I wouldn't characterize anything about the app as ‘harmless,’ because in my view stuff like this harms the decency and dignity of the human spirit, which is in enough need as it is of being uplifted. But let's not make a spectacle of the mistake. Let's move on.”

House passes hate crimes prevention act

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:13:00 +0000

The US House of Representatives passed the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, Wednesday, April 29th with a bipartisan majority.

Supporters of the bill say it would provide local law enforcement agencies with additional resources to investigate hate crimes motivated by race, ethnicity, gender, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability.

In addition, it would provide federal agencies with a means to participate in local hate crimes cases when local agencies can't or refuse to investigate serious bias-motivated crimes adequately. Funds would also be made available to local agencies for training purposes.

Two key provisions of the law would be to expand federally protected categories to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, pointed out that federal hate crimes statistics show that one in six hate crimes are committed against an LGBT person, and that number is on the rise.

'The nation cannot wait any longer to protect all of its citizens,' said Solmonese. 'We should all be able to walk the streets without fear.'

Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington Bureau, described the need to address hate crimes and expand protections as the nation's 'unfinished business.' Shelton rejected the idea that the law would limit free speech or religious rights.

'Nothing in this bill prevents people from saying what's on their minds in the streets and certainly not from our nation's pulpits,' Shelton said.

Echoing this comment, Caroline Frederickson, director of the ACLU's Washington legislative office, explained that her organization's support for the bill is based on its protections of free speech. She pointed out that local or federal authorities would have the authority to investigate issues of speech only when the speech act in question is directly linked to the crime under investigation.

'This bill has the strongest protection against the misuse of a person's free speech that Congress has enacted in the entire federal criminal code,' Frederickson argued.

Despite these facts, GOP opposition to the legislation astoundingly centered on seeing hate crimes as modes of free expression protected by the Constitution.

The Senate version of the bill will be introduced soon by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.). President Obama has indicated that if the bill comes to his desk he will sign it.

Over 300 civil rights, civil liberties, faith-based and law enforcement organizations have endorsed the bill.

President Obama's first 100 days bring real change for women

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:02:00 +0000

Original source:

President Barack Obama's first 100 days have brought real change for women.

Obama swiftly signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, repealed the Global Gag Rule, restored international family planning aid and acted to rescind Bush's harmful health care refusal rule.

He also signed the reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program with important provisions for immigrant children, and created the White House Council on Women on Girls.

The administration has been responsive to advocates' concerns, including provisions in the economic recovery plan that will put women as well as men back to work.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis are particularly excellent advocates for women, and there are many women in important administration posts, though far from gender parity.

In just 100 days President Obama has begun reversing the extensive damage done to women's rights these last eight years, giving us an idea of what is possible with enlightened leadership. I look forward to many more victories for women and girls in the coming days and years.

Kim Gandy is the president of NOW, National Organization For Women.

Rat Pack comes to life on American Idol

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:47:00 +0000

The final five on “American Idol” last night brought back famous tunes by Hollywood legends Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr., Dean Martin, Peter Lawford and Joey Bishop, otherwise known as the “Rat Pack” — the popular group that performed during the 1950s and ’60s.

Once again and by no surprise, frontrunner Adam Lambert rocked the microphone singing “Feeling Good.” Lambert had the judges all jazzed up. He was compared to athletic swimmer and gold medallist Michael Phelps. That was interesting. His performance was shocking in a good way and his opening entrance was noteworthy. Lambert demonstrates great showmanship and charisma and is truly singing for the gold. By no stretch, Lambert’s talented vocals and stunning performances are sure to be in the winning.

Danny Gokey seems to be stepping up his game singing “Come Rain or Come Shine.” His voice is soulful, passionate and bluesy. Gokey brought a new and fresh voice to the original tune and really connected with the song. He has such an incredible story and has so much heart. His story is personal and connects with people on so many levels. I imagine he’ll be safe this week.

Allison Iraheta sang “Someone to Watch Over Me,” and executed a killer performance. If Iraheta doesn’t win this contest she sure has a bright music career ahead of her. She’s personally my favorite and I hope voters feel the same way. She’s the underdog, being the youngest and only female remaining. The judges have a feeling she might not make it past this week. But it really depends on her fan base. She’s been in the final three the last few weeks. But despite her future on Idol, Iraheta is truly a rising pop sensation and extremely talented.

Kris Allen sang “The Way You Look Tonight.” The judges said Allen was subtle and sexy. Allen is a gifted artist and thinks outside the box. He continues to take risks that pay off in the end. He also connects well with a musical ensemble. Overall Allen has good chemistry on stage. But he might be in the bottom this week.

Finally Matt Giraud sang “My Funny Valentine.” Giraud knows a thing or two about jazz since he studied it in college. His performance overall was just okay and even though it was authentic I think he might be singing his last song this week.

Jamie Foxx, R & B singer and Oscar winner for best actor role as Ray Charles, was the guest on the show this week, coaching the final five Idol singers. Best of luck to all of them.

plozano @ pww.org

$963 billion in plastic debt: The next financial meltdown?

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:38:00 +0000

WASHINGTON—Amid warnings that the nearly $1 trillion in credit card debt held by consumers could be the “next financial meltdown,” President Obama and the House and Senate are moving quickly to enact a credit cardholders “Bill of Rights.”

The president hosted 14 CEOs of the major credit card companies at the White House recently warning them bluntly that abusive and deceptive practices that squeeze credit card holders with sudden increases in interest rates, late charges and fees must end. “I trust that those in the industry who want to act responsibly will engage with us in a constructive fashion to get this done in short order,” Obama told the CEOs. “The days of any time, any reason rate hikes and late fee traps have to end.”

Obama disagreed with the plea by the CEOs that new rules and regulations announced by the Federal Reserve last fall - but not scheduled to take effect until July 2010 - are sufficient to take care of the problem.

The president said he will push the House and Senate to quickly enact a “Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights” to protect consumers.

Last fall, a Business Week article was headlined, “The Next Meltdown: Credit Card Debt.” Much of the $963 billion in credit card debt is “toxic” the article reported. “The consumer debt bomb is already beginning to spread shrapnel through the financial markets,” it stated, adding “Credit card companies were unable to collect $41 billion in credit card debt in 2008 and are expected to lose another $96 billion in 2009” as layoffs and bankruptcies spread.

Sharon Reuss, a spokesperson for the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL), told the World, “The fact that protecting credit card holders has been elevated to a meeting at the White House is a huge advance for borrowers.”

CRL is a member of a broad coalition of consumer groups that united behind the “Credit Cardholder’s Bill of Rights” legislation authored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and approved in the House last Sept by a 312 to 112 vote. The bill died, however, when the Senate failed to enact their version of the bill.

The coalition, which includes the AFL-CIO, Consumer Federation of America, United Auto Workers, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights USAction and many other progressive organizations wrote an open letter to all members of Congress last January demanding prompt enactment of the Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights.

The letter said the bill “curbs some of the most arbitrary, abusive, and unfair credit card lending practices that trap consumers in an unending cycle of costly debt,” adding, “These tricks and traps have always been unfair, but they produce devastating financial repercussions in times of financial difficulty. Working families are particularly hard-hit as they are paying more each year in unreasonable fees and credit card interest.”

The letter continues, ominously, “Signs that credit card delinquencies and defaults are rising to historically high levels suggests that many families cannot sustain the cumulative burdens of these abuses. The sub-prime meltdown demonstrates the importance of ending abusive lending practices when warning signs rise.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) this week urged Congress to approve the legislation pointing out that it would end “unfair, arbitrary interest rate increases by requiring ample notice before rate hike and permitting lenders to raise rates on existing balances only if minimum payments are more than 30 days late.”

It would also end penalties on cardholders who pay on time like charging interest on already repaid debt. And it would protect consumers from due date gimmicks by requiring credit card companies to mail bills 25 days (instead of 14) before the due date. It would also require companies to give 45 days advance notice of any rate increase.

CRL released a report last year, “Priceless or Just Expensive? The Use of Penalty Rates in the Credit Card Industry,” denouncing hidden fees and penalties that grew by 69 percent between 2003 and 2007.

“For a household with the average amount of $10,678 in credit card debt, being penalty re-priced on all their balances would result in an additional $1,800 in interest costs per year,” the report said.

Two years ago, just as the current recession was looming, CRL released a report, “The Plastic Safety Net: The Reality Behind Credit Card Debt in America.” The report warned that credit card debt had nearly tripled in the 1990s and had increased 31 percent since 2000. Tamara Draut, co-author of the report declared, “The results are clear: Wages have stagnated while medical and housing costs have skyrocketed and if confronted with a layoff or health emergency there are few if any personal or public safety nets….Households are turning to high-cost credit cards to keep afloat.”

The grimfaced CEO’s left the White House without speaking to reporters.

Supreme Court hears case on states' right to enforce laws against banks

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:30:00 +0000

Original source: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case regarding whether states have the authorize to enforce state fair lending laws against national banks and other financial institutions.

The case, Cuomo v. Clearing House Association, began in 2005 when the state of New York tried to investigate certain national banks operating in the state that it believed were charging minority borrowers higher interest rates than White borrowers. Federal Reserve home mortgage data released that year showed that minority borrowers were given higher-interest mortgages at disproportionately higher rates than White borrowers.

Like his predecessor Elliot Spitzer, who initiated the investigation, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo wanted to determine whether banks and other lending institutions were complying with consumer and anti-discrimination laws. The banks refused to turn over their records, arguing that only federal regulators have the power to make them disclose loan information.

However, many civil rights advocates believe that states should take greater initiative in regulating banks because the federal government isn't doing enough to prevent abuse within the mortgage industry. In their amicus, or friend-of-the-court, brief (PDF), the Center for Responsible Lending and AARP argued that 'there is significant evidence that enforcement by state regulators has served an important role in protecting consumers against financial practices' and added that 'consumers, communities and the economy would be ill-served by concentrating in one federal agency the authority to enforce [consumer protection laws].'

The District of Colombia and 49 other states also submitted amicus briefs in support of the state of New York.

Gay couples marry in Iowa, hate crimes protection advances in Congress

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:31:00 +0000

Same-sex couples began applying for marriage licenses across Iowa April 27, after the state’s Supreme Court ruled to legalize gay marriage earlier this month.

By the end of the first day the ruling took effect, more than 200 couples had applied and paid $35 for marriage licenses. Some came from neighboring states like Illinois and Nebraska, officials said.

The Iowa Supreme Court’s unanimous decision on April 3 made the state the third to allow same-sex marriage, joining Massachusetts and Connecticut. Vermont passed a similar law that is expected to take effect in September. For six months last year, California’s high court allowed same-sex couples to marry before anti-gay groups steered voters into banning it in a state referendum last November.

In its decision, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld an August 2007 ruling by a Polk County District Court judge who found that a state law limiting marriage to a man and a woman violates the constitutional right of equal protection.

Meanwhile, a congressional committee voted April 23 to extend hate crimes protections to gay and transgendered individuals.

The House Judiciary Committee forwarded the legislation to the full House in a 15-12 vote. It adds “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the current categories — including race, religion and national origin — protected under the definition of hate crimes. The committee defeated several Republican efforts to weaken the measure.

The bill, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, HR 1913, appears to have a better chance of enactment this time, after having been blocked in previous years. The House and Senate both passed similar legislation in 2007. Under threat of a veto from President Bush, the two chambers failed to agree on a final version.

If the bill gains approval in this Congress, President Obama is expected to sign it into law.

The bill is also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, named after a gay college student who was brutally murdered in 1998 near Laramie, Wyo.

“After 10 years, and tens of thousands more victims, this critical legislation combating hate violence is long overdue,” Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign told Townhall.com. His group works to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality, told Townhall.com.

“We must not miss this opportunity to provide local police and sheriffs’ departments with the tools and resources they need to ensure that entire communities are not terrorized by hate violence,” he said.

The legislation would authorize the U.S. attorney general to help state and local officials in the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.

The bill would define a hate crime as one “motivated by prejudice based on the actual perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim or is a violation of the State, local, or Tribal hate crime laws.”

The penalty for a hate crime could be as much as 10 years in prison or, in some cases, up to a life sentence.

People For the American Way President Michael Keegan called the committee’s vote “a very positive step towards passing this bill into law. I’m extremely optimistic that this year we’ll finally be able to enact hate crimes legislation that includes protections against violence based on disability status, sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity.”

He continued, “ Political groups with an anti-gay agenda are working hard to stop the legislation, and we’ve already seen the usual barrage of baseless attacks from the right wing. The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act protects free speech, and it protects religious liberty. It’s time to turn away from dishonest scare tactics and pass this legislation on to the Senate and to the President’s desk.”

plozano @ pww.org

OPINION: Cuba and Venezuela are not enemies

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 06:12:00 +0000

The Obama administration did the right thing when it ordered the closing of the Guantanamo torture prison, and restored the right of Cuban Americans to travel and send remittances to their relatives on the island nation.

To those who think Obama is not making important and even historic changes or who contend he’s only slightly different than Bush, you’re not paying attention.

However, the ultra right (Bush’s old base) is paying close attention and they are having a fit over what President Obama is doing.

The president’s recent effort at the 5th Summit of the Americas to extend the hand of friendship and cooperation to all the states in the hemisphere and especially to improve relations with Cuba and Venezuela is causing the Republican right no end of grief.

When Obama shook hands with Hugo Chavez and accepted the classic “Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage,” Newt Gingrich could hardly contain his anger alleging the president was “bolstering the enemies of America.”

These changes should not be feared or condemned — they should be celebrated. Today, Mr. Gingrich, who thinks he is presidential timber, is way out of step with the U.S. people.

50-year failure

For nearly 50 years our government has been trying to destroy socialist Cuba. It’s a great thing that they have failed. Ending the embargo and normalizing relations between Cuba and the United States is to the benefit of both peoples and long overdue.

Over the years, the Cuban people have shown that despite many hardships caused by the embargo, they remain steadfast in their support for their socialist homeland. The Bay of Pigs invasion was supposed to militarily defeat Cuba in a matter of days. It did not. The many assassination plots against Fidel Castro failed. U.S. ships were posed to attack Cuba during the missile crisis but a diplomatic solution was found. The collapse of Soviet aid to Cuba was thought by many people including on the left to mean the collapse of the Cuban socialism. This did not happen.

The many acts of terrorism against the Cubans and foreign tourists were attempts to destroy Cuba’s tourist industry. They failed. The Helms/Burton bill was supposed to isolate Cuba and create economic chaos and collapse — it did not

Thus, the resiliency and commitment to its brand of socialism has made it possible for Cubans to overcome incredible obstacles.

Americans support normal relations with Cuba

President Obama’s call for a “new beginning” to ease tensions and begin dialogue with Cuban leaders is a big change from the past and can open up a new era of constructive and mutually beneficial relations.

Today most Americans agree that it is time to end the hostility and disruption of Cuba and normalize relations.

The American people are ready for change. A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll showed that nearly two-thirds favor allowing travel to Cuba and 70 percent want normal diplomatic ties.

Most importantly, Cuban Americans have also grown weary of the intense right-wing, anti communist hysteria that’s been directed at them for a half a century.

A recent Bendixen Poll shows a dramatic shift in the attitudes of Cuban Americans. According to the poll, in 2003 53 percent of Cuban Americans supported the travel ban to Cuba. 41 percent opposed it. Today 67 percent oppose the ban and 29 percent are in favor of it. That’s a big shift. In 2003 61 percent of Cuban Americans supported the embargo against Cuba and only 26 percent opposed it. Today 43 percent oppose the embargo and 42 percent still support it - a dramatic 16-19 point shift away from supporting the blockade. Among 18-49 year old Cuban Americans, only 33 percent support the blockade while 54 percent are now opposed. A whopping 76 percent are for lifting the travel ban while only 22 percent want it to continue.

Good business

Obama received 47 percent of the Cuban American vote in Florida last November. Today 67 percent have a favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of his presidency. Even a stanch Republican conservative like Sen. Dick Lugar is for ending the blockade and for trade with Cuba. There are also businesspeople across the country who are pushing for the opening of normal trade relations. There are hundreds of U.S. trade unionists who have traveled to Cuba and have been pushing their unions to open up relations with Cuban trade unions and support the release of the Cuban 5 whose only crime was to blow the whistle on terrorist plots being hatched from U.S. shores against the island.

Chavez not an ‘enemy’

Newt Gingrich is 100 percent wrong: Hugo Chavez is not an enemy of America. Under the guise of that thinking the Bush administration launched an illegal effort to finance the overthrow of Chavez. The coup failed when a million people took to the streets in defense of their democracy and independence. The fact Chavez had been elected by the people in fair elections didn’t matter to the Bush administration, they despised his democratic, socialist and humane policies. They could not live with his use of nationalized Venezuelan oil to help low-income people in the U.S. and elsewhere survive harsh winters.

This is no small matter. Our government went to war in Iraq over oil. They are threatening war with Iran over oil. They support the suppression of Palestinian people by the Israeli ruling class because they are located in the heart the most oil rich region of the world.

What about oil corporations?

Our whole economy is negatively affected by the manipulation and out and out thievery of the oil monopolies and their record profits.

Yet Hugo Chavez is the enemy? He is the president of a country that is providing discounted oil to poor folks, retirees, blacks and Latinos and Native American Indian people so that they can survive our harsh winters and he is the “enemy of America?” That’s outrageous.

The CITGO-Venezuela Heating Program provides an estimated 112 million gallons of fuel this winter to be distributed to more than 224,000 household and 250 social service providers in 23 U.S. states this year. I doubt those people support Gingrich’s view on Chavez.

New steps needed

I think we need friendship between the U.S., Cuba and Venezuela. They have a right to pick whatever social economic system they wish, including socialism.

Hands off Venezuela! The travel ban should be lifted and the Cuban 5 should be released. End the Blockade against Cuba and establish normal diplomatic and trade relations with our neighbor and natural trading partner just 90 miles away.

Jarvis Tyner is executive vice chair of the Communist Party USA.

Specter switches to Dems, strikes major blow vs. far-right GOP

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 05:25:00 +0000

WASHINGTON—In a stunning new blow to the Republican ultra-right, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) announced today that he is switching from Republican to Democrat and will run for reelection in 2010 as a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate.

“Since my election in 1980,” Specter said in a statement, “the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.”

His switch would give the Democrats the 60 vote margin they need in the Senate to break Republican filibusters, assuming that Democrat Al Franken of Minnesota is finally seated in the U.S. Senate. Franken’s GOP opponent, Norm Coleman, is appealing the ruling of a three-judge panel in Minnesota that Franken won in last November’s election.

Specter was one of only three Republican Senators who voted for President Obama’s $787 billion economic stimulus package last February.

But Specter recently announced he would not vote for the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), labor’s top priority, in its current form and said in the statement today he would not change his position nor be the automatic 60th vote.

However, Specter has enjoyed considerable labor movement support in past elections but he will not automatically receive that support running as a Democrat if he votes against EFCA.

Specter was facing a stiff challenge in the Republican primary from Rep. Pat Toomey, a right-wing extremist backed by the “Club for Growth.”

The rabid ultra-right was oozing venom from every pore over Specter’s announcement. The Human Events blog carried blog entries snarling at Specter as a “RINO” (Republican in name only), a “rat” and “miscreant.”

But for the grassroots movements of the people fighting to push through EFCA, Obama’s $3.5 trillion budget and other programs, the announcement was warmly welcomed.

Sen. Arlen Specter statement on leaving Republicans to join Democrats

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:37:00 +0000

April 28, 2009

Statement by Senator Arlen Specter

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

As swine flu hits, Republican cuts in funds put nation at peril

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:11:00 +0000

WASHINGTON—Public health advocates urged the Obama administration and Congress to restore quickly $870 million in emergency flu pandemic funding stripped from the president’s economic stimulus package in February at the insistence of Republican Senators.

There was praise here for President Obama’s quick response, declaring an “emergency” in the swine flu outbreak that has killed 148 people in Mexico and has now spread to the U.S. and around the world. There is fear of a pandemic like the influenza that struck in 1918 killing 40-50 million people. The flu strain that erupted in Mexico is a hybrid of swine, avian, and human viruses for which humans have no natural immunity. Scientists are racing to collect “seed stock” so they can begin producing vaccines for the deadly virus strain code named H1N1.

Americans United for Change (AUC) said the $870 million cutback is more proof that the Republicans are the “Party of No.” AUC Acting Director, Tom McMahon, asked the GOP lawmakers “if they have any regrets for insisting that $870 million for pandemic preparation by stripped from the stimulus package to pay for tax cuts for millionaires.”

The Trust For America’s Health (TFAH), convened a telephone media briefing April 27, to urge Congress to restore the funds and provide an additional $350 million annually to bolster the state and local public health system hammered by Bush-era budget cuts. TFAH Executive Director, Jeffrey Levi said the money should be rushed through as an emergency supplemental.

TFAH points out that essentially the money removed from the stimulus package was the “final installment” of the $7.1 billion in President George W. Bush’s pandemic preparedness package approved in 2005. The last of that money “went out the door last August.”

Now there is “no more pandemic preparedness money in the pipeline for state and local public health agencies,” TFAH warned. “In addition to the cutoff of pandemic flu funding, public health agencies have seen their “all hazards’ preparedness funding drop about 25 percent since 2005.” TFAH estimates that public health agencies across the country suffer a combined $20 billion shortfall each year.

Dr. Paul Jerris, MD, executive director of the Association of State and Territorial Health Organizations, said state and local public health agencies have been forced to lay off about 12,000 health care workers just as the swine flu epidemic begins to hit.

“They are shifting resources from one function to another to meet this outbreak,” Jerris said. “We are extremely concerned about the diminishing funding for state and local preparedness as well as the removal of all funding for pandemic flu and the decrease in funding for hospital preparedness. This is a matter of losing the infrastructure created over the past several years.” Jerris praised the gains at the federal level in preparing to cope with a pandemic especially by the Center for Disease Control. But he added, “Just having those things is not enough. How do we get that to the American people? That’s why we’re asking for the $350 million for state and local preparedness. ”

State budgets are “under siege” he said and many highly trained emergency medical responders “are losing their jobs” just when they are desperately needed, he said. “These are the boots on the ground.”

Robert Pestronk, Executive Director, National Association of City and County Health Officials said 10,000 public health workers were terminated in 2008 and another 10,000 will lose their jobs in 2009. “This is a situation of the ‘emperor’s new clothes’” he said. “We expect a vigorous response but the suit may not be on anybody’s back. There are big holes in their budgets. We can’t defend the health of the American people on resourcefulness alone.”

Republican lawmakers attacked pandemic funding on grounds that it has nothing to do with the economy. Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine told her colleagues, “Everybody in this room is concerned about a pandemic flu. But does it belong in this bill? Should we have $870 million in this bill. No we should not.”

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-WI) had warned that if a pandemic strikes, workers could be ordered to stay at home, factories could be shuttered, to prevent the spread of the disease—a warning that is coming true with a vengeance in Mexico City.

In his FY 2010 Federal Budget, Obama requests $8.6 billion for the Center for Disease Control (CDC). The Department of Health and Human Services in January awarded a $487 million contract to build the first U.S.-based manufacturing facility to produce stem cell-based flu vaccine. It will increase vaccine production by 25 percent. Cell-based flu vaccines can be cultured much faster than traditional egg-based production.

The Service Employees International Union assailed Senate Republicans for blocking confirmation of former Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius as Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services at a time of a national health emergency. “They’re playing politics with the health of our nation and it could end up costing us lives,” said SEIU Online Campaign Manager, Jessica Kutch.

Health care reform rally: Yes we can!

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:22:00 +0000

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS – Repeatedly chanting “Yes, We Can,” some 600 labor, retiree and community activists loudly voiced determination to win health care reform this year at a rally April 17 sponsored by Health Care for America NOW (HCAN).

The standing room only crowd filling the sanctuary of Forest Hills Presbyterian Church cheered Sen. Sherrod Brown as he outlined plans for a “public option” in legislation expected to be introduced this week in Congress. Brown is seen as the lead Senator in the fight in Congress for health care reform.

“I would love to see a single payer system,” Brown said, referring to a national health care program without private insurance companies, “but that is not possible right now.” What is possible, he said, is a public option that, in effect, regulates the insurance companies and that “will keep the private plans a lot more honest.”

The urgency for basic reform was driven home as speakers gave brief and powerful testimonials of the criminality of a system in which “people must choose between food and pills,” according to Pam Franklin of the Amos Project in Cincinnati. “We must make sure that the care of people means more than the care of profits,” she said to loud applause.

This is possible, Brown said, because “the days when the drug companies and insurance companies write health care legislation are over. The conservative era is over. We now have the opportunity for a national health care reform.”

The U.S., Brown said, has entered a “new progressive era” similar to the New Deal of the 1930’s and the Great Society of the 1960’s. “The government is on the side of middle class people,” he said, and high on the agenda is an overhaul of the failed health care system.

Over all, he said, the U.S. ranks number 12 in health care among the 13 richest industrial democracies “and we spend twice as much as everyone else.” The only area where the U.S. excels is that “people over 65 live longer and you know why that is?”

“Medicare, Medicare,” the audience shouted.

Brown received a standing ovation as he voiced confidence that progressive people would act to bring about the change that is needed. “When people in union halls, churches and advocacy groups really want something to happen, it will happen.”

Brian Rothenberg, executive director of Progress Ohio, said the event was probably the largest of 50 similar actions held around the country during the Easter Congressional recess.

“I’ve been to a lot health care rallies, but I’ve never seen so much energy.” Key to passage, he said, may be inclusion of health care reform in the budget. “That way only a simple majority is needed. Otherwise we need 60 votes to stop a filibuster by opponents of reform.”

The Cleveland event was simulcast on the internet and can be viewed on Progress Ohio’s website at

Former Republic workers welcome Vice President Biden to window factory

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:42:00 +0000

CHICAGO – Union members with United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers (UE) Local 1110 and former employees of the Republic Windows and Doors here welcomed Vice President Joe Biden to their factory April 27. Biden toured the factory, which is in the process of being reopened under the new ownership of California-based Serious Materials in response to increased demand for energy-saving building products.

Biden’s visit highlighted President Barack Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which is aimed at creating jobs and building a 21st century economy in Chicago and across the nation.

“This is a story about how we inspire a better tomorrow,” Biden said to reporters at the north side factory. “What I have seen here today at Serious Materials Chicago inspires me and brings to life the real impact the Recovery Act is already having, just in the short time since our work began,” he said.

“Everywhere I go, I am hearing stories just like this one – stories of hard workers filling good jobs, our $8 billion investments in weatherization and energy programs re-opening doors and our tax credits creating new demand for energy-saving materials. This is the story of our new economy – and this is the story of the Recovery Act,” Biden added.

In December 2008 Republic owners gave over 260 workers at the factory a three-day notice before closing operations. Republic refused to negotiate with the workers and their union. Republic said they closed shop because it’s main creditor, Bank of America, had cut off financing having just received a $25 billion bailout package from the federal government. Apparently Bank of America decided not to use some of that money to keep manufacturing enterprises going at Republic, leaving workers out in the cold. Republic declared bankruptcy, shut down and moved to Iowa where they hired non-union workers at a cheaper wage.

The workers and their UE local took charge of the situation and led a very successful and peaceful occupation of their factory that drew national and international attention including support from then President-elect Obama. The six-day sit-in led to hours of intense negotiations, and Republic’s management, Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase agreed on a $1.75 million settlement with the workers and their union. Each worker was promised eight weeks salary, all accrued vacation pay and two months paid health care.

In February 2009, Serious Materials acquired the assets of the factory, and in early March – just days after the Recovery Act was signed into law – the company announced its intention to reopen the plant and meet the demand under the act. The new owners also reached an agreement with UE Local 1110 to recognize the union and to rehire all former Republic workers at their former rate of pay.

In the weeks since acquiring the factory, Serious Materials has already begun rehiring former workers and is now installing new equipment for the manufacturing of super-insulating windows that lower heating and cooling costs and improve energy efficiency.

A small crew has been working at the plant preparing to get it back in full production.

“We look forward to getting all our members rehired and working at Serious Materials to create green jobs at living wages,” said Armando Robles in a recent press release. Robles is a maintenance worker there and president of UE Local 1110.

UE Local 1110 Vice-President Melvin Maclin said, “We are glad to see that we have the continuing support of the White House.” He noted, “This would not have been possible without the hard work we have done as a union, and the support of our allies.”

Carl Rosen, President of UE Western Region said, “The former Republic Windows and Doors shows that simply relying on market forces and unregulated banks and corporations cannot provide an economy that works for the American people.”

Rosen continued, “We hope that the Obama administration and Congress continue to take the steps that are needed to ensure that everyone in our country who wants to work has a steady, decently-paid job that they can go to every day.”

At the factory Biden was joined by Mayor Richard Daley, Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan, U.S. Reps. Mike Quigley and Debbie Halverson. Democratic Illinois U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Roland Burris also attended.

Serious Materials is a leading producer of energy efficient windows and other environmental products. The federal stimulus package contains $16 billion for retrofitting existing homes with the type of windows produced by the company, potentially creating a huge market and thousands of jobs.

Under the $787 billion stimulus package, $8 billion is available for state and local weatherization and energy efficiency efforts through the Department of Energy – $5 billion through the Weatherization Assistance Program and another $3 billion for the state Energy Program.

U.N. conference reaches agreement on anti-racism resolution

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:42:00 +0000

Delegates from more than 100 United Nations (U.N.) member nations met in Geneva, Switzerland, this week to discuss strategies for eradicating racism. The Durban Review Conference (Durban II) is a follow-up to the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which was held in 2001 in Durban, South Africa.

After months of contentious negotiations, the conference's organizing committee reached an agreement Tuesday on a final resolution outlining how U.N. member states can eradicate racism. The resolution, which represents a broad consensus on how to tackle racism and related forms of intolerance around the world, will be formally adopted by the full conference on Friday.

Recommendations in the resolution include:

* aggressively investigating hate crimes; * affirming the right to organize for native-born and migrant workers alike; * encouraging governments to embrace equal opportunity programs; * calling for the ratification of other U.N. social justice treaties; and * establishing independent national human rights bodies that would launch investigations, make policy proposals, and monitor compliance with human rights treaties and domestic law.

In the weeks leading up to this year's conference, U.N. officials and experts worried that it would be impossible for the conference participants to come to consensus because of sharp disagreements among countries concerning the right to free expression, singling out certain conflicts in the world, and the refusal of some countries to attend the conference.

The U.S. boycotted this year's conference, as it did in 2001, citing objections to provisions prohibiting hate speech and references to Mid-East policies. Eight other countries, mainly from Europe, also withdrew from Durban II.

But U.N. officials were still encouraged by the level of participation of the countries that did attend the conference. 'What we have decided shows the outcome when you remain engaged in the process. It shows that boycotts do not assist,' said Amos Wako, president of the conference.

But not everyone felt that way. Representatives of many countries and human rights advocates were deeply disappointed with how the final resolution failed to recommend compensation regarding the lasting effects of transatlantic slave trade, although that topic was addressed in the 2001 conference.

Latinos in the South often targets of abuse

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:33:00 +0000

Original source:

Low-income Latinos have become growing targets across the South. In a report released this week by the Southern Poverty Law Center, poor Latinos described life in the South as living in a 'war zone.'

The SPLC's 'Under Siege: Life for Low-Income Latinos in the South' documents the widespread abuse facing low-wage Latino workers in Southern states. Focusing on Nashville, Charlotte, New Orleans, rural southern Georgia and northern Alabama, the Montgomery, Ala.-based civil rights nonprofit surveyed hundreds of residents who detailed a striking degree of abuse, including 'widespread hostility, discrimination and exploitation.' Researchers said they found a 'population under siege and living in fear' -- fear of the police, fear of the government and fear of criminals who prey on immigrants because of their vulnerability.

The South is a steadily changing region demographically. The U.S. Census shows the region has had the nation's fastest growing immigrant populations since the 1990s. By 2006, six Southern states (Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee) recorded a tremendous growth in their Hispanic populations, having added some 1.6 million Latinos.

As more immigrants move South to fill low-wage jobs in fields and factories across the region, a growing anti-immigrant climate has taken root, worsened by the crackdown on illegal immigration at the federal level in recent years. The anti-immigrant climate is harming all Hispanics in the South, whether or not they are illegal immigrants, according to the report.

In fact, the discrimination against Latinos filters down into all parts of their daily life. For instance, Latinos are routinely the targets of wage theft, racial profiling, police harassment and workplace abuse, according to the report. Employers know that immigrants, even those here legally, are often poorly equipped to protect their rights, resulting in intimidation and unsafe working conditions in the workplace. Hispanic women suffer high rates of sexual harassment as male supervisors threaten to report them to immigration authorities if the women don't provide sexual favors.

In the South laws to protect workers from abuse are weak and almost nonexistent, making it even more challenging for Latinos suffering from wage theft, workplace discrimination or workplace injuries to seek justice. Nearly one third of people surveyed reported on-the-job injuries, and only 37 percent of those said they received appropriate treatment. The rate of deaths for Mexican workers in the South was one in 6,200--more than double the national average.

Latinos interviewed reported having little confidence in police. Respondents said they're pulled over by police for 'the most minor of offenses -- or no offense at all.' In fact, Latinos often become the victims of crime because they do not feel safe reporting abuses to police or the government, making them attractive targets for criminals. Police checkpoints and roadblocks in predominantly Latino areas were also a common complaint, particularly in rural areas of northern Alabama. In fact, in Alabama more than 55 percent of respondents said there are police checkpoints where they live.

'This report documents the human toll of failed policies that relegate millions of people to an underground economy, where they are beyond the protection of the law,' said Mary Bauer, author of the report and director of the SPLC's Immigrant Justice Project. 'Workplace abuses and racial profiling are rampant in the South.'

Yet, little has been to promote fair treatment and reform. Instead of acting to prohibit and eliminate systematic exploitation and discrimination against Latinos, state and local governments in much of the South have exacerbated the situation, according to the report. A number of Southern communities, have enacted ordinances designed to limit services to undocumented immigrants. In addition, many law enforcement agencies in the South work under the 287(g) program, which allows local or state police to enforce federal immigration law. But these law enforcement agencies are enforcing immigration law in a way that has led to accusations of systematic racial profiling and has made Latino crime victims and witnesses more reluctant to cooperate with police, according to the report.

Since the 2005 hurricane season, the Gulf Coast region has also seen an explosion in its Hispanic population, particularly in New Orleans where migrant workers flocked to fill the construction jobs that opened up during the post-Katrina recovery effort. Estimates indicate the New Orleans metro area's Hispanic population has tripled in the last three years, from about 60,000 to about 180,000. The SPLC's report shows that in New Orleans migrant workers have faced rampant wage theft, coercion, and abuse. Some 80 percent of these workers said they had not been paid for work performed. Other research in post-hurricane New Orleans has shown this similar level of rampant worker abuse. In 2007 the National Immigration Law Center, the New Orleans Worker Justice Coalition, and the Advancement Project published a report called 'And Injustice for All: Workers' Lives in the Reconstruction of New Orleans' documenting poor working conditions for immigrant workers rebuilding New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The Chicago-based Interfaith Worker Justice also released a report in 2007, Working on Faith : A Faithful Response to Worker Abuse in New Orleans, which surveyed 218 reconstruction workers in the summer of 2006, found that 47 percent reported they didn't receive all the pay they were entitled to and 55 percent said they received no overtime pay.

'Discrimination against Latinos in the region constitutes a civil rights crisis that must be addressed,' the report says. The report concludes by urging the federal government to strengthen labor laws and civil rights protections, which would make crime victims and communities safer, curb racial profiling and other abuses, and better protect the wages and working conditions of all workers.

Some findings from the study include:

* Nearly 50 percent of respondents knew someone who had been treated unfairly by police. * 77 percent of the women who responded said sexual harassment was a major workplace problem. * 41 percent surveyed had not been paid for work, a figure that climbed to 80 percent in New Orleans. * Two-thirds of respondents said they had been made to feel unwelcome by others in the community, while 68 percent said they encountered on a regular basis what they perceived as racism -- from 'looks' to physical abuse. * 46 percent have confidence in police. * 46 percent with court experience say there were no interpreters.

Student loan reform: Obama to take on banks and their 'army of lobbyists'

Sat, 25 Apr 2009 08:24:00 +0000

On a major education reform offensive this week, President Obama met with working families struggling to pay college expenses for their children. During that meeting at the White House Friday, April 24th, the president announced a number of measures his administration has already taken and will propose this year to make college more affordable and to save taxpayer dollars in the process.

First, the president's economic recovery act provided a new $2,500 tax credit for families with children in college and set aside $17 billion to boost the number and size of Pell Grants awarded to college students in 2009 and 2010.

The new Pell Grant funds are set to expire in 2011 along with the economic recovery act, however. To make the new program permanent, the president has proposed 'to make Pell an entitlement,' according to a White House press statement. The administration wants to tie the Pell Grant to the rate of inflation and to invest up to $116 billion in the program over the next 10 years to ensure its financial strength.

The next piece of the president's package will help pay for the new Pell Grant system. The administration plans to expand the Department of Education's Direct Loan program. This move is expected to eliminate the current dominant system of paying taxpayer dollars to subsidize banks who make student loans. The White House estimated this move alone could save taxpayers almost $100 billion over the next decade.

On this piece of the reform package, Education Secretary Arne Duncan told reporters on Friday, April 24th, 'There's some controversy on what business we should be in. I fundamentally think we should not be in the business of propping up banks.'

'I'd much rather be investing in our country's young people,' Duncan said.

The current subsidy program pays banks and other lenders a guaranteed rate of return and reimburses them for defaults, giving them large profits set by the political process rather than won in a competitive marketplace, the White House press statement said.

The president's proposal earned swift opposition from major banks who have profited enormously from the subsidy program, especially Sallie Mae.

President Obama offered a sharp response. “The banks and lenders who have reaped a windfall from these subsidies have mobilized an army of lobbyists to try and keep things the way they are,' he pointed out.

'They are gearing up for a battle. And so am I,' the president told the families he met with. 'They will fight for their special interests. I will fight for America’s students and their families.”

As part of its PR campaign to counter the Obama administration's momentum on the issue, Sallie Mae claimed that the measure would cost thousands of jobs. Ironically, this claim comes after several years of Sallie Mae outsourcing thousands of jobs overseas.

Secretary Duncan countered on the jobs issue by noting that expanding the Direct Loan program would likely offset any job losses that might occur as a result of the shrinking subsidized loan market dominated by Sallie Mae.

The Direct Loan program has a much lower rate of default and expense than the subsidized loan market. And interest earned on the loans would be returned to taxpayers not to boosting the profit margins of banks like Sallie Mae.

Another piece of the president's reform package included a $2.5 billion investment in programs to help students stay in and finish college. 'Obviously getting students into college in the front door is very important,' Duncan stated, 'but when they're not coming out the back end with their diploma, we're not changing the prospects for their future that much.'

Duncan also stated that the Education Department plans this year to revise the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), the application students use to get Pell Grants, student loans and other forms of college payment assistance. The complexity and length of the form discourages many students from applying for assistance and even keeps some people from applying to college at all.

Student groups made a major push this month in support of President Obama's education budget priorities. As , groups like the United States Student Association organized nationwide visits by college students to their members of Congress earlier this month in support of the president's reform proposals. Other youth and student groups affiliated with the joined a nationwide call-in day in support of President Obama's budget on April 21st. Similar efforts are planned for the future.

President Obama's education reform proposals received a huge boost Friday, April 24th, when Democratic lawmakers announced they would include them along with health care reform in the appropriations process under rules that would prevent a Senate Republican filibuster. Instead of requiring 60 votes for passage in the Senate, the reform packages could be passed by a simple majority.

1 million kids may have lead poisoning: what you can do

Sat, 25 Apr 2009 08:03:00 +0000

Three hundred thousand children in the United States are documented as having lead poisoning. Due to poor reporting practices and failure of the health care system to test all children between 1 and 5 years of age, there may be as many as 1 million children with lead poisoning in the U.S. It is an expensive and preventable public health problem.

An important thing to remember about lead poisoning is that the damage never goes away. When high levels of lead are detected in the body there is treatment to lower the level of lead, but the damage remains. There is no safe level of lead.

It particularly affects the developing brain; therefore young children and fetuses are particularly susceptible. The effects are cumulative, and even low levels can cause damage over time.

Preschool children are particularly vulnerable — as they explore the environment, they put every and anything in their mouths.

Lead damages the nervous system, cardiovascular system and kidneys, even bones and teeth. The damage can cause a decrease in I.Q., problems with attention, stunted growth, obesity, and in rare cases death.

The most common source of lead in the environment is lead paint. Lead also reaches the soil through emissions from certain industries, especially battery plants. Lead was once a legal ingredient of paint, water pipes, the solder along the seams of food cans and gasoline. It continues to be found in consumer goods such as pottery, toys and leaded crystal.

The Environmental Protection Agency and Consumer Product Safety Commission are charged with protecting the public from dangerous chemicals and hazardous products. But as we have seen with the recent peanut-contamination scandal, public agencies do not always use due vigilance. The Bush administration under-funded these agencies and, at the behest of big business and corporate America, encouraged a blind eye when it came to enforcing rules and regulations meant to safeguard the public.

Indications are that the Obama administration intends to do much better. For starters, more staff, with the backbone to enforce standards, needs to be hired.

To protect yourself and your family:

* Check for lead paint in homes when buying or renting. Federal law requires disclosure of lead in houses built before 1978. Have a home inspection when buying. Make sure there is no peeling paint. Paint and plaster in poor condition can be covered with paneling or sheetrock.

* Be sure water filters have been certified to remove lead by an independent testing agency. Run water for 10 minutes in the morning before using it for drinking or cooking, so water that has been sitting overnight, possibly leaching lead from pipes, is not used.

* Damp dust floors, wood molding and window sills frequently.

* Leave shoes at the door, wash hands when coming in from outdoors and before eating. Children should eat indoors.

* Children should play in grassy area or paved areas, not in dirt

* Wash toys frequently. Read labels on toys. Kits are available to test toys and other household items, but they vary in reliability.

* Vacuum rugs with a HEPPA-filtered vacuum sweeper.

* Wear gloves when gardening.

* Check dishes and pottery for lead content — some products manufactured outside the U.S. can contain lead.

* When installing new water faucets, make sure they are lead-free.

* Eat lots of fruits and vegetables.

* Have children tested. The early symptoms of lead poisoning, such as an upset stomach, or irritability, are easily attributed to other causes.

* Insist that agencies whose duty it is to protect the public are well funded and staffed, and that they are not privatized.

* Further, insist that polluters and landlords who ignore standards for environmental lead be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If the law is weak, insist that politicians enact legislation to strengthen it.

Diane Mohney is a retired nurse and health care reform activist.

At home in union-made utopia: PBS looks at the housing co-op movement

Sat, 25 Apr 2009 06:29:00 +0000

Original source:

Three elderly New Yorkers—Yok Ziebel, Julie Luguvoy and Pete Rosenblum—are meeting at the apartment complex in the Bronx where they grew up together. They embrace with all of the affection of lifelong friends. They joke with each other (Ziebel: “Did you lose weight?” Rosenblum: “No, I’m shrinking.” Ziebel: “We’re all shrinking.”). They reminisce.

This sweet moment begins a splendid, subtle documentary, “At Home in Utopia,” created by Michael Goldman and Ellen Brodsky, which will be shown on the PBS “Independent Lens” series April 28. (Check your local PBS station schedule here.)

Ziebel, Luguvoy and Rosenblum grew up in one of the most remarkable and least-known experiments in the history of the union movement—the housing cooperatives of New York City, built mainly by immigrant Jewish workers in the early 20th century.

These workers agreed on very little. They were socialists, liberals, labor Zionists, communists, anarchists and everything in between. They engaged in some ferocious political fights in their day.

Yet they all had something powerful in common. They thought unions should aim for “a shenere un besere velt”—a more beautiful and better world, as the Yiddish socialist Workmen’s Circle put it—even if they passionately disagreed about what that world would look like.

How to get from here to there? That’s where the housing cooperatives (and other kinds of cooperatives) came in.

Labor Zionists built the Farband houses. Socialists and Communists started the Shalom Aleichem Houses. The Amalgamated Clothing Workers Union sponsored the Amalgamated Houses. But the largest of all when it opened its doors was the United Workers Cooperative Colony, or the “Co-ops,” the home for more than 700 Communist and pro-Communist working families starting in the 1920s.

It’s where Ziebel, Luguvoy and Rosenblum spent their childhood. Says Rosenblum:

This was all an experiment. The people that started the experiment thought we’ll end up with heaven on earth.

Heaven didn’t arrive, but the Co-ops changed the lives of everyone who lived there.

For one thing, it was a vast improvement over the hideous slums and tenements of the Lower East Side and Brownsville where most of them had been stuck. Harriette Bressack recalls:

When my mother moved into the Co-ops, she was delighted, because where she lived before there was no greenery. In the spring, when just that pale green would come, she would say, “This is the part I love.” And my kids to this day say, “That’s your mother’s color coming up now.”

Yet there was more to the Co-ops than gardens and space and fresh air. Says Lugovoy:

I think that what my parents felt here was that they were the owners of both their apartment and their fate, of what happened to them.

In the 1930s, when racially integrated housing was nearly unheard of, the Co-ops were integrated. In retrospect, it was one of their finest achievements. Says Mary Louise Patterson, whose father was a lawyer for the Scottsboro Boys:

I grew up in neighborhoods that were black. You didn’t live in a building with white people. So it was very different to go to a place like the Co-ops and see black and white people living together, because the children socialized together—which we did! And I did!

One of the most touching moments in “At Home in Utopia” is when Boris Ourlicht, a Pole, tells about his first date in 1947 with Libby Dickerson, an African American. “Oh, she was a beauty!” he says with tears in his eyes. Inside the Co-ops, an interracial relationship was perfectly fine. But as they were driving down to Greenwich Village, a policeman saw the two of them together, insulted them, arrested them and took them to the police station.

It’s hard to imagine a more disastrous first date—but that hardly stopped them. They fell in love and were happily married until Dickerson’s death in 1995. As Ourlicht is being interviewed, her photo sits next to him.

There came a time when the Co-ops needed to raise the monthly rent by $1 per room to meet the terms of a mortgage. The residents voted against the increase. As a result, the mortgage deal collapsed and a company called the BX Corp. took over the apartments. That was more than 60 years ago.

So what became of the other workers’ housing cooperatives in New York?

The Shalom Aleichem apartments have been under private ownership since the 1930s. One of the Farband ’s buildings was sold but the other is still a co-op. The union-supported Amalgamated Cooperative is still flourishing with 1,500 families—and over the years, its managers have built even more high-rise cooperatives around the city.

And the Co-ops of the Bronx, with all of its achievements and flaws and dreams, left a legacy. It wasn’t what the founders planned. “We were expected to conquer the world,” says Rosenblum. They never came even close.

But they did produce a generation, now in their 70s and 80s, who have lived their long lives with a storehouse of rich, complicated memories—and a particular, passionately held vision of justice that changed its contours but never completely disappeared.

Cartoon: What good are they?

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:23:00 +0000