People Before Profit blog

Chicago alderman Rosa, community, activists denounce ICE raids on day laborers

Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:45:00 +0000

CHICAGO -- Activists, community residents and laborers gathered on the corner of Milwaukee and Belmont in the heavily Latinx neighborhood of West Avondale August 9 to denounce the recent increase in ICE raids taking place on the north west side of the city. Government agents had raided a neighborhood location where immigrant workers gather on Friday August 5 at around noon, forcing a group of laborers to to submit to illegal searches and mobile fingerprint scanners.

Aristides Banegas was one of the laborers who came face to face with ICE agents that day. He recalled details of the incident. He said that in the 23 years he's been living in the U.S., the last couple of years have exposed the type of energy and effort being directed at targeting immigrant communities. [Ed. note: Mr. Banegas' remarks are translated from Spanish.] "I came to this country for a better life and for change, and not to be mistreated." He stated that Friday around noon a blue Ford Explorer pulled up to the Shell gas station parking lot where day laborers and other subcontractors normally station themselves to be recruited for jobs. Banegas said several men jumped out of the vehicle and shouted at the laborers not to move. He said one of the men grabbed Banegas by the arm and demanded that he show them his papers. While Banegas was able to provide the agents with his state ID, ICE ended up detaining 3 of his peers. One was later released, but the other two remain in detention as of this writing. (story continues after video)

This form of racial profiling in Latinx and immigrant communities is not only a violation of civil rights, but is an example of the racism that drives this country's immigration policies. For years, anti-immigration legislation, like Arizona's infamous SB 1070 law, has provided 'loopholes' for government agents to ask local police to determine the immigration status of someone arrested or detained when there is "reasonable suspicion." Many have argued that SB1070 and similar laws set a dangerous precedent for racial profiling of brown and black individuals across the nation.

On a local level, immigrants' rights groups such as Organized Communities Against Deportations and Not One More have been outspoken about the the injustices that plague Chicago's communities. In response to the recent raids in Chicago, they have taken several steps to challenge the legality of ICE orders. They have filed an official request and are demanding an investigation to the civil rights violations that are occurring in various immigrant- heavy neighborhoods around the city. The groups also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that may also help expose whether local police played any role in providing information to help execute last Friday's raid.

Alderman Carlos Rosa, of the 35th ward, was present at the rally representing the Logan Square neighborhood. He told the People's World that he came out to show his support of undocumented communities and condemned the racial profiling of ICE practices. "Isn't it funny," he said, "that these searches don't occur downtown to men in business suits?" Rosa emphasized the need to pass ordinances that strengthen the city's sanctuary policy. A sanctuary city is one with policies designed to not prosecute people solely for being an undocumented immigrant. Despite Chicago being on the list, it seems that federal agents have found other means of systematically targeting and imprisoning undocumented workers. It is estimated that in the last several years the Obama administration has invested 18 billion dollars on immigration enforcement, an amount that Rosa says could have gone to better use. "[This is money] that could have gone to schools, to healthcare - but instead it went to destroying working families."

While the legal paperwork is being processed to get the detainees released, community members and allies continue to demand transparency and accountability. "We want to send a strong message to ICE- you are not welcome here," said Rosa. "This is a war on working people and we won't stand for it."

Photo: Michelle Zacarias/PW

Video: Earchiel Johnson/PW

Don’t fall for it: Trump’s economic plan a fraud

Tue, 09 Aug 2016 15:04:00 +0000

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump tried to change the conversation yesterday away from his campaign's self-inflicted wounds of the last two weeks with a major speech on the economy. After attacking the Khans, Gold Star parents who spoke at the Democratic National Convention, and comparing running a business to the sacrifice military families make when they lose a loved one, Trump continued his habit of boldly telling lies and offering nothing but coded America First rhetoric instead of serious proposals that could make a positive impact on the lives of working people -- of all backgrounds, races and ethnicities. In fact-check after fact-check, experts agreed that Trump plays fast and loose with the truth.

In its fact check story, The Associated Press reported, "Donald Trump changed some of his facts to fit his agenda Monday, pitching shades of truth and misconceptions in what was billed as a major economic policy speech." Whether on Hillary Clinton's record as senator from New York, or President Barack Obama's economic record, or on taxes, trade, regulations, infrastructure, the auto industry and jobs, Trump created his own reality show where he calls the shots and packages himself as some savior of workers.

Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest union federation, unmasked the New York real estate mogul's speech as "deceitful" and "offensive."

Trumka said, "Donald Trump will say he speaks for all Americans, but his all white, all male, Wall Street banker economic team proves his intentions. Trump has chosen to get his real advice from people just like him - people who have made millions off the backs of hardworking families."

After he "has spent his life getting rich by hurting working people. Now he returns to Michigan for an economic speech almost one year to the day after he suggested automakers move production from Michigan to states with lower wages. It's ironic, deceitful, and simply offensive," Trumka said in his Aug. 8 statement.

Trumka was referring to an interview Trump gave to the Detroit News last year, which "notoriously revealed his ideas for assaulting the wages of supposedly overpaid autoworkers by closing and re-locating plants: 'You can go to different parts of the United States and then ultimately you'd do full-circle-you'll come back to Michigan because those guys are going to want their jobs back even if it is less. We can do rotation in the United States-it doesn't have to be in Mexico,'" wrote Tim Libretti in his Feb. 2 story Union workers ... for Trump?.

In his speech yesterday, Trump never mentioned raising the minimum wage or the crucial role of unions and collective bargaining in winning higher wages for America's working people. Instead Trump wrapped Republican establishment economic policies of tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations, as well as deregulation giveaways to auto, Big Oil and Wall Street into his coded-coated divisive brand of populism. Like all good pickpockets, he distracts with fabricated arguments while pinching your wallet.

"Trade has big benefits, and I am in favor of trade. But I want great trade deals for our country that create more jobs and higher wages for American workers. Isolation is not an option, only great and well-crafted trade deals are," he said.

This is the man whose "line of ties is produced in China, and his signature line of menswear is manufactured in Mexico," wrote Libretti, suggesting that Trump be judged by his actions.

"Even as he rails against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Trump's own behavior undermines U.S. workers by exploiting cheaper labor abroad."

Trump apparently believes that working people cannot spot a con when they see one. On taxes, he figures by inserting the word "workers" or "jobs" that people will be fooled. He promised to repeal the so-called "death tax."

"American workers have paid taxes their whole lives, and they should not be taxed again at death and it's just plain wrong and most people agree with that. We will repeal it," he said.

In reality, the "death tax" is called the "estate tax" because it affects millionaires and billionaires, and in general, workers do not fall into that category of taxpayers.

The New York Times fact check on Trump's speech said, "Only a very few American workers are subject to estate taxes, and those subject to the tax are usually not termed "workers." Under current law, a married couple can shield up to $10.9 million of their estate from any federal taxation."

In an obvious play for working women's attention, Trump also announced a tax deduction for child care costs. The slight of hand here is a tax deduction is not the same as a tax credit and therefore will not be of use for most working families.

"On surface, this sounds like a good idea. Since the cost of daycare can be a huge cost for many families, the plan has the potential to help many Americans. But Trump is proposing a tax deduction, not a tax credit-and that's a problem. A deduction subtracts from a person's taxable income while a credit reduces the amount of taxes a person owes. These tax expenditures, as they are known, are the same as spending but they happen through the tax code. Congress has grown very fond of spending through the tax code; in the last fiscal year, tax expenditures totaled around $1 trillion," writes Politico's Danny Vinik.

Clinton responded to Trump's speech in real time. "His tax plans will give super big tax breaks to large corporations and the really wealthy, just like him and the guys who wrote the speech, right?" she said. "He wants to roll back regulations on Wall Street. He wants to eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has saved billions of dollars for Americans. He wants to basically just repackage trickle down economics."

Clinton will unveil her own economic program Thursday, also in Detroit, but is expected to emphasize progressive policies based on the Democratic program, including infrastructure investment, debt free college education, $15 an hour minimum wage, union and worker rights and trade deals that create jobs, raise wages and protect the environment.

Photo: Even Trump didn't seem too happy with his speech at the Detroit Economic Club as he left the podium. | Evan Vucci/AP

Unionists, protesters, fact-checkers, economists pan Trump economics address

Tue, 09 Aug 2016 14:14:00 +0000

DETROIT (PAI) - Unionists outside, protesters inside, fact-checkers at The Wall Street Journal and other media and even some conservative economists all panned Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's major economics address, given August 8 in Detroit.

Trump gave the speech at the Detroit Economic Club, a frequent venue for major political and economic addresses. The conservative business owners in the audience sometimes applauded him, especially when Trump's security guards ejected 17 female protesters from the room.

The women protested Trump's anti-woman stands - and his outsourcing.

"You want to close Michigan plants and outsource our jobs!" one autoworker from Grosse Pointe Woods shouted. As she stood on her chair, she added: "How are we supposed to raise our families without good jobs? Is that what you call 'winning'?" She was then tossed.

Trump's speech itself had few clues about what his policies would be towards workers, other than his promise to renegotiate trade treaties and a flat ban on federal regulations, including pro-worker rules. He also declared "our education reforms will help parents send their kids to a school of their choice," code words for supporting private - not public - schools.

And Trump promised to "immediately cancel all illegal and overreaching executive orders," without specifying which ones. Several Obama administration orders aid workers, notably low-income workers.

"Nothing would make our foreign adversaries happier than for our country to tax and regulate our companies and our jobs out of existence," the business mogul stated - before announcing he would propose cutting the federal corporate tax rate to 15 percent, if elected.

The stated federal corporate tax rate is now 35 percent, but businesses use deductions, exclusions and income-shifting overseas to pay an average of 12.6 percent, Wall Street Journal fact-checkers noted. That's lower than the rate imposed on most individual taxpayers.

Unionists outside the hall-where 1,500 corporate executives and guests paid $45-$55 each to listen to Trump-gave his speech failing grades.

Trump "spent his life getting rich by hurting working people," said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka. "Now he returns to Michigan for an economic speech almost one year to the day after he suggested automakers move production from Michigan to states with lower wages. It's ironic, deceitful, and simply offensive.

"Trump will say he speaks for all Americans, but his all-white, all-male, Wall Street banker economic team proves his intentions. Trump has chosen to get his real advice from people just like him - people who have made millions off the backs of hardworking families.

The Auto Workers led on-site protesters outside the hall, and both UAW and the Michigan AFL-CIO lambasted Trump's promises as empty or worse.

"Trump would be an absolute disaster for working people in Michigan," the UAW said. "This is the same guy who said 'our wages are too high.'

"And Trump said he would close 'a couple of plants' and send Michigan auto jobs to other states as a way to cut the wages of Michigan autoworkers. That kind of thinking is downright dangerous, and will kill Michigan jobs."

State Fed President Ron Bieber called Trump's plant-closing schemes and plans to cut workers' wages "just nuts" and "downright dangerous." He added Trump would send the state economy "right down the drain."

"All we heard from Donald Trump today was a lot of hot air," Bieber added. "Trump doesn't give a rip about helping working people in Michigan. If he did, he'd hire Michigan workers to make his clothes, instead of producing his ties in China and his suits in Mexico. The truth is Trump only cares about making more money for himself.

And given Trump's past denunciations of women, Hispanics, Muslims, veterans and others, Bieber called on top Michigan Republican officeholders to withdraw their support from the controversial nominee.

"Michigan can't afford Trump's reckless ideas. That's why I'm calling on Republican leaders like Attorney General Bill Schuette, Lieut. Gov. Brian Calley, Congresswoman Candice Miller, Congressman Tim Walberg, and House Speaker Kevin Cotter to do what's right for Michigan and withdraw their support for Donald Trump," Bieber said.

Cotter and Calley did not attend Trump's speech, though Calley stumped with Trump's running mate in late July. Nor did right wing GOP Gov. Rick Snyder, who announced in June he would not endorse Trump.

Former GOP Michigan Gov. William Milliken, a moderate, is backing Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Former GOP Gov. John Engler, now head of a top D.C.-based business lobby, has been silent so far, but supports "free trade" pacts that Trump denounced.

Photo: Demonstrators protest during Trump's economics address in Detroit. | Paul Sancya/AP

Teachout’s Congressional campaign: “Score one for the political revolution”

Mon, 08 Aug 2016 13:45:00 +0000

HUDSON, New York -- If Zephyr Teachout wins the race for New York's 19th Congressional District, she will do more than add a seat to the Democratic column. She will help bring Bernie Sander's political revolution to the House.

Teachout, a Fordham University law professor, has been a leader in the Occupy movement and served as head of Mayday PAC, dedicated to campaign finance reform. She is also the former director of the Sunlight Foundation and the author of the widely-read book, Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin's Snuff Box to Citizens United.

She was among the first Congressional candidates to be endorsed by Sanders and won New York District 19's Democratic primary by 71 percent of the vote.

That primary attracted a much higher turnout than did the Republican balloting.

New York's 19th District is largely rural, includes parts of 11 Upstate New York Hudson valley counties and has a long history of swinging back and forth between Democratic and Republican representation. It once elected Franklin Delano Roosevelt to the New York State Senate. Since 2010, the area has been represented by conservative Republican Chris Gibson, who is now retiring.

Teachout faces right winger John Faso for Gibson's vacant seat.

Faso is a lobbyist for many conservative causes. As a member of the New York State legislature, He was the original sponsor of charter school legislation and was a leading figure in the passage of Governor Pataki's proposal to create charter schools in New York State in 1998.

Faso's Republican primary campaign was funded in large part by hedge fund manager Robert Mercer through a super PAC called New York Wins. He won the Republican primary by over two to one.

Faso is now being backed by billionaire hedge fund operators like Paul Singer who are pouring millions into super PACs aimed at helping candidates who support Donald Trump for president.

As quoted in The Nation magazine, Jim Dean, chair of Democracy for America, said "Wall Street is scared to death of being held accountable by Zephyr Teachout in the halls of Congress.

"Few candidates," Dean continued, are better prepared than [she is] to run and win the kind of aggressive, people-powered campaign [that is] needed."

In 2014, Teachout received 34 percent of the vote when she ran against incumbent Andrew Cuomo to become the Democratic Party's nominee for governor.

Her congressional campaign is being supported by small donors, not the super rich.

"Score one for the political revolution," Working Families Party New York State Director Bill Lipton told The Nation.

"Zephyr has been able to build a grassroots movement of activists and small dollar donors looking to take on the political and economic establishment. Voters in the 19th District now have a rare opportunity to elect a representative who will lift up their voices and be a national leader in taking on corruption and corporate influence in our politics. The choice for them in November could not be clearer, and eyes of the entire country will continue to be on this race."

Teachout says, "One of the original sins in modern thinking is the separation of thinking about economics and politics."

She advocates policies that respond "to the interests of the people [rather than] to the interests of individual, monopolistic companies."

She is one of the nation's leading advocates for campaign-finance and ethics reforms, breaking up big banks, net neutrality, and raising the national minimum wage to $15 an hour, which New York State has already done.

In her primary night victory speech, Teachout said "I am running for Congress to break down those doors in Washington, DC; the doors that are keeping the people of America-the real people, the citizens of America-locked out. I've been fighting well-paid lobbyists on behalf of working families my entire life.

"I will fight until we win-for the people of New York's 19^th and for the American people."

Photo: Zephyr Teachout | Mike Groll/AP

Pence heaps praise on ALEC

Mon, 08 Aug 2016 12:50:00 +0000

INDIANAPOLIS (PAI) - Well, now we know why Mike Pence went home to Indianapolis after last month's GOP convention, and it wasn't just for rallies for Donald Trump's ticket.

Instead, Indiana's governor, who became the business mogul's Republican running mate, addressed - and hailed - the American Legislative Exchange Council, disregarding worker protests out front of the secretive right-wing cabal's meeting in his state's capital city.

"I think everyone should be very weary and very leery, watching carefully to see where ALEC gets its resources and how it connects those resources to legislators," said Teresa Meredith, president of the Indiana State Teachers Association, at the July 27 rally. Meredith led more than 100 teachers in front of the hotel where the corporate-funded front group hosted lobbyists and state lawmakers from around the country, and, later, Pence.

"ALEC has driven the privatization of public education in Indiana," Meredith said. "Our state is a leader in funding private school vouchers and charter schools with taxpayer money to the detriment of the more than 90 percent of Hoosier kids attending public schools."

ALEC is known for its anti-worker, anti-minority "model legislation" which its corporate lobbyists draft and its right-wing politicians enact. If those right wingers, all Republicans, control state and local governments, the ALEC schemes - often adopted word-for-word - become law. ALEC also pushes so-called "voter ID" laws to disenfranchise workers, students, women and minorities who oppose its corporate agenda.

That corporate agenda includes so-called "right-to-work" and "paycheck protection" legislation, bans on project labor agreements, outlawing public worker unions and their contracts, taxpayer-paid vouchers for parents of private school kids - defunding public schools - abolition of teacher tenure and more.

Pence endorsed all of that. He promised the audience Trump would be "empowering states with resources and flexibility," right wing code for cuts in regulations and elimination of programs for low-income and minority people. "You are the model for Washington, D.C., after this election," Pence declared. Trump's running mate also reminded the right wing of the importance of presidential U.S. Supreme Court nominations.

"For the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of the sanctity of life, for the sake of our Second Amendment and all of our God-given liberties, we must assure the next president making appointments to the Supreme Court of the United States of America is President Donald Trump," Pence said, to enthusiastic applause.

The U.S. Constitution's 2^nd Amendment states that "a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." "Sanctity of life" is the code for anti-abortionists.

ALEC first became notorious for its "concealed carry" gun laws. Florida's ALEC-drafted law let a neighborhood watch "volunteer" shoot and kill unarmed African-American teenager Trayvon Martin. His killing was the first in a long line of shootings that have galvanized national attention - including union attention-on African-Americans' problems with law enforcement, official and unofficial.

Photo: MediaMatters

Trump’s VP pick Mike Pence addresses right-wing lobby ALEC

Mon, 08 Aug 2016 12:29:00 +0000

INDIANAPOLIS (PAI) - Well, now we know why Mike Pence went home to Indianapolis after last month's GOP convention, and it wasn't just for rallies for Donald Trump's ticket.

Photo: Indianapolis unions protest ALEC meeting. USW Local 1999 Facebook

Voting with their feet: Traffic plummets at Trump casinos and hotels

Fri, 05 Aug 2016 15:02:00 +0000

If Donald Trump's recent slide in the polls isn't yet enough to worry the billionaire real estate mogul, then the latest traffic numbers out of the Trump entertainment properties might just start to hit him where it hurts - in his ego-driven brand. And if the Trump brand is suffering, that means the Trump wallet will eventually feel the effect too.

Since he began his run for the White House last summer, the number of people visiting the array of Trump hotels, casinos, and golf courses has been on a pretty steady decline, according to data released by the location-tracking app Foursquare. Looking at the lodging and entertainment choices made by its more than 50 million users, the company released a report Thursday showing that June 2016 saw a 17 percent drop in market share for Trump properties compared to the same month a year ago. It gets worse when you look at market share in blue states and among women.

While the tech company goes out of its way to say that it makes no political statement with its report, the pattern they highlight is confirmed by other travel-related firms as well. A trend is emerging: people are voting with their feet.

Whether it appears on a ballot or on the front of a building, Trump's name is a turn-off for increasing numbers of Americans.

The numbers

When it comes to gathering foot traffic intelligence in the consumer market, Foursquare has some solid credentials. This is the same company that predicted Apple iPhone 6s sales numbers before the manufacturer itself, knew ahead of time that burrito lovers were not yet over the Chipotle E. coli scare in the spring, and forecast the success of all-day breakfast at McDonald's. If big data on market share is what you're looking for, Foursquare's got it.

So when they say something is afoot at Trump properties, it's probably worth looking at. Their analysis is centered on market share, or the amount of traffic going to Trump's branded locations compared to the amount visiting competing properties in the same area. That means it's a reflection of the choices participating consumers are making, regardless of the macro trends of overall spending in the lodging/entertainment sector.

Trump announced his candidacy for the White House in June of 2015. Before that time, the traffic to his branded properties was relatively steady year-over-year and was even growing a bit. But the usual bump from the summer travel season didn't happen for his destinations last year. And when the presidential primaries really heated up in March 2016, putting Trump on television constantly, losses accelerated again. Another expected vacation season bounce failed to materialize.

Some properties were harder hit than others, with those in blue states suffering the most. New York's Trump SoHo, the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago, and Atlantic City's Trump Taj Mahal all saw absolute traffic declines as high as 24 percent. In blue states overall, July 2016 saw a 20 percent year-over-year market share drop.

Women driving the drop-off

Dig a little deeper into the data and you find a fact which really shouldn't be all that surprising: women are driving the drop-off in market share for Trump properties. At Trump sites in blue states, the share of women visiting last month sunk almost 30 percent. Given that seven in ten American women have an unfavorable opinion of the Republican nominee, it makes perfect sense that they would be leading the way in shifting their dollars away from any business with the Trump name plastered across it.

It's not just Foursquare that is reporting such dismal numbers for Trump properties, though. Another firm, Priceonomics, which owns a hotel-booking search engine, says that in the first quarter of 2016, room reservations at Trump hotels were down by an astonishing 59 percent. This at a time when bookings for hotels overall were up. Trump properties are actually bucking the positive trend for the hotel sector.

Worst hit were the Trump hotels in New York (down 74 percent), Las Vegas (down 71 percent), Chicago (down 31 percent), and Atlantic City (down 17 percent). North of the border, Canadians and foreign tourists also appeared to be snubbing Trump, with his Toronto hotel seeing a 47 percent decline in bookings.

The significance

While we are still three months from Election Day and a lot can happen between now and then, these numbers are still important indicators of emerging cultural and political trends. The way people choose to spend their money on products so explicitly connected to a particular candidate is a peek into how they relate to the political identity associated with him.

There is of course no automatic correlation between the market share of Trump travel destinations and the number of votes he will get in November. But if his name is becoming increasingly toxic in the entertainment market, it's not that big of a stretch to assume his brand might face a similar problem in the electoral market.

News also broke Thursday that the owner of Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City, the GOP nominee's billionaire friend Carl Icahn, was closing the casino permanently at the end of summer and eliminating 3,000 jobs with it.

Icahn's managers blamed the striking workers of UNITE-HERE Local 54 for the casino's failure. The numbers discussed above, however, suggest that the real problems go straight to the top - all the way to the name on the sign.

Photo: The outline of the letters that once spelled "Trump Plaza" remain visible on the facade of the shuttered Trump Plaza casino in Atlantic City, NJ; January 14, 2015. | AP

Massachusetts passes most comprehensive state equal pay law

Thu, 04 Aug 2016 15:44:00 +0000

With bipartisan support, the Massachusetts legislature passed and GOP Gov. Charlie Baker signed the most comprehensive state equal pay for equal work law in the U.S., on August 1.

The state AFL-CIO, the New England Jewish Labor Committee, 9to5 and Jobs With Justice were among the large coalition that pushed the law. It would, for the first time, bar employers from demanding past salary figures from job applicants and screening applicants based on past pay. Both demands and screening hurt female job applicants.

Instead, the employer must present salary figures, which the job-seeker could accept or reject. The new law takes effect at the start of 2018.

That's not all. The new law also "seeks to help eliminate the gender wage gap in Massachusetts by providing a more comprehensive definition of comparable work" than just exactly equal jobs, its sponsoring coalition says.

And it orders firms to let workers "discuss salaries without the threat of retaliation and eliminates the practice of requiring salary history on job applications," said its leading backers, the Equal Pay Coalition and the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women.

Massachusetts becomes the latest state to enact a pay equity law, since the GOP-run U.S. Congress has pigeonholed similar equal pay legislation for at least a decade. A 1962 federal pay equity law has been weakened by court restrictions in the ensuing years.

The median pay for a working woman in Massachusetts is 81 cents for every dollar in median pay for a working man, slightly above the national ratio of 79 cents per dollar. The median is the point where half the workforce is above and half below.

The national ratios for union workers are 92 cents in median pay for every unionized working woman for every dollar for an unionized working man - and each of them earn more than $200 a week more than their non-union colleagues.

The new Massachusetts law defines "comparable work" - the standard for equal pay - "as solely meaning work that is substantially similar in content and requiring substantially similar skill, effort and responsibility and performed under similar working conditions."

It also bans "discrimination on the basis of gender in the payment of wages for comparable work unless the variation is based upon seniority, a bona fide merit system, a bona fide system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production or sales, geographic location, or education, training, or experience to the extent such factors are reasonably related to the particular job in question and consistent with business necessity."

Employers guilty of breaking the new law will have to fork over unpaid wages, an equal amount in damages and pay the harmed worker's attorney's fees. And "each discriminatory paycheck shall be deemed a violation of the law."

Photo: New England Jewish Labor Committee.

Meeropol brothers launch petition to exonerate their mother, Ethel Rosenberg

Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:07:00 +0000

Readers of the People's World and its antecedents may know something about the federal spying case against Julius and Ethel Rosenberg that led to their execution at Sing Sing Prison on June 19, 1953. In the light of newly uncovered evidence, a campaign is now underway to exonerate Ethel. The campaign, directed to Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch and President Barack Obama in their final months of office, was launched recently on the website of the Rosenberg Fund for Children (RFC), an organization founded in 1990 to support the children of present-day activists who have been imprisoned or otherwise separated from their children.

Written by Robert and Michael Meeropol - the Rosenbergs' two sons who were adopted by Anne and Abel Meeropol - the petition outlines the evidence showing that Ethel was not a spy. It claims the government knew that, but manufactured "evidence" against her to use as leverage against Julius. When Ethel and Julius did not cooperate with this plan as expected, the government executed her anyway.

Little of that story will comes as "news" to many of our readers. But the release last summer of David Greenglass' long suppressed grand jury testimony makes the chain of events and false information so clear, that the Meeropol brothers felt their case for exoneration would be compelling.

To date, the petition has generated over 10,000 signatures. The aim is for at least 50,000 and hopefully closer to 100,000 by early December. RFC has launched an outreach campaign to spread the word about the effort to reach that goal.

The full text of the petition follows. To see the references for quotes, please go to the RFC site linked at the end of this article, where you will also be able to sign on to the petition.

Petitioning Attorney General Lynch and President Obama

Exonerate our Mother, Ethel Rosenberg

Created by Robert and Michael Meeropol

Our parents, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, were executed on June 19, 1953, during the anti-communist hysteria of the Cold War Era. They had been convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage, in what was called "the crime of the century." We were 6 and 10 years old when they were killed.

Our mother was not a spy, and her execution was wrongful. Her conviction was based on perjured testimony and prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. The charges against our mother and the threat of the death penalty were meant to intimidate her and our father into cooperating. The U.S. government wanted Julius to falsely confess to passing "the secret of the atomic bomb" to the Soviet Union, and name others involved.

Their trial took place during a time of widespread panic about communism. The sentencing judge went so far as to blame our parents for the Korean War. In denying clemency, President Eisenhower accused them of causing future nuclear wars. These outrageous statements and our parents' execution helped fuel a dangerous climate of fear and intolerance in our country which permitted political opportunists like Senator Joseph McCarthy to poison our society. Today, we face a similar climate of hatred which targets immigrants, Muslims, LGBTQI individuals and others.

A formal acknowledgement of the wrong done to our mother and our family will help prevent similar injustices in the future. A healthy democracy requires that the government acknowledge and correct its transgressions. The government cannot return our mother to her loving family. But it can admit this miscarriage of justice.

Please, join us in calling on Attorney General Lynch and President Obama to formally exonerate Ethel Rosenberg before they leave office. More than 60 years after her unjust conviction and execution, now is the time to clear her good name.

Why Ethel's execution was wrongful

The grand jury testimony of a chief prosecution witness against our parents, our mother's brother, David Greenglass, was made public recently. This material - along with previously released testimony and other records - proves that our mother was prosecuted simply for refusing to turn on our father.

The evidence presented against our mother at her trial consisted of testimony by David, and his wife, Ruth. They stated that Ethel took part in two meetings between the Rosenbergs and Greenglasses in 1945 (including one at which David gave Julius a sketch of a cross-section of the bomb), and that our mother's participation included typing notes. Our mother's conviction hinged on these alleged actions of hers.

The record now refutes these claims. David's grand jury testimony made no mention of Ethel's presence at either meeting, much less her typing. Instead, responding to questions about spying, David told the grand jury: "My sister has never spoken to me about this subject," and, "I never spoke to my sister about this at all."

Despite this testimony, prosecutors developed a plan to use our mother against our father. An assistant attorney general told the F.B.I. that there was "insufficient evidence" to charge Ethel, but that she could be used "as a lever against her husband." Furthermore, a month before the trial, a prosecutor told a congressional committee: "The case is not too strong against Mrs. Rosenberg. But for the purpose of acting as a deterrent, I think it is very important that she be convicted too, and given a stiff sentence."

At our parents' trial, David contradicted his sworn grand jury testimony and suddenly implicated our mother in the alleged spy ring by describing Ethel's presence at the meetings. Decades later, David admitted on national television that this testimony was a lie. Therefore, Ethel's conviction - which hinged on this story - was wrongful.

Based on these revelations, on September 28th, 2015 (what would have been our mother's 100th birthday), 13 members of the New York City Council and the Manhattan Borough President issued proclamations declaring that our mother was wrongfully executed. This was a step towards acknowledging a terrible injustice. Now, it is time for the federal government to do the same.

To read the petition in full, link to documents provided to substantiate the case, and sign it, click here.

Photo: rfc.org

Courts block some voter suppression laws

Tue, 02 Aug 2016 16:10:00 +0000

Court rulings in recent weeks have given voters in five states reason to hope they will be allowed to cast their ballots in the upcoming presidential election. Right wing efforts to suppress the voting rights of minority groups have hit roadblocks in North Carolina, Wisconsin, Texas, North Dakota and Kansas.

The fight is far from over, however. The governments of each of the five states have been captured by far right wingers who have now vowed to ask the Supreme Court for emergency action.

Three years ago, the Supreme Court paved the way for the recent deluge of voter suppression laws. It gutted the Voting Rights Act, taking away the power of the federal government to prevent states from passing laws aimed at disenfranchising groups of voters.

Almost immediately, 22 states passed new restrictions on voting rights.

North Carolina

The crudest and most devastating attempt at voter suppression was perpetrated by the legislature and governor of North Carolina.

Literally within hours of the Supreme Court decision, the right wing controlled legislature started crafting the most restrictive anti-voter regulations in the nation.

Among other measures, the state required strict voter ID to cast a ballot, cut early voting by one week, eliminated same-day voter registration and out of precinct voting and eliminated pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds.

Thousands of North Carolinians protested, staging weekly mass demonstrations and filing several court suits.

Their concerns proved to be true.

There was widespread voter suppression in North Carolina's presidential primary this past March. In order to vote, people had to be able to wait in line for three or more hours. In a throwback to the "literacy tests" of the Jim Crow era, foreign-born US citizens were asked to spell their names to poll workers. Elderly voters with vivid memories of segregation were turned away from the polls.

Then on July 29, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit handed down a major victory for democratic rights. It ruled that the restrictions passed by the North Carolina General Assembly "targeted African Americans with almost surgical precision" in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

The Court said that just because Republicans were in the majority did not give them the right to stop voters from exercising their rights.

The Court said " ... winning an election does not empower anyone in any party to engage in purposeful racial discrimination."

Wisconsin

The same day a court ruled against voter suppression in North Carolina, a federal judge did the same regarding Wisconsin.

In his decision, U.S. District Judge James D. Peterson struck down as unconstitutional limits on in-person absentee voting, residency requirements and a ban on using expired student identification.

Moreover, Peterson dealt head on with Republicans' phony justification for passing ID requirements that restrict voting rights. Like other right wingers, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, a Tea Party favorite, had said that the restrictive laws were needed to prevent voter fraud.

But Judge Peterson wrote that "The Wisconsin experience demonstrates that a preoccupation with mostly phantom election fraud leads to real incidents of disenfranchisement.

"To put it bluntly," Peterson wrote, "Wisconsin's strict version of voter ID law is a cure worse than the disease."

He implied that if the Supreme Court had not ruled that states could pass voter ID requirements, he would eliminate these restrictions altogether.

However, he did rule that the requirement forcing Wisconsin voters to show either a photo identification or go through a special petition process had unfairly burdened minorities and needed to be reformed or replaced before the November presidential election.

Nevertheless, Peterson left Wisconsin's current voting rules intact for the August 9 primary elections for federal, state and local offices, saying to change them less than two weeks in advance would be disruptive.

Texas

On July 20, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that Texas's voter ID law discriminated against minority voters and must be fixed by the November elections.

It refused to strike down the law completely.

Nine of the 15 Fifth Circuit appellate judges upheld a district court's finding that 600,000 people, lack the specific kind of identification required - a driver's license, military ID, passport or weapons permit, among them - and that it would be difficult for many to secure it.

African American, Hispanic and poor voters were most likely to be affected, the court found.

"It would be untenable to permit a law with a discriminatory effect to remain in operation" for the coming election, wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Catharina Haynes for the majority, made of up five judges nominated by Democratic presidents and four nominated by Republicans.

Those who possess the necessary ID must show it to vote in November, Haynes wrote. But she said the district court judge who first heard the case should fashion a remedy to rectify "the discriminatory effect on those voters who do not have . . . ID or are unable to reasonably obtain such identification."

North Dakota

Yesterday, August 1, a federal judge ruled that North Dakota's strict voter ID law, passed in 2013, is unfair to Native Americans.

The Court blocked the law from being used in the coming election.

U.S. District Judge Daniel L. Hovland, a George W. Bush appointee, said North Dakota for years had provided an alternative to voters unable to get the specific kinds of ID required and that eliminating it has disenfranchised eligible voters.

Before 2013, the state allowed many forms of identification for use at the polls and those without an ID could sign affidavits to their identity. But in 2013 the law was changed to allow only four forms of ID: a North Dakota driver's license; a North Dakota non-driver's ID card; a tribal government-issued ID card; or an alternative form of ID prescribed by the secretary of state.

To make matters worse, a provision added last year prohibited the secretary of state from allowing college IDs or military IDs to be used.

"Although the majority of voters in North Dakota either possess a qualifying voter ID or can easily obtain one, it is clear that a safety net is needed for those voters who simply cannot obtain a qualifying voter ID with reasonable effort," Judge Hovland wrote.

"Voter fraud in North Dakota has been virtually non-existent," he wrote.

Kansas

In mid May, a federal judge ruled that Kansas cannot require voters to prove their citizenship when registering to vote.

U.S. District Judge Julie A. Robinson decided that part of Kansas' voter ID law is in violation of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which says states may only require voters provide the "minimum amount of information necessary" to assess whether or not someone is eligible to vote.

Robinson ordered that Kansas re-register about 18,000 voters who registered at a department of motor vehicles office but did not provide the identification required by Kansas law.

"This ruling lifts the barrier that the state illegally imposed on Kansans who were trying to register to vote," said Dale Ho, the director of the Voting Rights Project at the ACLU. "It means thousands of people who could have been sidelined ... will be able to participate [in the November elections]."

Photo: The Moral Monday movement in North Carolina has built up the pressure resulting in the recent sweeping court victory that threw out North Carpolina's restrictive voting laws. | Chuck Burton/AP