People Before Profit blog

Republicans step up their attacks on immigrants

Mon, 02 Feb 2015 11:42:00 +0000

OAKLAND, Calif. - In an escalating dispute with President Obama, Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill in mid-January, which would cut any funding from the Department of Homeland Security for suspending the deportation of undocumented people. In December the President ordered the department, beginning this spring, to defer the deportation of undocumented immigrants who have children born in the U.S., who are thus U.S. citizens.

A previous Obama order suspended the deportation of young people without documents, brought to the U.S. as children. The Republican bill would rescind both orders.

A new, Republican-dominated Congress took office in January. Congress must fund the department by Feb. 27 or it could shut down. President Obama has threatened to veto this bill, and while there are enough Republican votes in the Senate to pass it, there are not enough to override a veto.

The labor movement has supported deferral programs, and has opposed the mass deportations that now total over two million people during the Obama administration - around 400,000 per year. In speaking about his own ancestors, who arrived last century after crossing the Atlantic from Europe, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said, "I think about what those boats would look like now. They'd be turned in the other direction, deporting those hopeful workers and separating our families. Because America doesn't welcome her children now - our broken patchwork of policies turns them away."

After the Republican majority was elected, Trumka warned its defunding proposal "would further exploit and force our community members to continue to live and work in fear." Guillermo Perez, President of the Pittsburgh Labor Council on Latin American Advancement, told Julia Kann, a writer for the magazine Labornotes, that labor's job was to ensure implementation of Obama's deferral order. This executive action "will help us in organizing workplaces where there are substantial numbers of undocumented people." Joe Hansen, president of United Food and Commercial Workers, agreed. "Executive action is not all we need or deserve," he said. "But it is a step in the right direction."

Obama's latest executive action, however, caused a lot of controversy among unions and immigrant rights activists, not because of disagreement over the deferral itself, but because of the conditions attached to it. One condition, for instance, will allow high tech employers to bring to the U.S. increased numbers of workers recruited under contract labor programs, and pay them wages substantially below those of U.S. residents. Over 900,000 workers already arrive in the U.S. in these programs every year, which have been criticized because the recruited workers have few labor rights.

Many organizations also criticized the administration's order because it increases immigration enforcement. U.S. law forbids people to work without legal immigration status, but about 12 million people currently live and work without it. Under Obama's order, about four to five million, at most, may get permission to work. But at the same time the Department of Homeland Security will increase enforcement against those millions of others who will not get it. They will be subject to firing at the demand of the government. Over the last decade, tens of thousands of workers in agriculture, meatpacking, construction, building services, manufacturing and other industries have lost their jobs as a result of workplace enforcement. Many, if not most, have been union members, and a groundswell of labor opinion has condemned these terminations.

Hundreds of workers, for instance, were fired in the middle of an organizing drive at a California supermarket chain, Mi Pueblo. Gerardo Dominguez, organizing director of Local 5 of the United Food and Commercial Workers, called the terminations "an economic disaster for the San Francisco Bay Area. These workers pay taxes that support local schools and services. Being terminated because of immigration status is a violation of their human and civil rights. Their families and our entire community will be harmed, and inequality and poverty will increase."

In addition, the President announced that even greater resources will be spent on the U.S./Mexico border, where hundreds of people die each year trying to cross in the desert. "More enforcement here will mean even more people will die trying to cross, and greater violations of civil and human rights in our border communities," according to Isabel Garcia, director of the Coalicion de Derechos Humanos, an immigrant rights organization in Tucson, Arizona, with a long history of cooperation with unions. "We need to demilitarize the border, not to increase its militarization. The U.S. already spends more money on immigration enforcement, including the notorious Operation Streamline kangaroo courts, than all other federal law enforcement programs combined. It is inexcusable to spend even more."

President Obama also announced he will expand the number of privately run prisons for immigrants, and the number of people held in them. One such center, the South Texas Family Residential Center, has already been built in Texas to hold over 2400 children and family members from Central America. The detention of Central American children has been strongly criticized by the AFL-CIO. A recent delegation to Honduras led by the federation's vice-president Tefere Gebre even urged the Honduran government not to accept deportees arriving from the U.S. if they haven't been allowed their legal right to apply for asylum.

According to many labor and immigrant rights groups, however, migrants from Central America, Mexico and elsewhere have been driven into migration by free trade agreements and other economic policies pursued by the U.S. government. Yet the Obama administration is currently asking Congress to give it a "fast track" process for approving the Trans Pacific Partnership, a free trade agreement involving 12 countries around the Pacific Rim.

The Dignity Campaign, a network of a number of local unions, labor councils and immigrant rights organizations, warned, "Two decades of experience with NAFTA tells us that these deals drive people into poverty, leading to more displacement and global migration, while U.S. jobs are eliminated. We need to end these trade arrangements as part of a sensible immigration policy. We must change U.S. immigration law and trade policy to deal with the basic causes of migration, and to guarantee the human, civil and labor rights of migrants and all working people.

The Obama executive order will not change U.S. law -- only the Congress can pass laws. It can only change the way existing law is enforced. The possibility exists, therefore, that an incoming administration elected in 2016 could reverse the order, deporting those who have come forward to claim a deferred status. That prospect has already frightened some potential applicants. "The challenge is getting those folks to apply, get them legal status, and make sure that they never lose it," Perez told Labornotes. "If we don't get enough people into the program, it's more likely that it could be taken away. I'd love to see union halls all over the country opening up and serving as places where people can come to get good information to apply. That would be beautiful."

Photo: Immigrants, workers, union members and community activists demonstrated in front of the Federal Building in Oakland, California, against the firing of undocumented workers because of their immigration status. The Federal Building demonstration was the third day of a three day hunger strike to protest the firings. Equaltimes.org

“Healthy Florida” plan may expand Medicaid in Sunshine State

Mon, 02 Feb 2015 11:21:00 +0000

TALLAHASSEE, Fl. - As Rick Scott was beginning his run for Florida's governorship in 2009, he was publicly criticizing President Obama's Affordable Care Act and spending $5 million out his own pocket to form the "Conservatives for Patients' Rights" and oppose the law.

According to Amy Sherman of politifact.com, despite the June, 2012 Supreme Court ruling in favor of upholding the ACA and despite the fact that 21 percent of Florida'a population was uninsured, Gov. Scott told Fox news his state would not be expanding Medicaid saying it "just doesn't make any sense" and was too costly.

Then as the Governor's race inched closer, Scott began to change his tone about providing nearly one million uninsured with Medicaid in Florida. In an interview with the Herald/Times in September 2014, Gov. Scott told reporters, "While they spend 100 percent, I'm not going to stand in the way of the federal government doing something." He added, however, "What I'm not willing to do is put Florida taxpayers on the hook ... I've been very consistent and let's all remember that Obamacare is an absolute bad bill for patients, for families, for employers, for employees."

Scott's support for expansion is very carefully limited, however. The governor supports only a three-year period in which all costs are paid by the federal government, falling short of making a commitment for the state of Florida to share a 10 percent portion of continued costs (despite the estimated 10-year cost to the state of Florida being $3 billion, less than one percent of state General Revenue that would be needed to fund Medicaid expansion over the next decade). However, the cost to the state will likely be offset as a result of savings from reductions in uncompensated care.

According to Lloyd Dunkelberger of the Herald-Tribune, many believe that new developments in administering Medicaid expansion are beginning to convince Florida legislators to seriously debate the issue in the upcoming 2015 legislative session and find a middle ground that the GOP majority in Tallahassee can accept.

A coalition that includes the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Republicans and business lobbies like the Associated Industries of Florida are advancing an initiative called "A Healthy Florida Works," Dunkelberger continued.

Proponents of this plan sell it as a, "free market" solution that promotes "personal accountability" among beneficiaries by requiring them to pay monthly premiums and to search for employment or enroll in job training programs," said Daniel Chang and Kathleen McGrory of the Miami Herald.

State Rep. Richard Corcoran, a Land O'Lakes Republican who may soon be leading the House Budget Committee said "It sounds like they are headed in the right direction" and that the coalition's plan is worth considering, added Chang and McGrory. "A Health Florida Works" also is supported by Senate Rules Chairman David Simmons, R- Altamonte Springs, who also happens to be a close ally of Senate President Andy Gardner, R- Orlando.

Florida follows other GOP-led states like Indiana, whose Republican governor has sought federal government approval for a plan similar to "Healthy Florida," said Dunkelberger of the Herald-Tribune. He continued adding that Arizona and Iowa have already been successful in winning federal government approval of plans that allow participants to use the federal funding to acquire private insurance.

Photo: Florida's approach to Medicaid has looked increasingly rusty. FlaglerLive

Boston GCC union local halts deportation of Salvadoran refugee

Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:11:00 +0000

BOSTON (PAI) - Demonstrating the importance of community outreach, Graphic Communications Conference/IBT Local 3-N in Boston has worked successfully with the local Jobs With Justice branch, elected officials and faith-based organizations to halt the threatened deportation of a Salvadoran GCC/IBT press operator.

"This is why it is important as union leaders to have coalitions in your area," Local 3-N President Stephen Sullivan said after their efforts succeeded late last year. "It's easy to be isolated" on various issues "but everything ties together - minimum wage issues, immigration issues, everything."

Sullivan said the coordinated effort on behalf of the 49 year-old unionist, who does not want his name published, "represented a victory on an important cause" and blocked a miscarriage of justice.

"He had played by the rules, paid taxes, and was a model citizen but was being deported on a technicality" until the union and its allies stepped in to defend him, Sullivan said.

The immigrant worker fled El Salvador in 1990 to avoid the right-wing violence then sweeping his country. He was granted employment authorization in the U.S. after applying for political asylum.

His petition was denied years later, but his former attorney failed to update paperwork intended to provide him temporary residency while appealing the ruling. Last year, immigration officials contacted the press operator and told to buy a plane ticket to El Salvador and leave by Aug.1, on less than a month's notice.

Sullivan was "shocked" when told that "one of our own" - an admirable employee who worked his way upwards through the ranks for more than 20 years to become a journeyman press operator - was in jeopardy.

"He played by the rules, worked hard, had never been in trouble and felt he was contributing to America. He is a low-keyed, quiet, respectful person you would want as your neighbor," Sullivan added. The local quickly rallied support for him.

"Facing insurmountable odds, I knew we needed to mobilize, educate and most importantly we needed action on his behalf," the union leader said. F With assistance from Jobs With Justice, the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., Massachusetts Democratic State Rep. Mary O'Keefe and religious and community groups, Local 3-N helped the worker fight the deportation order.

Community members wrote letters on the worker's behalf, as did his employer. The Teamsters blasted out an online petition and collected several hundred signatures supporting his campaign to remain. The effort paid off. "We stopped deportation," Sullivan said.

At a hearing later last year, the federal government granted the press operator "temporary protective status." That lets him stay in the U.S. and at his newspaper job for another year.

It's also hopefully a step towards his citizenship, Sullivan said. And Local 3-N isn't through. "We are going to advocate on his behalf until he's here permanently," Sullivan says.

The worker's new attorney, Madeleine Moreno of Worcester, Mass., said the worker is grateful for Local 3-N's intervention. Without it, she added, immigration authorities "would have executed the order and he would have been removed from the United States."

Sullivan, whose parents were Irish immigrants to the U.S., said immigration, "is a hot-button issue" for many Americans, but unionists "must stand up for what's right."

The Salvadoran press operator, once feeling abandoned and without hope, now knows union members take care of their own, Sullivan said. "He may have no blood relations in the United States, but he has thousands of brothers and sisters," Sullivan adds.

Photo: Teamster.org

Mayors back Obama’s executive action on immigration

Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:43:00 +0000

WASHINGTON - Mayors Bill de Blasio of New York City and Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles announced today plans by more than 30 mayors to file an amicus brief in the Texas v. United States lawsuit to support President Obama's recent executive action on immigration reform. The brief opposes a lawsuit pending in Brownsville, Texas, brought by states seeking to block President Obama's immigration reform efforts.

The two mayors led the effort to organize more than 30 cities, the National League of Cities, and the U.S. Conference of Mayors in filing a brief arguing that the public interest across the country is served clearly and overwhelmingly by implementing immigration reform by executive action. The brief also argues that blocking executive action with preliminary injunction will stall desperately needed changes to the federal government's immigration policies. The cities represented by these mayors together account for approximately 28.2 million people, including 7.5 million immigrants.

"Our mission is urgent. Delaying implementation of the president's executive action will further hurt our families, negatively impact our economies, and create unnecessary insecurity in our communities," said Mayor Bill de Blasio. "Cities are where immigrants live, and cities are where the president's executive action will be successfully executed. We are organized, and we will fight for the changes this nation needs and deserves, and fight those who oppose immigration reform, be it in the courtroom, in Congress, or in our communities. Our voices will be heard."

"Our cities cannot afford delays to immigration reforms that will strengthen our economy and help families," said Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who established a Mayor's Office of Immigrant Affairs. "This isn't a blue or red issue, but a human and economic one."

This joint effort to offer the court the crucial perspective of American cities is an outcome of the December immigration summit hosted by de Blasio at Gracie Mansion and the organizing efforts of the Cities United for Immigration Action coalition. By submitting this "friend of the court" brief, America's mayors are making a strong statement in support of the president's plan to grant administrative relief to over four million undocumented children and adults. The amicus brief will demonstrate to the Court that executive action will benefit cities by providing work authorization to millions, increasing local tax revenue, and stimulating local economies, facilitating the civic engagement of immigrants, keeping families together, and improving public safety by strengthening our neighborhoods and communities.

In December, 25 states led by Republican governors brought a lawsuit captioned Texas vs. United States in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Texas, seeking to halt the implementation of the president's executive action. In response, a group of 12 states in January joined by the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief challenging the lawsuit by arguing that, contrary to the plaintiffs' claims, the president's immigration reform will in fact "further the public interest" of states and their residents, both immigrants and citizens. A group of 27 law enforcement leaders and other groups have also filed amicus briefs in support of the president's executive action on immigration reform.

This is the first submission to the court from the city perspective.

"San Francisco is proud to file an Amicus Brief joining cities large and small from across the country and the U.S. Conference of Mayors to support our president's bold action on immigration and create the change to help our residents succeed," said San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee. "As the son of immigrant parents, this issue is very personal to me. Mayors must lead on this reform to provide all of our residents with hope, opportunities, and the services they deserve. We know our diversity drives our cities' economies and makes us all stronger."

"The president's executive action on immigration is a step forward for America," said Salt Lake City Mayor Ralph Becker. "We need to support his efforts to address our broken immigration system."

"Filing an Amicus Brief is our way of saying: Pittsburgh stands on the right side of history. The president's action on immigration was an important first step towards progress-for the growth and prosperity of our nation. We must not go backwards," said Pittsburgh Mayor William Peduto.

"The City of Dayton is proud to be a leader in welcoming people from diverse backgrounds to its community," said Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley. "This order will strengthen our commitment to inclusion by allowing all residents to fully participate and help grow the economic vitality of the region. It is essential that all citizens feel safe and engaged in the place they call home."

"This proposal is fair, economically beneficial for everyone, and the right thing to do," said Madison Mayor Paul Soglin.

"Right now, our immigration system invites the best and brightest from all over the world to come and study at our top universities, including Washington University and St. Louis University, and then once they've gotten the training they need to build a new invention or create a new business, our system too often tells them to go back home so that other countries can reap the benefits, the new jobs, the new businesses, the new industries," said St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay. "It's evidence of the broken system we have today and why we must fight to fix it."

The following mayors have signed on to the amicus brief:

Mayor Bill de Blasio, New York, New York

Mayor Eric Garcetti, Los Angeles, California

Mayor Kasim Reed, Atlanta, Georgia

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Baltimore, Maryland

Mayor Byron Browm, Buffalo, New York

Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Chicago, Illinois

Mayor Steve Benjamin, Columbia, South Carolina

Mayor Nan Whaley, Dayton, Ohio

Mayor Michael Hancock, Denver, Colorado

Mayor Muriel Bowser, Washington, D.C.

Mayor Pedro Segarra, Hartford, Connecticut

Mayor Annise Parker, Houston, Texas

Mayor Steven Fulop, Jersey City, New Jersey

Mayor Paul Soglin, Madison, Wisconsin

Mayor Ras Baraka, Newark, New Jersey

Mayor Michael Nutter, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Mayor Bill Peduto, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Mayor Charles Hales, Portland, Oregon

Mayor John Dickert, Racine, Wisconsin

Mayor Tom Butt, Richmond, California

Mayor Lovely Warren, Rochester, New York

Mayor Ralph Becker, Salt Lake City, Utah

Mayor Ed Lee, San Francisco, California

Mayor Gary McCarthy, Schenectady, New York

Mayor Ed Murray, Seattle, Washington

Mayor Francis Slay, St. Louis, Missouri

Mayor Marilyn Strickland, Tacoma, Washington

Mayor Mike Spano, Yonkers, New York

The following mayors have expressed their support and will sign on to the brief, pending final local approvals:

Mayor Karen Majewski, Hamtramck, Michigan

Mayor Virg Bernero, Lansing, Michigan

Mayor Tom Barrett, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Mayor Betsy Hodges, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Mayor Greg Stanton, Phoenix, Arizona

Photo: Immigrant and labor rights activists march in New York City. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kcjc/ / CC BY 2.0

Labor, environmental leaders challenge Fast Track trade deals

Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:16:00 +0000

WASHINGTON -- The labor movement and its environmental allies are voicing major concerns about trade promotion authority - also known as Fast Track legislation - which President Obama is seeking from Congress. The Fast Track bills (S. 1900 and H.R. 3830) would establish a process that disallows amendments to - and curtails debate on - trade deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. During a teleconference hosted today by the BlueGreen Alliance, leaders got together to ask the necessary tough questions regarding the president's support of Fast Track.

Labor leaders continue to see good jobs disappearing as a result of the big trade deals and the environmentalists have jumped into the fight for fear that politicians might be trading away the nation's clean air and water.

Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, spoke during the call, and noted that Fast Track mirrors the destructive impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). "Close to 700,000 jobs were lost to NAFTA," he said, referring to the fact that increased U.S. trade with Mexico resulted in many manufacturing jobs moving down there. "But this is not a matter of numbers, it's a matter of lives, jobs, and lost opportunities." With trade promotion authority, "history will repeat itself and we will continue to lose jobs."

If Fast Track is implemented, legislators can agree to harmful provisions that will send jobs overseas, interfere with workers' ability to collectively bargain, and reduce safety regulations. And who stands to gain the most from this?

"The biggest engines behind these kinds of trade deals are the multinational corporations," Gerard clarified. "They want to be able to move [potential U.S.] jobs into any country based on a capitalist's whim. They don't play by the rules, and our trade laws are antiquated. More of the same will only yield more outsourced and offshored jobs and shattered dreams."

Of NAFTA, the AFL-CIO explained, "Fast Track legislation allowed the North American Free Trade Agreement to be rammed through Congress with weak labor and environmental side deals. Since NAFTA went into effect in 1994, North American workers have experienced downward pressure on wages and a tougher organizing environment. Twenty years later, we find an unbalanced system in which profits soar even as workers take home a diminishing share of the national income."

Larry Cohen, President of the Communication Workers of America, was also on the call, and said, "We find a lack of real oversight and enforcement in these types of trade deals. We need to know what's in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and what that means for jobs and the climate. We need transparency, and that means that if this thing is as good as they say, we say 'show us.' We want a thoroughly reviewed process. But so far this is looking like NAFTA on steroids. It will lead to more lost jobs, closed factories, and depleted industries. The president himself recognizes this, so what is he afraid of? His own party opposes him on Fast Track. There's not one good argument for doing it."

Gerard noted, for example, that imports of tires into the U.S. from South Korea and China continue to increase, and shipping jobs like U.S. tiremaking overseas will worsen if the Fast Track bills are passed.

Referring now to the trouble his own union could face, he added, "And in China, they have over 400 million tons of overcapacity in steel. With fast track, they'll keep eating into our market. We'll lose market share, and the ability to defend our union members, instead of making net job gains and a level playing field."

Debbie Sease, the Sierra Club's Federal Campaign Director, spoke of the environmental impact this could have, remarking, "These trade deals will be trading away our clean air and water, bringing unsafe food to our dinner tables, and affecting our very communities."

Environmentalists entering the fray over Fast Track is a more recent development, compared with labor, which has long opposed the legislation. But now they're joining the fight in earnest.

"There's a lot at stake," Sease continued. "And that's why more than 40 environmental groups have sent a joint letter to Congress urging them not to grant the president trade promotion authority. Rushing trade agreements through Congress without accountability will be a recipe for disaster."

And the threat goes beyond the environment. Under "free trade" pacts, the low wages and lack of worker rights in Latin America will encourage mass migration to the U.S. from those nations, as happened before, to Latin American farmers, when the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) took effect. In that instance, farmworkers there were unable to compete with American factory farms and their cheap goods, and were thrown off their land and forced to migrate to the U.S.

Under CAFTA, said Cohen, workers in Honduras, for instance, endured "constant violations of organizing rights. This included everything from the murder of union leaders to the collapse of bargaining rights where they once existed. But our AFL-CIO complaint [about these conditions] sat at the Labor Department for more than two years, just as the complaint about widespread abuse in Guatemala was held for six years before the U.S. Trade Representative finally raised it with the government there."

Loretta Johnson, Secretary-Treasurer of the American Federation of Teachers, added, "Fast Track will undermine our democracy. That's why a public sector union like us are advocating for openness, with greater Congressional input. Transparency is required by such 21^st century agreements, but Fast Track is trying to turn back the clock. To do this behind a veil of secrecy sets a bad precedent. And the truth is, this will mean open season on U.S. jobs."

Photo: Teamsters264.org

Citizens United enabling Koch brothers to take over America?

Tue, 27 Jan 2015 13:51:00 +0000

Five years ago the Supreme Court changed campaign financing rules so drastically that today two billionaire brothers are able to decide the results of elections throughout the country.

People buying elections may be nothing new in American history but the influence peddling and subversion of democracy connected to the story of the oil billionaire Koch brothers is beyond anything that has happened in the country in the past. The New York Times reported today that Charles and David Koch have vowed to use their web of tax-exempt organizations to spend nearly one billion dollars to get their candidates of choice elected in 2016.

Spending on that level, observers note, rivals what is typically spent in a national election by either of the two major political parties.

"It's no wonder the candidates show up when the Koch brothers call," David Axelrod, former adviser to President Obama, told the Times. "That's exponentially more money than any party organization will spend, in many ways, they have superseded the party."

The brothers held secret meetings in Palm Springs recently and four Republican presidential candidates were in attendance - Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, Rep. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

The problem with the Citizens United decision is not just that it allows unlimited contributions but that it allows them to remain secret. That means the Koch brothers can keep much of the anti-democracy web of which they are a part completely hidden from the public. The Democratic and Republican parties must release the names of their donors but the Koch brothers and the groups to which they are connected are under no such obligation.

Beyond the power of the Koch brothers, however, Citizens United has paved the way for money to dominate the entire electoral system.

A recent report By Demos in 2013 found that the richest 1 percent of Americans are "extremely active politically and that they are much more conservative than the American public as a whole with respect to important policies concerning taxation, economic regulation, and especially social welfare programs."

The same report showed that in the 2014 midterm elections, in the highly competitive races, candidates got 86 percent of individual contributions from donors giving more than $200.

Polls now show that Americans believe corporate money is weakening democracy. In a recent study CNBC poll done by Burson-Marsteller, 73 percent of Americans believe that government most often takes the side of corporations rather than average citizens.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and others are circulating a petition to tell Congress to end Citizens United now. Here is the link.

Photo: Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has sought the backing of the Koch brothers for years. He is seen here with David Koch. (A P/Jacquelyn Martin/Phelan M. Ebenhack/Photo montage by Salon)

"Wicked": Boehner invitation for Netanyahu slammed from all sides

Tue, 27 Jan 2015 12:23:00 +0000

"Wicked," "a cynical political move." That's what even conservative commenters are calling Republicans' invitation to far-right Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on March 3, just two weeks before Israel's hotly contested March 17 elections.

Republican House leader John Boehner invited Netanyahu, supposedly to discuss the "Iranian threat," without any consultation with the White House or State Department. This violation of normal protocol is seen as a multi-pronged ploy: to undermine President Obama, try to whip up support for new sanctions on Iran that Obama opposes, and boost Netanyahu's re-election chances. Netanyahu will also be meeting with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the lobby group that plays a big role in pushing support for right-wing Israeli policies in Congress.

Netanyahu also addressed the U.S. Congress in 2011, also at the Republicans' invitation. In 2012, he openly backed Republican Mitt Romney's effort to unseat Obama. Writing at vox.com last week, commentator Max Fisher accused Netanyahu of "playing a game with US domestic politics to try to undermine and pressure Obama - and thus steer US foreign policy," and charged that "Boehner wants to help him out."

"The fact that Netanyahu is once again meddling in American politics, and that a US political party is siding with a foreign country over their own president, is extremely unusual, and a major break with the way that foreign relations usually work," Fisher wrote.

President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry said they would not meet with Netanyahu during his Washington visit.

Even Israeli hawks are worrying that the situation could endanger their ties with the U.S.. Israel's own former ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, who was appointed by Netanyahu, said the Republican/Netanyahu maneuvers "created the impression of a cynical political move." He called on Netanyahu to cancel the congressional appearance "so as not to cause a rift with the American government."

And at Obama-unfriendly FOX News, commentators Chris Wallace and Shepherd Smith openly criticized Boehner and Netanyahu. Wallace called the "whole thing" "wicked," adding, "I have to say, I'm shocked." Smith said it seemed like these people "think we don't pay attention and that we're just a bunch of complete morons, the United States citizens, as if we wouldn't pick up on what's happening here."

Democrats who usually support Israeli policies have also reacted negatively. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, both California Democrats, called the Boehner/Netanyahu move "inappropriate."

President Obama, in his Jan. 20 State of the Union speech, emphasized that he was pursuing a diplomatic agreement with Iran on nuclear weapons. He warned that he would veto new sanctions that are being pushed by Republicans and some Democrats, saying it would "undo" the "chance to negotiate a comprehensive agreement."

Presumed presidential contender Hillary Clinton, known for more hawkish views on Middle East policy, also criticized the push for additional sanctions on Iran. "Why do we want to be the catalyst for the collapse of negotiations until we really know whether there's something that we can get out of them that will make the world safer, avoid an arms race in the Middle East. Can you imagine?" Clinton told a meeting on global issues in Winnipeg, Canada, last week.

In Israel, Netanyahu's opponents in the upcoming elections across the political spectrum criticized his move for further inflaming relations with the Obama administration. What effect it will have on his re-election prospects remains to be seen. Israeli voters appear sharply divided, and voter turnout could be a key factor.

In an unprecedented development, Israel's Arab parties and its Jewish-Arab Hadash (Democratic Front for Peace and Equality), led by the Israeli Communist Party, announced on Jan. 22 that they have formed a joint slate for the March elections. The slate, known as the Joint List, is headed by Hadash leader Ayman Odeh, an attorney who has represented Hadash on the Haifa City Council, and also includes leaders of Arab parties Balad, Ra' am and Ta'al as well as well known Communist Knesset member Dov Khenin and several other Hadash members. The list is expected to boost critical voter turnout among Israeli Arabs. Polls suggest it is likely to win at least 11 seats in the 120-member Knesset, which could make it a key player in potential formation of a center-left coalition to replace the current far-right Netanyahu coalition.

Photo: On the morning after President Obama's 2015 State of the Union speech, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, tells reporters that he has asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on "terrorism" but that he did not consult the White House on the invitation, Jan. 21 on Capitol Hill in Washington. From left: Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Kansas, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Calif., House Majority Whip Steve Scalise of La. and Boehner. (AP/J. Scott Applewhite)

Chicago’s Garcia takes on banker–backed mayor

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:49:00 +0000

Calling for the revitalization of Chicago's neighborhoods, mayoral candidate Jesus "Chuy" Garcia pledged to halt the "hijacking" of the city by hedge fund operators and bankers at a campaign rally Saturday.

Vacant buildings in the city's neighborhoods are signs of disinvestment and neglect, Garcia stated. "The bankers brought us the Great Recession," he added. "The Recession put people out of work and that brought crime."

Garcia pointed proudly to the diversity of the crowd, which was predominantly young adults in their 20s and 30s, many with children and babies in tow. The Grand Palace Ballroom on the city's southside reverberated with the beat of an impressive display of the city's musical talents from R&B to son jarocha.

Many had come to see Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis, a fierce opponent of incumbent Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel closed 50 Chicago schools in the wake of a bitterly fought teachers strike two years ago. Lewis, who had been planning a run for Mayor herself before being sidelined by emergency surgery for a brain tumor last fall, made it clear in one of her first public appearances that Chuy was the candidate to carry on the fight. "I hope I've taught you all here something," said the former high school science teacher, "And I don't mean just chemistry!" Lewis seconded Garcia's call to stop the flow of Tax Increment Financing funds to corporate people connected to City Hall, which totaled $1.7 billion under Emanuel.

Chicago's "non-partisan" primary will take place February 24. Emanuel hopes to achieve a 50 percent plus vote in order to avoid a run off. He has amassed a $12 million campaign chest, in large part from the same financial giants referred to by Garcia. Other candidates include southwestside Alderman Robert Fioretti and Willie Wilson, an African American supporter of newly-elected Republican Governor Bruce Rauner.

Garcia surprised many political observers by gathering over 60,000 signatures on his nominating petitions in just three weeks in November after Lewis dropped her candidacy.

Photo: M. Spencer Green/AP

Google Hangout: New era in U.S.-Cuba relations

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 14:09:00 +0000

Americans and Cubans woke up on Dec. 17, 2014, to the jaw-dropping news that the United States is making a monumental shift in its relations with Cuba. With diplomatic relations being restored, will the embargo go next? What can people do to strengthen ties between our two countries? How will it affect Cuban socialism?

This event will be broadcast live tomorrow on Google Hangout on Air: Tuesday, Jan. 27 at 8 p.m. Eastern, 7 p.m. Central, 5 p.m. Pacific

Join the conversation by clicking on the link: http://tinyurl.com/kkrqvuc

American Indians oppose glorification of Andrew Jackson

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:58:00 +0000

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - On Jan. 17, Native Americans held a second demonstration here oppposing the campaign of local historians and a newly founded organization to raise the infamous Indian killer, Andrew Jackson to the status of a "great president." The demonstration was held at the Hermitage, the historic home of Jackson, which is considered a tourist attraction by mainstream society.

The seventh president of the United States, Jackson is reviled by American Indians across the country. The demonstrations have been prompted by efforts of the newly-formed Andrew Jackson Foundation (AJF) and local historians lauding him as the " most important American president," the " founder of American democracy" the "People's President," and "the most famous citizen Nashville ever produced." Their actions are part of a commemoration of the 200th anniversary of Jackson's victory at the battle of New Orleans over the British.

Jackson carried out the most murderous removal campaign against American Indians - Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws, and Seminoles - in U.S. history. He was directly responsible for the hideous, agonizing deaths of tens of thousands of Native Americans, beginning with the Creek War of 1813-14.

Jackson was accountable for the deaths of thousands of Creek people in that conflict. He envisioned an America without Indians. Jackson led armies that conducted war, a campaign of extermination, against non-combatants - women and children.

According to present-day Creek sources, hundreds of Creek women and children were also sold into slavery. They were starved, raped and murdered. Creek children, particularly little boys, were sold for $20 each as "pets." Orphaned children were taken off the battlefields from the bodies of their mothers as "trophies." Three such children were taken by Jackson himself.

The matter of the children brings this column to an issue of particular outrage committed by the AJF. As part of the exhibit at the Hermitage Jackson is also praised as " the first president to raise a Native American child." This is scandalous and shocking to American Indians, especially to present-day Creeks. The child referred to is Lincoya, a Creek child taken from a battlefield, from the body of his dead mother after Jackson's army had killed all of his adult relatives. Creek citizens are outraged beyond words that this is considered another reason to praise Jackson. Moreover, he did not raise Lincoya, the poor, captive child died at 16 after repeatedly trying to run away to rejoin his people.

The Creek War resulted in one of the greatest land grabs in American history. The fraudulent Treaty of Fort Jackson imposed on the Creek Nation took huge swaths of land in Alabama and Georgia totaling over 23 million acres. This became the basis of the so-called "Cotton Kingdom" of the South, a slave system that ultimately further dispossessed Native Americans, economically encouraged the enslavement of African Americans and augmented the impoverishment of poor whites in the region.

Moreover, the Treaty of Fort Jackson was illegal under the Treaty of Ghent that ended the War of 1812. Article Nine of that Treaty, signed by the U.S. and England, stated that Native Americans who had fought against the United States would not lose any territory. The Treaty was a flagrant violation of Article Nine, meaning that the Creek Nation is still the legal owner of the 23 million acres in Alabama and Georgia.

After the Creek War, Jackson signed the Indian removal Bill of May 30, 1830 and military enforced fraudulent treaties that further brought death to thousands of Native American men, women, children and elderly. Of the Cherokee "Trail of Tears" it is said that no one under 6 or over 60 survived the hideous march of genocide.

A relatively little known fact is that Cherokees held captive in "Trail of Tears" concentration camps were initially deprived of the use of soap. When Cherokee leaders were final able to prevail upon the Army for the issuance of soap, Jackson upon hearing of this flew into a rage at the Hermitage and demanded that the order allowing for the use of soap be rescinded, so bent was he on Indian extermination. This is the so-called " People's President." What people? Surely not Native American people !

Yet the Andrew Jackson Foundation wants to elevate this monster, this ethnic cleanser to the status of a great president. Jackson was a racist devil incarnate - an early day American Hitler whose deadly legacy for American Indians remains extant to this very day.

We, American Indians, call upon all decent-minded citizens nationwide to join us in opposition to these efforts to elevate this purveyor of genocide to the status of greatness.

Photo: Andrew Jackson. | Wikipedia (CC)

Working Families Party says Cuomo must deliver more

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:42:00 +0000

NEW YORK - In response to what New York Gov. Cuomo called his 'opportunity agenda' outlined in his state of the state address, the New York Working Families Party called on the governor and the state legislature to enact an agenda that puts "working families first."

While applauding Cuomo's proposals to raise the minimum wage, relieve student debt, and reform the criminal justice system, WFP state director Bill Lipton said "the governor's proposals simply don't deliver the kind of change we need."

Saying this is his opportunity to be "a leader in the fight against inequality" in a Times Union op-ed Lipton called on Cuomo to follow San Francisco and Seattle leads by raising the minimum to $15 an hour and not just his proposed $10.50 which would still leave many New Yorkers below the poverty line.

Speaking on the education system at his inaugural earlier this month Cuomo said, "We have one for the rich and one for the poor." While making proposals to alleviate college student debt, he didn't address the significant funding inequality in the state's public education system that a state supreme court ruling in 2007 mandated it solve. Rather, he focused on teacher evaluations and expanding charter schools.

He also linked the DREAM Act which would provide tuition assistance to undocumented immigrants to a GOP-supported education tax credit, forcing the state legislature to adopt both or nothing. Rejecting education policies that "cynically pit New Yorkers against each other" the WFP called for the expansion of Universal Pre-K to the entire state, full and equal funding of public education and a return to free higher education at public universities.

Admitting the proposals as "ambitious" Lipton said "this is about the choices we make as a society . . . education is a good investment, taxpayer subsidies for 100 million-dollar condos, not so much." Instead, Lipton said, "We can meet that commitment by returning the millionaire tax to 2009 levels, reversing estate and bank tax cuts that benefit the super rich, and curtailing wasteful subsidies and giveaways to real estate developers and businesses that fail to create good jobs."

The WFP supported Cuomo's proposal to end the treatment of 16 and 17 year-olds in the criminal justice system as adults, but said that the recent Grand Jury decision in the Eric Garner death had "shaken faith in the guarantee of equal justice," and that "Cuomo should enact legislation to put in place a special prosecutor for all complaints of excessive police force against a civilian." The party said that as a first step, the attorney general should be given temporary authority to investigate the deaths of "unarmed civilians killed by law enforcement."

Lipton called Cuomo's recent ban on fracking historic but urged him to reverse his decision rejecting a plan for renewable energy windmills off Long Island and to match or exceed the state of California's goal to transition to 50 percent renewable energy and to "create hundreds of thousands of jobs" by building a green economy.

While in the past the governor has been able to push significant legislation through the state legislature, like important gun control measures after the Newtown Creek massacre in Connecticut and a gay marriage law that was considered the tipping point on the issue nationally, with the state senate firmly under GOP control after last November's election strong resistance is expected.

The recent arrest of the powerful Sheldon Silver, speaker of the Democratic-dominated Assembly, could throw that body into turmoil for the near future as well.

The WFP endorsed Cuomo for Governor last spring after he committed to a series of progressive issues, including campaigning to win back the state senate from GOP control. Since then the party has been critical of Cuomo's lack of commitment to pursuing a progressive agenda.

Listing a series of other issues like election campaign finance reform, universal voter registration, paid sick days and family leave and strengthening rent-laws Lipton said "Cuomo needs to put working families first, so New York works for all of us, not just the wealthy and well-connected."

Photo: Working Families Party Facebook page

Rick Perry and Chris Christie interrupted in Iowa by Dreamers

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:35:00 +0000

DES MOINES, Iowa - Today, a group of undocumented youth interrupted prospective 2016 Presidential candidate and former Texas Governor, Rick Perry. Marco Malagon, Dreamer from Texas, shouted "Governor, do you stand with King, or do you stand with us and our families? Do you think I'm deportable?" while others stood up with signs that read "DEPORTABLE?" in reference to the comments of Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, about an undocumented student who attended the State of the Union address as a guest of First Lady Michelle Obama. Following Perry, Christie was also interrupted by Cesar Vargas, Dreamer from New York.

The group of 13 youth were escorted out. Marco and Cesar were arrested but with no explanation by police.

For years, Rep. Steve King has been one of the most vocal GOP voices against Dreamers and the undocumented community. He has been on the record using derogatory language against Dreamers and has tried several times to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a program that protects certain undocumented individuals who came to this country as children.

"We are here today sending a message to the GOP presidential candidates, like Perry, that if they are serious about 2016, they need to stay as far as possible from Steve King and his hateful actions towards us," said Malagon, who is also co-founder of the Texas Dream Team.

"Immigration continues to be a central issue for GOP hopefuls who have their eyes on the White House. Events like the Freedom Summit further illustrate how out of touch the Republican Party is with the growing Latino and immigrant population in the United States. Do they really want to deport me and my mother?" said Cesar Vargas.

Photo: Dave Weigel/Twitter

On right turns

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:22:00 +0000

Have you ever wondered how it came about that in most places a right turn on a red light is now the law of the land? Here's how it happened. But please, please, please, dear reader, take this as satire, every word of it! It's all meant in left-wing fun.

Fellow Americans! Big Brother in Washington has once again, and for the last time, insisted that in order to receive our next batch of federal energy handouts, we the sovereign people of the State of Connecticut and of our sister Commonwealth of Massachusetts must pass so-called energy-saving legislation permitting a right-hand turn on a red light. Do you realize what this means?

Think of it! One of the cornerstones of our Democracy ("rule by the people") from the earliest town meetings all the way up to our present day has been that the Federal Government does not interfere in matters properly belonging to the states. Already the last few years have shown the worst erosion of this sacred principle in such matters as so-called "civil rights" cases, education of our children, and the housing of our families, all of which have come under the federal eye. And now what? Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say that the right of a state to regulate its own local traffic has been taken away from us? Is this some new amendment the liberals in Congress have slipped by us unawares?

And for what? To save energy? It saves no energy to run that red light and narrowly avoid an unsighted person and their seeing eye dog, an animal (God bless them) specially trained to cross on red. Or to enter the crossflow of traffic and force it to slow down for you and then to start up again. In any case, the way to save energy is not the way the peacenik radicals in Congress tell us to. They would have our whole society cave in to the greedy Arabs. What we should be doing, instead of passing silly little "energy-saving" laws, is take over the oilfields. That'll save some energy!

But, fellow citizens, and Christians, beware. There is something yet more sinister about this affair than meets the eye. And it has nothing to do with energy at all. That is merely the guise in which the serpent appears. It has to do with the sacred principle of Authority. At stake in this issue is one more instance of the Big Lie. The Communists in Congress are trying to spread all throughout the country the treasonous notion that red is not red!!!

Remember Animal Farm? George Orwell said it all right there. Now everyone knows the Federal Government has been infiltrated by Communists since FDR met "Comrade" Stalin at Yalta. If they can get our young children to go on red, the color will lose all meaning. It will be the last step towards anarchy. It was reported during the so-called Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, after all, that they changed the traffic lights in Peiping to mean "advance" on red. Is that what we want here?

What can I tell my six-year-old child who cries out to me in fear, "Daddy, you're going through a red light!" Must I tell her it is her own government that wants us to flaunt reason, the color scheme, Authority and the Constitution? To endanger human lives? To bow down to Arabs? Must we resort to civil disobedience, the very tactic of our enemies, to protest this violation?

We citizens of Connecticut and Massachusetts, the last two remaining free states, have an awesome responsibility before us. Nothing less than the sacred duty to save our nation from being swept up by the menace of Big Government and its Big Lies. If you, dear reader, do nothing about this insidious threat to our American Way of Life, the law will pass and the State will reign supreme, ruling over all our lives as if it were God Almighty. Future generations will demand to know what part you played in this historic turning point of our civilization as we know it.

I urge you, before it is too late. Join me and say "No!"

"Better red than dead!"

Photo: Wikipedia (CC)

President Obama goes on offense in State of the Union

Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:16:00 +0000

Delivering his State of the Union message to the new Republican-controlled Congress Tuesday night, an upbeat and forceful President Obama signaled that rather than retreating in the wake of Republican victories in last November's election he intends to use the remainder of his second term to push hard for a progressive agenda on behalf of the nation's working people.

"Will we accept an economy where only a few of us do spectacularly well? Or will we commit ourselves to an economy that generates rising incomes and chances for everyone who makes the effort?" he asked the packed chamber of the House.

The president made an impassioned plea to GOP lawmakers who are against his longstanding proposal to raise the federal minimum wage: "And to everyone in this Congress who still refuses to raise the minimum wage, I say this: If you truly believe you could work full-time and support a family on less than $15,000 a year, go try it. If not, vote to give millions of the hardest-working people in America a raise."

In no uncertain terms the president made it clear that unions are critical to the process of restoring fairness. "To give working families a fair shot," he declared, "We will still need more employers to see beyond next quarter's earnings and recognize that investing in their workforce is in their company's long term interest. We still need laws that strengthen rather than weaken unions, and give American workers a voice."

"The president's focus on raising wages through collective bargaining, better paying jobs, a fairer tax code, fair overtime rules, and expanded access to education and earned leave sent the right message at the right time," AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka said in a statement. "We thank the president for his passion and advocacy. We are ready to see what he and Congress will do about it. That is the ultimate standard of accountability."

Women's groups too have been hailing the speech. What the president had to say about childcare is one of the things they liked.

"During World War II, when men like my grandfather went off to war, having women like my grandmother in the workforce was a national security priority," Obama said. "So this country provided universal childcare. In today's economy, when having both parents in the workforce is an economic necessity for many families, we need affordable, high-quality childcare more than ever. It's not a nice-to-have - it's a must-have. It's time we stopped treating childcare as a side issue, or a women's issue, and treat it like the national economic priority that it is for all of us."

"From child care to paid sick days to fair pay to overtime to the minimum wage, and much more, the president laid out an agenda that would, indeed, make a huge and meaningful difference for America's families," said Debra Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families.

The president called for massive programs to rebuild the nation's infrastructure and blasted Republicans for their shortsightedness in this area. "Twenty-first century businesses need 21st century infrastructure," he declared. "Modern ports, stronger bridges, faster trains, and the fastest Internet. Democrats and Republicans used to agree on this. So let's set our sights higher than a single oil pipeline. Let's pass a bipartisan infrastructure plan that could create thirty times as many jobs per year, and make this country stronger for decades to come."

Obama also went on the offensive against climate change deniers, saying, "I've heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they're not scientists; that we don't have enough information to act. Well, I'm not a scientist, either. But you know what? I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA, and at our major universities. The best scientists in the world are telling us that our activities are changing the climate, and if we do not act forcefully, we'll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, conflict, and hunger around the globe."

On foreign policy the president asked the Congress for a resolution authorizing the use of force against ISIS but emphasized the need for diplomacy and avoiding military conflicts whenever possible. He vowed to veto any attempt by Republican lawmakers to levy new sanctions against Iran while negotiations to reduce tensions with that country continue.

He castigated right wing opponents of his new policy of openness toward Cuba and called on Congress to lift the economic embargo against that nation. "In Cuba," he declared, "we are ending a policy that was long past its expiration date. When what you're doing doesn't work for 50 years, it's time to try something new."

By going on the offense last night President Obama appears to have made gains on a number of critical issues. NBC polling shows 73 percent of the public viewed the speech favorably.

Even more interesting, however, were surveys by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner that involved online dial testing with 61 white swing voters across the United States and two follow-up online focus groups - one with white non-college educated men and women and one with unmarried women.

The president's personal favorability improved from a neutral rating (44 percent warm, 44 percent cool) to a net 33 (66 percent warm, 33 percent cool), the largest post-State of the Union shift seen for a president in recent years.

In the focus groups afterward the voters noted that the president was stronger, more confident, and more relaxed than they have seen him recently and that they liked his positive views. In contrast to the deep partisan divide in the November elections there was little polarization between Democrats and Republicans throughout the speech, with the Republican dials at or above 50 percent for most of the president's address.

Photo: President Obama delivers his State of the Union address on Jan. 20, 2015, in Washington D.C. | AP

Union-led democracy initiative may tackle politicization of state courts

Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:44:00 +0000

WASHINGTON - The union-led Democracy Initiative, founded and led by the Communications Workers - an initiative that racked up a big win in the last Congress - will tackle politicization of state courts, a senior strategist says.

"The battle over money in politics is one thing, but now it's seeping down into the state courts," added Greg Moore, of the NAACP National Voter Fund, at a January 13 forum in D.C. on corporate and political party spending in state judicial elections. "The Democracy Initiative is a good place to have that conversation" about the money's impact, he added.

Moore discussed the idea at an American Constitution Society forum. ACS, a progressive legal group, tackles issues such as money in politics and voting rights. One main aim of the Democracy Initiative, led by CWA President Larry Cohen, is to curb the impact of money in politics and thus restore the rule of regular citizens, not corporations and the rich.

The Democracy Initiative's biggest win so far was to force then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to change U.S. Senate filibuster rules to end GOP talkathons against presidential nominees, by requiring only 51, not 60, votes to halt debate. That cleared the way for Senate approval of a fully legal, full-5-member National Labor Relations Board.

The catch, as panel participants pointed out, is that what the NLRB, state legislatures or Congress can enact, state and federal judges can easily overturn. And while attention focuses on federal court nominations and decisions, state courts issue 98 percent of all rulings.

"They touch people in every way, involving civil and human rights," said ACS President Caroline Fredericksen. That includes "who can marry whom, who can vote, whom police can detain and arrest, and who goes to jail and for how long."

Voters elect 90 percent of state judges, panelists said. That makes their campaigns open to partisan and monetary manipulation.

"Money influences cases, including" cases involving "worker rights and environmental law," said Alicia Bannon of the Brennan Center for Justice. Recent examples of state courts' impact on workers include:

The Louisiana Supreme Court - elected, like 38 other state high courts - overturned lower court rulings reinstating fired unionized New Orleans teachers to their jobs and awarding them millions of dollars in damages for being canned, despite their contract, after Hurricane Katrina smashed the city and its schools.
The Indiana Supreme Court, again reversing lower courts, upheld the state's new so-called "Right to Work" law. Operating Engineers Local 150 sued to overturn it, citing a state constitutional ban on forcing people to provide services for free. RTW laws let "free riders" get away with using union-negotiated services without having to pay dues or fees for them.
A $3 million battle pitted corporations and the GOP on one side versus unions on the other over a key swing seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. It was part of the war between right wing GOP Gov. Scott Walker and labor over Walker's destruction of collective bargaining rights for 400,000 Wisconsin state and local workers. Walker's pick won, narrowly.

Those examples and many others show why politicization of the state courts by moneyed interests is important, ACS panelists said. And corporate spending on state court races multiplied enormously since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United ruling opened the floodgates for a tsunami of corporate cash in U.S. politics.

In one race, a GOP campaign finance committee dumped $300,000 into a circuit court election in Coles County, Mo., said Bert Brandenburg, director of ACS' Justice at Stake project. There was a reason for that cash infusion, he told the puzzled crowd.

"Coles County includes Jefferson City," the state capital, he explained. Its circuit court handles cases involving Missouri laws and agencies. The judge the Republican State Legislative Committee opposed had struck down the GOP legislature's restrictive voter ID law.

"Courts are supposed to be impartial, not political...But elections are being turned into tools of political pressure," Brandenburg added. And the "U.S. Supreme Court cannot be relied on as an ally" in the anti-politicization fight, warned Moore.

Besides working through the Democracy Initiative, panelists advocated other ways to battle corporate influence over state courts:

Advocate merit selection of judges: Non-partisan panels would forward short bipartisan lists of qualified judicial candidates to governors. Brandenburg admitted "merit screening isn't waterproof, but it's the most effective method" to achieve qualified "diverse, and non-partisan" judges. "But that also typically requires changing a state constitution," he said.
Educate voters to pay attention to "down-ballot" races for legislatures - which some-times must approve judges before they face voters for retention or defeat - and judgeships. The catch with education, Fredericksen said, is that judicial races often lack information.

The panelists explained state judges are constrained from publicizing themselves, while outside political groups and the rich are free to circulate and air negative ads, especially charging judges with being soft on crime, to defeat judges who oppose the corporate agenda.

Battle cynicism, by pointing out how voters in many states can overcome negative judicial campaigns. "A recent poll shows 96 percent of voters believe too much money impacts politics," said Courtney Hight of the Sierra Club, another Democracy Initiative partner. "But 91 percent believe we can't do anything about it..."That's why we've come together - to make sure that money coming into the system is not just coming from 1,000 billionaires."

Photo: Wisconsin Solidarity, March 5, 2011. People's World Flicker.

Ferguson and St. Louis demonstrators reclaim the memory of Dr. King

Tue, 20 Jan 2015 16:01:00 +0000

St. LOUIS - Hundreds of demonstrators carrying signs that read "Black Lives Matter" and wearing "Justice for Mike Brown" t-shirts gathered at the Old Courthouse downtown Monday morning. Listening to speakers, holding hands, and chanting "this is what democracy looks like" demonstrators prepared to reclaim the legacy of Dr. King, who stood for direct action and peaceful civil disobedience.

This year's march followed months of tension in the aftermath of multiple police killings of young African-American men across the nation. In Ferguson, near here, it was Michael Brown who was shot to death by the now-retired police officer Darren Wilson.

At 11 a.m., demonstrators from Ferguson, who set out ahead of other demonstrators, turned off the main route and marched to the New Life Evangelistic Center while the official parade continued on its way to Harris-Stowe University. The New Life Evangelistic Center is a local homeless shelter slated for closure after the city board ruled it a nuisance.

Demonstrators held a four-and-a-half-minute moment of silence before passing out hot soup to the homeless and chanting, "Homeless lives matter!"

"I just hope we keep true who and what Martin Luther King stood for," explained Johnetta Elzie, 25, who has been active in the Ferguson protests since August 2014.

After the march that day some of the demonstrators marched on the Ferguson Police Department without incident or arrest.

Photo: Conditions on Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in St. Louis - vacant lots, boarded-up stores and crumbling businesses - don't reflect the hopes and dreams of people who participated in the demonstrations here. AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)

Fifty years later it’s not too late for Dr. King’s dream

Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:09:00 +0000

In 1954, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Brown v. Board of Education, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP-the value of all goods and services produced in the United States) per capita of the United States stood at $15,745. In September of that year, a young man, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., became pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. In December 1955, Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat, and the Montgomery Bus Boycott would be launched. Soon everyone would know who Dr. King was and what the Montgomery Improvement Association was.

In 1967, the GDP per capita had grown to $21,913. After leading fights to end Southern segregation, gain the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. King reflected that year on what had been accomplished, and what was left undone, in his book "Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?" He had left the South and spent time in the ghettos of Los Angeles and New York. As he strongly argued in his book, the success of the civil rights movement had been tremendous in changing the racial landscape of the South. But on some fronts, like school segregation, little had changed. And in the North, the economic plight of the African American ghettos appeared untouched.

Yet, pondering the rapid gain in America's wealth over that period, Dr. King wrote with an optimism that a nation that could produce such wealth could do better. He understood what many do not. The point of GDP as a measure is to gauge what a society can do. It tells how much in resources it has that it can bring to bear on solving problems.

In his speech to the Southern Christian Leadership Council, where he laid out the thesis of his book, Dr. King said:

"We must develop a program that will drive the nation to a guaranteed annual income....The problem indicates that our emphasis must be twofold. We must create full employment or we must create incomes....Now our country can do this. John Kenneth Galbraith said that a guaranteed annual income could be done for about $20 billion dollars a year. And I say to you today, that if our nation can spend $35 billion dollars a year to fight an unjust, evil war in Vietnam, and $20 billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God's children on their own two feet right here on Earth."

Dr. King preached the "politics of the possible" but today, unfortunately, we are dominated by a politics of the impossible. Rather than see what is possible, we get a set of bad choices. Because of globalization, because of technical advances, politicians tell us we must accept a new normal of unsteady jobs and low pay. Yet, our GDP has grown to $50,805 for every man, woman and child in the country. This makes us a nation more than twice as wealthy as when Dr. King lived. So, why are fewer things possible?

This week, the Center for American Progress (CAP) released a report of the Commission on Inclusive Prosperity. Key to understanding the report is its very powerful exposition of life in other industrialized countries; countries that face the same forces of globalization and same technological advances that fuel the world's economy today. Rather than seeing that a $7.25-an-hour job at Walmart is an inevitable result of these forces, the report shows that other countries pay such workers much higher wages. Yet, Walmart is profitable in those countries.

Our low wages and lack of labor rights are a policy choice. This is a point that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka made last week at a national summit focused on policies to raise wages.

The world of the possible is opening when voices of the "smart" policy set, like the International Monetary Fund and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, all warn that growing inequality is not good, and it is not inevitable. This is 50 years after Dr. King's observations, but not too late.

Published at AFL-CIO Now.

William Spriggs serves as chief economist to the AFL-CIO, and is a professor in, and former chair of, the Department of Economics at Howard University. Spriggs assumed these roles in August 2012 after leaving the executive branch of the U.S. government.

Photo: Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at the famous Selma to Montgomery march. | Steve Schapiro/Corbis

Maryland protesters demand action to end police violence

Fri, 16 Jan 2015 12:55:00 +0000

ANNAPOLIS, Md. - Baltimore protesters chanting "Black lives matter" gathered in the Maryland State capital Jan. 15 to demand that the legislature enact laws to end the plague of police killings in Maryland.

The big, multiracial crowd, mostly youth, gathered in "Lawyers' Mall" under a statue of the late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, a native of Baltimore.

They held a banner with a photo of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "Would Dr. King Be Celebrating?" the banner asked.

Tre Murphy, a leader of the Algebra Project, a high school youth group in Baltimore, told the crowd that if the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. were alive he would not appreciate churches and established civil rights organizations that have remained silent. "We are at a critical time in history, a time to create a better future," Murphy said, urging an outpouring of protests against the killing of innocent, unarmed Black men by racist police officers.

"Stand with us," Murphy said. "Support community-based groups that are speaking out and taking action. Get off the fence and join the revolution. Be on the right side of history."

The Rev. Heber Brown, pastor of the Pleasant Hope Baptist Church in Baltimore, that filled a bus to attend the rally said the movement is broad-based and will not go away., "Look to your left. Look to your right. We are all leaders," Rev. Brown said. "We are here today bringing together all the leaders to address a question that affects all of us: police violence."

The Rev. Stephen Tillett, pastor of Asbury Broadneck United Methodist Church in Annapolis told the crowd it is false that the movement to end police violence is "anti-police." He added, "We are not against police. We need the police. This is an 'excessive force' protest. What do we want? Equal protection under the law. Equal treatment under the law. Equal justice under the law."

Tillett listed the specific legislation the Maryland lawmakers should enact: Take advantage of an offer by the Obama Administration to help pay for "body cameras" to be worn by every police officer; legislation to require that an independent prosecutor deal with any case of death or bodily injury caused by a police officer.

Tillett also urged the legislature to enact legislation to require every municipality to create police civilian review boards to curb police use of lethal force.

Tillett said a law requiring the appointment of a "special prosecutor" is urgently needed to end the "conflict of interest" warning that "no one is going to believe the decisions rendered" by a Grand Jury named by any prosecutor who works hand-in-glove with the local police.

He cited the death of Eric Garner on Staten Island last year. "Even the coroner called it a homicide. Yet the Grand Jury did not indict the police officer."

While it is true that most victims of police lethal force are Black men, police violence is a threat to everyone, Tillett added. "Dr. King was correct when he said 'An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'"

Rev. Tillett told the People's World that African Americans have endured police violence for centuries, including under chattel slavery yet he said, the movement to end the violence is "a new civil rights movement, a human rights movement. This is a movement that seeks a change of heart, to recognize our common humanity."

Ameerjril Whitlock stood in the crowd holding a placard that listed the names of 26 men, all but one of them African American, killed by police in one year in Baltimore. She drew the names from a report "Stolen Lives" that lists the more than 400 people killed by police each year in the U.S. "I was one of the people who fought to establish the first civilian review board in Baltimore," she said. "That was 15 years ago. What has happened since?" She said the death of James Quarles killed by a police officer at Lexington Market sparked the movement for that first civilian review board. Years later came the police killing of Tyrone West. "It is mostly Black men but as the Hispanic population has grown, the numbers of Latino men killed is growing."

The Stolen Lives project documents "that there is a police killing every 28 hours somewhere across the nation."

The crowd then walked to a legislative meeting room in a nearby building where the Judiciary Committee was holding its first meeting of this session. The crowd packed the room with a standing room crowd that listened in silence as the lawmakers introduced themselves. Rep. Jill Carter, a delegate from Baltimore said, "I want to welcome the guests we have here from Baltimore." She vowed that her "first priority" as a legislator would be to address the legislation the crowd was demanding.

The brief meeting adjourned. Rev. Brown then told the crowd, to get accustomed to this room because this is where hearings will be held on legislation to end police brutality. "We will be coming back," Brown said.

Photo: Tim Wheeler/PW

Rebel with a cause – a young Ferguson commissioner

Fri, 16 Jan 2015 11:28:00 +0000

I met Rasheen Aldridge at an overcrowded Starbucks in the central west end of St. Louis, an area now infamous after a recent tense moment between Ferguson demonstrators and motorists weeks ago. As he walked up wearing a grey winter coat, and a 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot' t-shirt, one would never guess that this unassuming young black man is making waves in the sea of Missouri politics as the youngest member of the Ferguson Commission. He also serves as co-chair of Missouri Jobs with Justice.

The commission is an independent group created by Gov. Nixon to study and generate recommendations that can diffuse tensions resulting from the recent police killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson.

Earlier that day over the phone he let me know about the first time he heard the call to activism following the 2008 election of Obama as president of the U.S. This motivated him, he said, to join Show Me 15, the local fast food workers campaign, while working at Jimmy John's sandwich shop and attending community college. His commitment to winning a living wage and union recognition for all fast food workers led him to quickly become a household name among activists and young workers.

As we sat down outside the Starbucks, doing our best to keep warm, I couldn't help but throw out the most obvious question.

Winters: As the youngest member of the commission, do you feel that your voice and ideas will be taken into real consideration by your older colleagues?

Aldridge: I think having a young person who has been out in Ferguson, who has been active in this movement, and who has been working on building relationships with other coalitions is good for the commission. Deeper than that, when the whole selection came together and Nixon decided he wanted a young person; [laughing] I'm not sure how his team went about it - and don't get it twisted, I'm grateful about this opportunity - I'm just curious as to why it was me. But, it's always difficult being young and a minority of anything. Because you always end up asking yourself, "will my voice really be heard?"

What I would say is that I need to step up more than ever to really get my voice heard. The other folks on the commission do want to hear what I have to say and I just really need to be assertive and not let their time around the city and city politics prevent me from speaking out. I can't let that situation happen. If I do that would be a failure on my part and a failure to be a voice for the youth out there.

Winters: This last commission meeting it seemed that many residents expressed their frustrations through visible anger. Do you feel that their voices are being heard at these open meetings?

Aldridge: You have to understand that the anger is really based on two things. First that the commission was set up by Governor Nixon. There is a long list of reasons why people feel that he is not on the right side of history and I am one of them. I respect him as our Governor but his decisions have been unbelievable throughout this whole ordeal. We are an independent body that has nothing to do with him (Gov. Nixon) and I know that I would not want to align my decisions with the Governor currently.

Second is racism, the issue that no one wants to talk about. When Michael Brown was murdered it was the youth who said that they would not let it go on. There is a lack of trust in the system, not just the police but the system itself. Someone is gunned down, the police pick up the body, people are angry, and then there is no justice for the community. Justice is never served. The disruption and anger that is there (at these meetings) is normal and needed. The commission is the place for that to happen. It's a place where everyone can come into a room and have their voices heard.

Everything truly needs to be on record. Sam Dotson (St. Louis City Police Chief), who was at this last meeting, which a lot of folks weren't happy about, needs to be there on record to be held accountable just like we (the commission) need to be held accountable. The people need the truth. If we say we are going to do something than people need to know that they can call us out. The community hopefully over time will see that this commission, including myself do want change.

Winters: What happened with Chief Dotson?

Aldridge: He was there because the main point of that meeting was to discuss community improvement, police, and how to ensure trust is rebuilt between residents and police departments. When he got to speaking, it was more of a planned talk about how great the department was and that not every cop is a bad cop instead of talking about how we are going to come together, what they are going to change and what the community can do. The talks are done, we need to hear both sides of the story and the youth started to speak out and then he started to get snarky and very dismissive of their concerns . . . His comments and rude behavior was not what the community needed right then.

We took a quick break in our conversation and made our way to a less crowded café. As our luck would have it the wind began to pick up and teeth began the usual winter chatter.

Winters: Ok, now that we're back, you mentioned earlier that a lot of people are angry with the commission and believe that it is just a distraction created by the Governor's office. Were you ever worried about the potential backlash from the activist community when you accepted this position?

Aldridge: What's been great about being out here and working with these folks in the streets for the past 123 days is that you really do get to build a real relationship. You tend to see them more than you see your family, they get to truly know you. I thought I was going to get some backlash because of who put this commission together; someone (Gov. Nixon) who has not been pro-protestor and has done nothing to try to ease the situation and lower the tensions between police and the community. Surprisingly, I got more flak from the older folks who have seen how truly messed up things are and see this as another thing the system is putting together to sweep it under the rug. We can't let the tragedy in Ohio, Florida, and New York go. This again goes back to people not believing in the system. The support I have gotten from the younger activists has been great and I just hope I can be a voice for them inside the commission.

Winters: I've noticed that a lot of the young activists out in Ferguson have some close ties to the Fight for $15 movement and that you got your community organizing start with the Show Me $15 campaign. How does it make you feel now that the Fast Food movement has come out in full support of the fights in Ferguson, Ohio, and New York?

Aldridge: [Smiling proudly] I'm very happy that the fast food workers across the country didn't just focus on their fight. At the end of the day all our fights are connected. You know here locally, they were the first ones in the labor movement to show support and solidarity with Ferguson. There is such a lack of good jobs in these communities that continue to bring people and families down. It's a bad system overall and I salute all the fast food workers who took a stand for 15 and a union and for Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, and Eric Garner. The labor movement needs to look at them (fast food workers) and not be scared of change. Instead they should learn from the workers and help to fix communities where only low-wage jobs are available.

Almost as quickly as we had seated ourselves to re-start our conversation his phone began to ring and I knew that our talk would soon come to an end.

Winters: I know you have to get going but the last thing I would like to ask is, what do you think the commission will actually accomplish when it hands in the much-anticipated Ferguson report?

Aldridge: I really feel like this commission is not going to create all the change that people want in St. Louis. But, I do feel that the people on this commission, including myself, don't care about just the report we have to make. We have the ability to really tackle these issues and make something happen. Come six months down the line you can ask me this again but for now I know where I stand and I am going to be speaking to the community, with my mentors, and learning how to make change happen and dedicating myself to doing everything I can to see that change become a reality. Starting with the police, going into the issues of economic disparity, and institutional racism in our country. I don't want to just focus on one thing because all of this is tied together and we need to fix all of them instead of just putting a band-aid over one of them.

Aldridge headed out after that final question. He was off to another action planning meeting and apologized for not being able to stay any longer. For this young Ferguson Commissioner it seems that there is only one solution and come November 2015, when the Ferguson report is released, I look forward to sitting down with him again and asking that last question one more time.

Photo: Rasheen Aldridge organizing protesters in St. Louis. | Camille Phillips/St. Louis Public Radio

AFL-CIO opens Civil and Human Rights Conference in Atlanta

Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:18:00 +0000

ATLANTA - Today kicks off the AFL-CIO's 2015 Martin Luther King Jr. Civil and Human Rights Conference in Atlanta, where hundreds of union and civil rights activists are honoring King's life and legacy and the accomplishments of the civil rights movement and plan to renew the commitment to carry on King's fight for equality and justice. You can follow the action on Twitter @aflcio with the hashtag #1uMLK, and if you are attending the conference and want updates on speakers, panels and activities, text KING to 235246.

Under the banner "Dream Big. Love All. Act Now," this year's conference takes place during the 50th anniversary year of the Voting Rights Act.

'We must take this opportunity to honor the struggles of our brothers and sisters who fought to provide us with this opportunity and continue to advocate for life-changing policies and practices that better the lives of all workers, communities of color, women and LGBTQ people," declared AFL-CIO executive vice president Tefere Gebre.

Community service has been a constant focal point of the conference and again opportunities to volunteer will be offered, as well as sessions to teach participants how to infuse community service into the labor movement.

Through plenaries, workshops and panels, attendees will be able to build knowledge and skills on a range of issues, including race; intersectionalities of underrepresented groups; development of labor-community relationships, especially with other civil rights organizations and much more.

Click here for information and to download the conference agenda.

Photo: Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington for Jobs, Peace and Freedom, August, 28, 1963.