People Before Profit blog

Congress agrees on $ for roads, bridges, but not mass transit

Mon, 02 Jul 2012 11:41:00 +0000

WASHINGTON (PAI) -- Construction unions facing high rates of unemployment hailed the apparent congressional agreement on June 28 on a 2-year $109 billion measure to fund reconstruction of the nation's roads and bridges. But Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) President Larry Hanley warned that it makes a bad situation worse for bus, subway and commuter rail systems and their riders.

Lawmakers reached the deal with just two days to spare before the authority to collect money for such projects, through the federal gas tax, ran out. That would have brought construction to a dead halt, right in the midst of the best season for building -- and at a time when more than one of every seven construction workers is jobless.

Key GOP hang-ups, which were apparently dropped from the final version of the legislation, included Republican insistence on construction of the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline from the U.S.-Canada border to refineries of the Texas Gulf Coast.

Construction unions strongly support Keystone, both because of the jobs it would create and because its Canadian owner, years ago, signed a Project Labor Agreement to have union labor construct the pipeline. But the Transport Workers, several other unions and environmentalists oppose Keystone. They argue it would increase pollution by bringing in extremely "dirty" oil from Alberta's tar sands.

Operating Engineers President James Callahan called the deal on the highway-mass transit bill "welcome news to Operating Engineers and thousands of other construction workers." It's "the nation's most important jobs bill," he said. Independent analysts say it also may be the only jobs bill this Congress approves this year.

Callahan said Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., had a "laser-like focus on putting thousands of Americans back to work. Her tenacity and leadership led to this deal." He urged lawmakers to back the bill.

"Unemployment in the construction industry, which reached over 27 percent in Feb. 2010, is still over 14 percent," Callahan noted. "One in every five jobs in the 'highway, street and bridge' subsector of construction associated with transportation has vanished since the start of the recession. We are entering the heart of construction season throughout this country. It's time to put party politics aside and put people back to work."

But ATU's Hanley called the measure "a death blow" to mass transit riders. The legislation "not only does nothing to address the mass transit crisis, but will make it much worse...It will impose hidden taxes on commuters and transit riders by raising fares while forcing cash-strapped transit systems to cut more service."

Hanley explained that congressional negotiators dumped Senate provisions to let all mass transit systems use their federal funding for operations, as well as buying new equipment. Using federal money for operations "keeps service on the street and creates jobs," he said. ATU lobbied hard and mobilized riders for that cause.

Bargainers also did not reinstate a prior federal tax credit for people who use mass transit, available through their employers. Drivers get a tax credit through employers for parking expenses. That's retained.

"Our government is spending $2 billion a week to fight wars and rebuild cities halfway across the world, while Congress lets our own cities and their transit systems get worse by the day," Hanley said. "From Pittsburgh to Boston to Detroit to Charleston, more and more transit-dependent Americans are stranded at bus stops and rail stations as cities implement some of the most severe service cuts and fare increases in history."

While congressional bargainers agreed on the bill, whether the tea party-run Republicans who rule the House will heed even their own leaders - including conservatives such as GOP House Speaker John Boehner and Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, top Republican on Boxer's panel - is open to question. Many tea partiers want to kill all highway and mass transit funding, on ideological grounds.

Photo: Bridge being widened in Richmond, Vt., May 30. Toby Talbot/AP

Calif. leading on Affordable Care Act

Mon, 02 Jul 2012 11:19:00 +0000

No state had more at stake than California, in last week's Supreme Court decision upholding the Affordable Care Act.

No state has advanced as far toward putting the law into effect, and with nearly seven million lacking coverage, California is among the states with the highest percentage of uninsured. Only about half of Californians are covered through an employer, compared to 60 percent nationally.

In the spring of 2010, even while Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was still in office, work started to get ready for the plan's full roll-out in 2014. California was the first state to set up a Health Benefits Exchange where people could compare insurance options and access the federal financial subsidies that will help low- and moderate-income people pay for coverage.

Among benefits already in place:

Over 400,000 people with low incomes who weren't eligible for Medi-Cal (California's Medicaid) are now covered by Low-Income Health Programs, run by counties with federal matching funds. They will be covered by Medi-Cal in 2014.
More than 11,000 people denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions are already covered under a federally-funded Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Program. Insurers already must cover children regardless of pre-existing conditions; in 2014 this provision will extend to everyone.
Over 350,000 young adults up to age 26 are insured through their parents' coverage.

More than two million more Californians can be covered in 2014 under expanded Medicaid. At the start, the federal government will cover all costs; federal funding will later drop to 90 percent.

Overall, it is estimated that between half and two-thirds of currently uninsured Californians will be covered through the ACA. The program has already brought the state billions to help set up the exchange; it is expected to bring the state some $15 billion in federal funds each year.

"Clearly, our large uninsured population will in 2014 have many more options available for getting coverage, which should be much more affordable for low-income people than it is today," Marian Mulkey of the California Health Care Foundation told a June 29 special broadcast over public radio station KQED. "And all of us who have insurance today but may lose it tomorrow will be in a more stable and secure position."

Ellen Wu, executive director of the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, expressed support for the court's decision "to uphold a law that has already had such a positive impact on our communities," and pointed out that over two-thirds of those in the state's Low-Income Health Programs are people of color.

Observers also pointed out that even when the ACA is in full operation, much remains to assure quality affordable coverage to everyone.

SIREN, the Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network, which serves immigrants in the San Francisco Bay Area, said the court's decision "reaffirms the government's commitment to improving the lives of American families," but expressed concern "that undocumented immigrants continue to be excluded from health care reform." SIREN said over one million undocumented Californians will remain uninsured under ACA, while recent legal permanent residents will have to wait five years to be covered.

Advocates of Medicare for All are vowing to continue their efforts to ultimately win a single payer system of health coverage. National Nurses United praised expanded Medicaid coverage and increased funds for community clinics, but pointed out that the ACA doesn't really limit how much insurers and providers can charge, and expands the "profit-driven insurance system" by requiring the uninsured to buy private insurance.

"Of course, the law is not an extension of Medicare for all, nor does it guarantee health care for all tomorrow. Those struggles are still ahead of us," John August of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, wrote on the California Labor Federation's web site. "But advocates for high-quality health care for all have been given a huge boost to build on the platform of the Affordable Care Act."

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/progressohio/ / CC BY 2.0

Colorado burning: This is what climate change looks like

Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:52:00 +0000

Colorado's Waldo Canyon Fire - which has forced the evacuation of 35,000 people, destroyed 346 homes, and burned for six days at the edge of Colorado Springs - is the most destructive brushfire on record for the state. According to experts, this havoc is just the beginning of what global warming will wreak in the future.

This is what climate change looks like.

Scorching temperatures and winds stoked the flames over the past few days, which has eaten up 18,500 acres of land so far. Firefighters managed to form containment lines around just 15 percent of the wildfire's perimeter on June 28.

Elsewhere in the state, the High Park Fire remains active, and has very recently had a potentially upsetting ripple effect: it has blackened the nearby Poudre River with ash, possibly killing schools of fish beneath the now-tainted water. The river is filled with dust and debris from the fire as well. The more ash collects in the water, experts believe, the higher the fish mortality will become.

"This is going to happen over time" as the wildfire continues, said Ken Kehmeier, an aquatic biologist with Colorado Parks and Wildlife. "When the river turns black, fish are getting all that particulate matter that could affect oxygen levels. We could see fish struggling due to their gills getting clogged up with ash."

In the case of the Waldo Canyon Fire, meanwhile, authorities say that arson cannot yet be ruled out as a culprit for the blaze. But the more likely causes for it, note scientists, are several: shorter winters with reduced snowfall, earlier springs, and extreme and early summer heat, all of which occurred this year.

"What we're seeing is a window into what global warming really looks like," said Michael Oppenheimer, a Princeton University climate scientist. "It looks like heat; it looks like fires; it looks like this kind of environmental disaster. This provides vivid images of what we can expect to see more of in the future."

The aforementioned weather conditions, he added, were exactly what he and his colleagues at the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had predicted would result from a carbon-induced climate shift.

Dr. Steven Running, a University of Montana forest ecologist, noted that mountain snow generally melted two weeks earlier than average this year in the U.S. "That just sets us up for a longer, drier summer. Then all you need is an ignition source and wind. Now we have a lot of dead trees to burn, and it's not even July yet."

But the problem runs deeper than just disasters that have been observed this year alone. Since 1950, the number of heat waves worldwide has greatly increased, according to a report by nonprofit science outreach group Climate Communication. The "remarkable run of record-shattering heat waves in recent years," said the report, "from the Russian heat wave of 2010 that set forests ablaze to the historic heat wave in Texas in 2011" all serve as examples of the ongoing climate change issue.

Others understand that right-wing efforts to deny the existence of climate change, to loosen regulations on pollution, and to divert attention away from environmentalism are only going to add to the problem.

Rep. Harry Waxman, D-Calf., remarked, "Extreme events like the wildfires in Colorado are going to get worse unless the Republican-controlled Congress changes course soon."

Photo: AP Photo

Stockton becomes largest bankrupt city in U.S.

Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:51:00 +0000

Earlier this week Stockton, Calif., population 292,000, became the largest U.S. city to file for bankruptcy. The June 28 filing came after months of talks with creditors failed to resolve a $26 million gap in the city's budget for the coming fiscal year.

Earlier in the week, the City Council had voted to halt bond payments, drastically cut workers' health and retirement benefits, and approve a minimum budget.

"We are extremely disappointed that we have been unable to avoid bankruptcy," Mayor Ann Johnston said in a statement. "This is what we must do to get our fiscal house in order and protect the safety and welfare of our citizens."

The city had already defaulted on some $2 million in debt this year, resulting in creditors seizing the building that was to become the new city hall, as well as three city parking garages.

Stockton, in the midst of California's Central Valley, is a major port handling the region's agricultural exports. The city experienced a housing boom in the 1990s and early 2000s, as it attracted many people priced out when housing costs soared in San Francisco and other Bay Area cities.

Now has the second-highest foreclosure rate in the country. Unemployment has soared to 16 percent, far higher than the state's current 10.8 official rate.

In recent years Stockton has slashed $90 million from its general fund, made big cuts to police and fire departments, and slashed pay and benefits for all its workers.

Much media commentary on the city's crisis has placed blame on a building spree during the real estate boom, and on allegedly lavish benefits granted city workers.

"This is a crisis that is being turned into an opportunity to beat up on public servants," Joe Rose, general counsel for the Stockton City Employees Association, said in a telephone interview. "The problem is not luxurious or lavish compensation for employees" but the soaring foreclosure rate and plummeting property taxes.

The city had made a commitment to its workers - many of them hired before 1986 and therefore not covered by Medicare - to fund retirement medical care, Rose said. In return, the workers agreed to take 20 percent less in salary adjustments, with the funds to be set aside to pay for the care.

"But city leaders never put that money aside, and now, because the plan was to pay those costs forward year by year, the city has a massive unfunded liability."

At the City Council meeting, workers highlighted the bankruptcy's cost to them. Retired police officer Gary Jones, diagnosed with brain cancer a decade ago, said the action "might well be a life sentence." He said he would not be able to afford the chemotherapy and other treatments he needs at the new lower level of coverage.

Another side of Stockton's crisis is illustrated by a new report from the Pew Charitable Trust's American Cities Project. The report points out that over the country as a whole, property taxes and state aid together make up over half of the revenue of cities and other local governments, and notes that in 2010, the State of California's aid to local governments plunged by more than $5.7 billion.

Further complicating the picture, California's 1978 voter initiative, Prop. 13, has essentially frozen property taxes. Democratic legislators have repeatedly called for a "split roll" that would protect individual homeowners while permitting commercial real estate taxes to rise when property is transferred, but Republican legislators have blocked the moves.

Court tosses Montana ban on Super PACs, CWA vows to fight

Fri, 29 Jun 2012 14:33:00 +0000

WASHINGTON - The Communications Workers, the top union proponents of constitutional limits on corporate spending in politics, vowed to step up that drive after the Supreme Court tossed out Montana's century-old state ban on such corporate cash.

The ruling said the Constitution's first amendment guarantees of free speech - which the court applied to corporate political speech in its Citizens United ruling two years ago - voids Montana's law, too. And that would apply to other state laws, also.

After Citizens United, Common Cause began a drive to amend the U.S. Constitution. Its proposal says that, for purposes of political speech, corporations are not people and not entitled to rights like freedom of speech that people enjoy under the Bill of Rights. The CWA has enthusiastically joined the Common Cause constitutional campaign.

The June 25 ruling by the five-person majority of the court, in the Montana case, American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock, "will only continue and extend the corrupting influence of corporate money in politics," the union said.

The same five justices voted for Citizens United, CWA pointed out. It called the Montana decision "yet another example of the court showing its ideological bias over clear constitutional thinking."

Citizens United let corporate political spending "spiral out of control," CWA noted. Left unsaid: Almost all of the hundreds of millions of dollars in corporate and big giver political cash is hidden, funneled through pro-GOP anti-worker front groups and radical right organizations and directed against workers and worker-backed candidates.

"CWA agrees with Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer who... said Citizens United makes it 'exceedingly difficult to maintain that independent expenditures by corporations do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,'" the union stated.

"We will continue to press for constitutional changes and other changes such as public financing of elections that will restore true democracy to our political and election spending," CWA vowed.

Sen. Bernard Sanders, Ind.-Vt., who has introduced the constitutional amendment, said he would push even harder for it after the court's ruling. In the Gettysburg address, he said, President Lincoln called the U.S. a nation "of the people, by the people and for the people." Between Citizens United and the anti-Montana ruling, "We are rapidly moving toward a nation of the super-rich, by the super-rich and for the super-rich." Added Sanders: "This is not democracy; this is plutocracy."

Today in history: Birthday of Julia Lathrop

Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:14:00 +0000

Born June 29, 1858, in Rockford, Illinois, Julia Lathrop's father was a lawyer and personal friend of Abraham Lincoln. Her mother was a suffragist active in women's rights activities.

Lathrop was able to attend and graduate from college. In 1890 she moved to Chicago where she joined Jane Addams and other women social reformers at Hull House, a settlement house aiding recently arrived immigrants. The women at Hull House actively campaigned to persuade Congress to pass legislation to protect children.

Lathrop was the first chief of the U.S. Children's Bureau, the first woman ever to head a federal bureau. She modeled the Children's Bureau investigations on the work she did while at Hull House.

The Children's Bureau under Lathrop lobbied to abolish child labor. The Bureau's use of scientific language battled contemporary ideas that high infant mortality rates were inevitable in working class and immigrant populations.

Lathrop argued that that high infant mortality among the poor and working class in American cities was not due to ignorance or laziness: "Which is the more safe and sane conclusion! That 88 per cent of all these fathers were incorrigibly indolent or below normal mentally, or that sound public economy demands an irreducible minimum living standard to be sustained by a minimum wage and other such expedients as may be developed in a determined effort to give every child a fair chance?"

In 1917 the American Association for Labor Legislation proposed a national health insurance act that included a provision for weekly cash allocations for pregnant women. Lathrop went against the private insurance industry and the American Medical Association to support this proposal. The American Medical Association called the law an "imported socialist scheme" and opponents accused Lathrop and other women who supported the act of being part of a sinister "spider's web' of Communist conspirators."

It is important to note that in the South, much of the public health campaigns were undertaken by African-American, Latino or white clubwomen working in their own segregated communities.

Lathrop's experience had given her firsthand knowledge of the conditions for children in county poorhouses and jails. Prior to the reform era, children over the age of seven were imprisoned with adults. Lathrop helped found the country's first juvenile court in 1899 and the establishment of a juvenile detention home in Chicago.

After her retirement from the Children's Bureau in 1922, Lathrop became president of the Illinois League of Women Voters. She also helped form the National Committee of Mental Illness, trying to dispel the myth of mental illness as a sign of moral defect. She died April 15, 1932.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

The contemptible Messrs. Issa and Boehner

Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:25:00 +0000

Congress' vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt is contemptible. This vote is steeped in racism, lies, cover up, NRA-gun politics and paranoid conspiracy theories. It marks a new low for Republicans in general and Reps. Darryl Issa of California and Speaker of the House John Boehner in particular: Issa for pushing the House of Representatives vote and Boehner for agreeing to it.

Democrats, prompted by the Congressional Black Caucus, plan to walk out en masse. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., chairman of the CBC, said the entire Democratic Caucus "will seek to delay any vote that is essentially a baseless attempt to reduce the significance of the attorney general's work. We are not going to cooperate with something that's so alien to our sensibilities. The only way is to not be there when it takes place." A few Democrats who are in the pocket of the NRA said they would also vote with Republicans.

At the heart of the matter lies a vast right-wing conspiracy hell bent on destroying the first African American president (and AG) and everything Barack Obama represents, including the American people who elected him in the first place.

Holder is the first black attorney general. Given the history of racism and civil rights in this country, the symbolism of a black attorney general, who is tasked to enforce the laws of the country - including civil and voting rights laws - was monumental. You may remember the Republicans' effort to block Holder's appointment led by none other than Karl "SuperPAC to destroy Obama" Rove.

Indeed, Holder's Department of Justice has vigorously moved to enforce the nation's laws - from investigating voting rights violations in GOP-enacted ID laws and voter purges to suing Arizona and Alabama over immigration - challenging two policies that are the darlings of the extreme Republicans.

The basis of the vote stems from a politically-driven investigation into a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) program called "Operation Fast and Furious." It is alleged that the agency ran guns into Mexico and some of these guns were involved in the death of a U.S. border patrol agent. Sounds like a bizarre and poorly thought-through program with tragic consequences that should be investigated.

Unfortunately that's not the world we live in. In our world, we have a vast right-wing conspiracy, (Hillary was right!) who love to spin lies, play to people's paranoia and fears and infect the political atmosphere with racism and hysteria through their blogs, radio and TV broadcasts.

Somehow, in that world, "Fast and Furious" became a grand scheme by the president and Holder to take away Americans' guns and second amendment rights, and on top of that, according to Gun Owners of America, (think NRA) Holder is guilty of murder!

The NRA told House members they have to vote for contempt or face their wrath, claiming the administration wants to use Fast and Furious to win gun regulations.

Now the vast right-wing conspiracy has political power and will do something never done in the history of the United States: hold in contempt a sitting AG.

Doesn't that suit the Republicans (and their Wall Street backers) well to have the first black attorney general - the nation's top lawyer - arrested? They would take the racist criminalization of African Americans to a whole new level. Such an action is part of their strategy to win the White House in November. Use racism as much as possible. Cast doubt on the administration. Confuse and divide. Play to hatred and the worst in people.

If that wasn't enough, according to a blockbuster story by Fortune Magazine's Katherine Eban published June 27, "Fast and Furious" gunrunning didn't even exist as currently asserted.

Eban shows how Arizona gun laws backed by the NRA, allowed people to buy as many guns as they wanted and then channel them into criminal operations, including drug running in Mexico.

The thousands of guns supposedly "walked" into Mexico with the ATF's blessing were actually let through as the result of weak gun laws and prosecutors in Arizona telling the feds there wasn't enough evidence for arrests. The agents involved in "Fast and Furious" were not allowed to stop the flow of guns because, under NRA-backed gun laws, they were legally bought.

The right wing hates the ATF (remember "jack booted thugs" and Waco, which led to the Oklahoma City bombing by Tim McVeigh) because they purportedly take away people's guns. But now these same people are furious because they didn't stop guns that were legally bought because of the lax gun control regulations. Eban calls it ironic. That's charitable.

In an interview with CNN after her story came out, Eban said that after the six months of investigating the story it became clear to her that Congress' so-called facts were "misconstrued, incorrect" and "a case of cherry picking." Her story exposes as a lie the claims made by Issa and other Republicans on his witch-hunt committee.

Let's call the House contempt vote what it really is - a political lynching. This is a new low for the Republicans. To drag Congress down in the gutter like that will leave a lasting stain on the Republicans and Boehner. Their behavior embarrasses and hurts the entire country.

In November, the American people will hold their own contempt vote and hopefully throw these liars out of office. But today you can express your contempt for Congress. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights urges taking action and protest the "aye" votes. Click here to see how your representative voted. Call (202)224-3121 to express your outrage.

Photo: Eric Holder, via AP Photo.

More big cuts in Calif. budget

Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:46:00 +0000

After months of negotiation, California Governor Jerry Brown June 27 signed overall legislation for a general fund totaling $95.1 billion - down from nearly $103 billion five years ago.

At press time, the governor's actions on specific implementation bills were not yet available.

Once again, most of the $8 billion in cuts to help close a nearly $16 billion budget gap came at the expense of the state's most vulnerable people.

Democratic legislators managed to blunt some of the severest cuts proposed by fellow Democrat Brown.

Among the cuts:

Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program, is cut by over $1 billion. Medi-Cal patients will now face co-pays for some services and elimination of others.

The Healthy Families program serving low-income children whose parents make too much to qualify them for Medi-Cal is to be eliminated and nearly 900,000 children are to be moved into Medi-Cal.

Low-income old and disabled people will be moved into managed care programs that critics say don't care properly for their current patients.

Participation in CalWORKS, the state's welfare-to-work program, will now be limited to two years, unless they qualify for six-month extensions because they live in a high unemployment area or are making progress in a program to help them find a job.The time limit used to be five years; last year it was cut to four.

Subsidized child care will be cut nearly 9 percent, though advocates say their fight-back avoided much deeper cuts proposed by the governor.

Hours of caregivers in the In-Home Supportive Services program will be cut by 3.6 percent - again, less than originally proposed. On the other side of the ledger, the budget contains legislation to create a new statewide authority to negotiate providers' pay, replacing the present county-by-county system under which rates vary from $8/hour to $14.78.

State workers are facing 12 days a year of unpaid leave.

On the revenue side, the budget depends on November passage of a ballot measure by the governor and the labor-community Restore California coalition, to temporarily raise taxes on incomes of over $250,000 and raise sales taxes 0.25 percent. It is hoped the measure will bring in $8.5 billion during the 2012-13 budget year.

If the initiative succeeds, the University of California, California State University and community colleges - all of which have suffered big cuts in recent years - will get substantial fund increases. If it fails to pass, "trigger cuts" would include slashing the K-12 school year and making further cuts to public higher education.

Recent poll figures show support running about 52 percent in favor and 35 percent opposed.

Signatures were gathered earlier this year to put the initiative on the ballot, because legislative Republicans have for years blocked any effort to legislate increased revenues. Though budgets can pass with a majority vote, raising revenues requires a two-thirds supermajority. Democrats control both legislative houses but lack that majority, and virtually all Republican legislators have signed a Grover Norquist "No new taxes" pledge.

Photo: Marilyn Bechtel/PW

Supreme Court upholds health care law

Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:04:00 +0000

In a historic decision, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday upheld virtually all of the Affordable Care Act - the health reform law championed by President Obama to extend health coverage to most uninsured Americans.

The decision stunned many who had predicted since oral arguments in April that the court would strike down a key provision of the law - that the uninsured buy private coverage or pay a penalty on their tax bills. The justices ruled 5-4 that the individual mandate was within Congress' constitutional authority to levy taxes.

Republicans had aimed their fire at the individual mandate because they knew that without it the entire law would fail. If everyone is not brought into the system, with many who could afford coverage opting out or others buying in only when they get sick, costs for everyone else would be unreasonable high and there would not be enough money in the system to provide coverage for 30 million uninsured people who cannot currently afford any coverage.

The only part of the law that the court took issue with was its provision expanding Medicaid coverage for low-income Americans to an additional 17 million individuals by easing eligibility standards. The justices said states could reject the expansion without forfeiting federal funds for their current Medicaid program.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a member of the court's conservative bloc, wrote the majority opinion, joined by four more liberal justices. Four dissenting justices said the entire law should be held unconstitutional.

President Obama praised the court's decision that his signature health care law was constitutional, calling the ruling "a victory for people all over this country."

"The highest court in the land has spoken. We will continue to implement this law," he said. "With today's announcement it is time for us to move forward. To implement and when necessary improve on this law."

Due to the ongoing campaigns against the law by the insurance industry and Republicans, the fact that the court upheld its constitutionality was as much of a landmark event as the law's passage in the first place.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney reacted to the ruling with what was viewed as a highly partisan and political statement, promising that "what the Supreme Court did not do on its last day in session, I will do in my first day in office. I will act to repeal Obamacare. Help us defeat Obamacare. Help us defeat the liberal agenda."

The president, in contrast, used his address to lay out the advantages of the new law for millions of Americans. "It should be pretty clear that I didn't do this because it is good politics," Obama said. "I did it because it is good for the country."

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said unions are pleased and relieved that the law was upheld. He described the Affordable Care Act as the "first step in expanding health care coverage, improving care and beginning to get control of health care costs. We will need to build on the achievements of the Act, Medicare and Medicaid," he said, "in order to fix our broken health care system and advance along a path to a more equitable and cost-effective system.

"A simple indisputably constitutional solution is to allow Americans of all ages to buy into an improved Medicare program," Trumka added. "We believe every baby in America - whether rich or poor - deserves the same standard of quality care and we will keep moving forward until we make this a reality."

President Obama signed the Affordable Health Care Act in March 2010 after it passed both houses of Congress following a 10-month legislative battle. Not a single Republican voted for the bill in either house.

The president's bill became law after more than 60 years of struggle for universal health care had already taken place in the United States. Universal health care is the norm in nearly every other industrialized country while today 50 million Americans remain uninsured.

The law upheld today by the court was not the preferred approach of most progressives who had backed a Medicare-type "single-payer" system of tax-supported federal reimbursement.

A "public option" alternative backed by Obama did not make it into the bill that was passed in 2010. That idea, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, was beaten down in Congress by the private insurance industry.

While most of the Affordable Health Care Act takes effect in 2014, including a requirement that insurers accept all customers regardless of pre-existing conditions, some provisions are already in effect including one that allows as many as 6 million young adults to remain covered by their parents' policies until age 26.

The law has also already banned sex discrimination in insurance rates, eliminated lifetime dollar limits on individual insurance benefits, and barred insurers from canceling coverage when a policyholder becomes ill. Other provisions have already expanded Medicare prescription coverage for seniors and provided them with free preventive checkups and services.

Photo: Supporters of “ObamaCare” healthcare reform in front of the Supreme Court building. AP

Title IX women’s equality law marks 40th anniversary

Wed, 27 Jun 2012 14:40:00 +0000

July 1 marks the 40th anniversary of a landmark equality law: Title IX. The measure, an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, prohibited gender inequality in federally funded education programs and institutions. As we watch women's basketball on TV, we may take this for granted today, but there was quite a struggle to pass Title IX. And battles over it continue to this day.

Title IX is also known as the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act, named for its author, Rep. Patsy Mink, D-Hawaii. It was signed on June 23, 1972, by President Richard Nixon and became law on July 1, 1972.

Title IX is often associated with women's equality in school sports, but it applies to all school activities at all educational levels, both public and private: elementary and secondary schools, colleges, graduate and professional schools, and vocational programs.

Molly Carnes, a professor of medicine and director of the Center for Women's Health Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, writes, "When I entered medical school two years after Title IX, women medical students in more than token numbers were a new phenomenon, and the change was not welcomed by all." Senior professors told her things like: "I don't think women should be doctors," and "Women just don't have what it takes to be researchers."

It's hard to believe today, but as Gwendolyn Mink, a professor of equality law, poverty policy, gender issues and American politics, and the daughter of Patsy Mink, writes in her blog, "The Washington Post and New York Times opposed it in editorials; college presidents decried it; college football coaches demeaned it; and many members of Congress tried to figure out ways to weaken it."

After Title IX became law, the attack on it intensified.

Mink notes, "The loudest assault came from the male athletics lobby - the NCAA, and legions of college football fans. Although Title IX was not enacted with women's athletics primarily in mind, the male sports establishment certainly predicted correctly that under Title IX, women would flourish as athletes."

President Obama, in a Newsweek oped marking the anniversary of the bill's signing, wrote that as result of the law, "Today, thanks in no small part to the confidence and determination they developed through competitive sports and the work ethic they learned with their teammates, girls who play sports are more likely to excel in school."

One of those women athletes is Joanne Smith, founder and executive director of Girls for Gender Equity. Smith received a college basketball scholarship as a result of Title IX. Nevertheless, she told The Root, "There is still such a gap between the letter of the law and the application of the law." She noted that the majority of intercollegiate athletic coaches continue to be men, even for women's teams.

Patsy Mink, after graduating from college with a stellar record in 1942, applied to 20 medical schools but none of them accepted women. She wound up going to law school. Today, writes Carnes, Mink would be gratified by the positive impact her bill has had for women in medicine. Women are now nearly 50% of medical students nationwide and hold leadership positions in all areas of medicine. However, new women doctors get paid significantly less than their male counterparts, women get less research funding, and men continue to be the overwhelming majority of medical school professors and department heads.

Title IX was a milestone, but the struggle to complete its promise goes on. For example, battles continue over charges that Title IX discriminates against men. Some colleges claim that Title IX forced them to drop predominantly male sports like wrestling.

Gwendolyn Mink says, "The history of Title IX over 40 years is really the story of millions of bold and resilient girls and women who have enforced Title IX by their actions - by resisting exclusion; demanding fairness; exposing sexual harassment; and challenging educational institutions to change because of the contributions of women."

"Going forward," she writes, "we must all hone Title IX to pierce and transform the culture of educational institutions, to dispel stereotypes that impede women's incorporation on equal footing, and to undermine the gross disparities in money and other resources that make it difficult for many girls and women to pursue the opportunities that Title IX assures."

Photo: Happy A // CC 2.0

After Court smackdown of Arizona, DREAMers speak out

Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:24:00 +0000

President Obama recently ordered an end to deportation of young people who have been brought to this country as children, have grown up here and, as he put it, have "become part of the American family."

The DREAM Act, which would have accomplished this and much more by providing the affected youth with a path to citizenship, actually passed in the House early in Obama's first term. But when it moved on to the Senate (where it also had enough votes to pass), Republicans filibustered it, preventing it from coming up for a vote and stalling any action whatsoever until the President acted last week.

On June 25 there was another historic development. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down three parts of Arizona's prejudicial immigration law, but, in a split decision, allowed a fourth part to remain:

Though the court did not definitively eliminate the part of that law that allows police to check the immigration status of those who are detained for other reasons, it killed the most egregious parts of the Arizona law - the parts that allowed police to demand immigration papers from anyone, for whatever reason and the part that made it a crime for the undocumented to even seek work.

The court also signaled that the section of the law it left standing is hanging by only the barest of threads. 'This opinion," wrote the court, "does not foreclose other preemption and constitutional challenges to the law as interpreted and applied after it goes into effect." In other words, reported the Washington Post, a sharp watch will be kept on what is nicknamed the "papers, please" provision.

Rebekah Friend, president of the Arizona AFL-CIO, said that letting that provision remain is a "grave error, because the rights of Arizona's working families will be violated and irreparably harmed in the meantime. We have seen first-hand the consequences of such divisive policies; everyone suffers. Thousands of jobs have been lost, communities have been disrupted, and families have been irreparably divided."

Tania Unzueta, lead organizer with the Immigrant Youth Justice League, said of both these developments, "We feel that it's good for undocumented youth! But people still need to know that there are many deportations going on. There are copycat laws [similar to the Arizona law] all over the country." In other words, Unzueta's point was, this was certainly an achievement, but DREAMers aren't out of the woods yet.

"DREAMer" is a nickname for an undocumented citizen who advocates the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act.

"This [Obama's order allowing hundreds of thousands a way of legally remaining in the U.S.] was good for many of us," Unzueta said, "but not everyone. It's something the community has to keep on top of. We're preparing to support people; we're setting up workshops that will teach people what the law actually is, and to whom it applies.

"The IYJL members feel that it's very good that many deportations are going to stop, but I think they're also a bit distrustful. We're at a very interesting point right now. Our community needs to organize so that we can give a positive message to Obama [about how we feel]."

Going forward, she concluded, "People have to be mobilized. The Secure Communities program is still in effect. As such, many people feel like they're in a hostile environment. They can't trust the police, because that program is legitimizing some of the [prejudicial] actions of the police departments.

"We have to make sure the government is paying attention [to these facts]. And we have to make sure that people who fall outside of the DREAM Act's qualifications get the help they need. No one should get left behind."

Secure Communities is a deportation program managed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and is used as a corrupt and problematic tool. Its policies do not discern a clear difference between criminals and innocent undocumented citizens.

"Secure Communities is still being enforced," 24 year-old Jorge Mena told the People's World. Mena is a University of Illinois graduate who is undocumented. While he said he was glad that DREAMers are finding community support, he noted, "We need to continue bringing attention to how [Secure Communities] is putting people into deportation proceedings and tearing families apart."

"The [program's] goal was to supposedly protect communities from criminal aliens," said 22 year-old Fanny Lopez-Martinez. "In reality, it's used to deport innocent immigrants. It causes a lot of fear; everyone is afraid to talk to police."

Mena and Lopez-Martinez were two of the "Chicago Six" - undocumented youths who stood on trial in the Windy City after being arrested for civil disobedience and charged with reckless conduct. They were ultimately found not guilty. That marked the first time in U.S. history that charges against undocumented immigrants accused of civil disobedience were dismissed in a court of law.

Despite the rough road that lies ahead, many DREAMers have a positive feeling about the situation as it stands now.

Jorge Resendez, who took part in a sit-in at the federal building in downtown Los Angeles, Calif. on June 20 with his fellow undocumented students, remarked, "Tears of joy definitely wanted to come out" when President Obama announced the temporary end to undocumented student deportations. "It was so surreal. I was so happy."

The 24 year-old University of California, Los Angeles student came to the U.S. from Mexico at the age of four.

"This doesn't give us [full] legalization," Resendez admitted, "but now we're going to breathe a little easier."

Photo: Pepe Lozano/PW

Gay pride parades celebrate "landmark year"

Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:22:00 +0000

CHICAGO - Under sunny skies and seas of rainbow flags, millions of Americans participated in gay pride parades across the country June 24, celebrating what many are calling a "landmark year" in advances for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality.

This year's parade theme was "Share the Love," a national call for passage of marriage equality laws, already legal in six states and the District of Columbia.

The first pride parade took place in 1970 and has grown to a national celebration. The crowds lining the streets reflected an incredible multiracial diversity, entire families and young and old alike.

This year the New York City parade, with over 2 million participants and sporting over 323 floats, was held on the one-year anniversary of passage of a state Marriage Equality Act.

The largest celebration occurred in San Francisco, where a whole weekend of activities took place. At the conclusion, Mayor Ed Lee addressed the gigantic crowd at the Civic Center not far from the site where slain Supervisor Harvey Milk famously gave a speech 30 years ago.

In Chicago, more than 850,000 people lined the 2-mile route to witness over 200 floats and contingents, including a large group from the Chicago Teachers Union. The crowds have been growing so massive in recent years the parade route had to be extended five blocks.

Momentum is growing rapidly in Illinois for passage of a marriage equality law, advocated by Gov. Pat Quinn and others. Recently 25 couples sued maintaining the state marriage law, which bans same-sex marriage, is discriminatory. Attorney General Lisa Madigan has refused to defend the law. In 2010, Illinois passed a civil union law.

All across the country contingents supporting President Obama were greeted with wild applause and thunderous cheers. In Chicago, the massive crowds reached out to give high fives, grabbed Obama stickers and signs and chanted "Four more years" the entire route.

"I've never seen anything like it," said one marcher.

The reception reflects the enthusiasm and appreciation for the president's history making announcement supporting marriage equality. Obama's position is in stark contrast to the position taken by his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, who remains steadfast against marriage equality.

"Everyone is so excited about Obama backing marriage," said Billy Crowe of Valparaiso, Ind., to reporters as he marched in Chicago.

Support by Obama for gay rights has also included signing the Matthew Shepherd and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Bill, repealing the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" discriminatory policy in the military and leading with First Lady Michelle Obama a nationwide anti-bullying campaign. The Obama administration has also refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, saying it is unconstitutional.

In issuing a proclamation for Gay Pride Month, the president noted, "The LGBT community has written a proud chapter in this fundamentally American story (of the fight for full equality). From brave men and women who came out and spoke out, to union and faith leaders who rallied for equality, to activist and advocates who challenged unjust laws and marched on Washington, LGBT Americans and allies have achieved what once seemed inconceivable."

In a video, Obama mentioned the contributions of gay activists such as Jean Manford and Harvey Milk. "But we also remember the unsung heroes," Obama said. "The millions of LGBT Americans for whom everyday acts required extraordinary courage."

Photo: Some 300 people march in the Obama For America contingent during Chicago's 43^rd Annual Pride Parade, June 24. (PW/John Bachtell)

St. Lawrence Seaway opened June 26, 1959

Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:51:00 +0000

One June 26, 1959 the 189-mile-long St. Lawrence Seaway opened, making the Great Lakes accessible to Atlantic Ocean shipping.

Thousands of workers toiled for decades to bring the project to fruition.

The St. Lawrence Seaqway today supports 75,000 jobs in Canada and 150,000 in the U.S.

Progressives say stakes in 2012 'higher than ever'

Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:18:00 +0000

WASHINGTON - With over 80 progressive organizations participating, the ninth annual conference of the Campaign for America's Future opened here June 18 under the banner of "Take Back the American Dream."

Robert Borosage, conference organizer, said at the opening that it was going to be an intense three day event because the stakes are so high: to reelect the president in November and take back the House from the "brazen billionaires" who are subverting our democracy.

The agenda was filled with high-profile speakers-Melissa Harris-Perry, Van Jones, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Damon Silvers, the AFL-CIO's policy director and Molly Katchpole.

Katchpole is the young woman who cut up her Bank of America card on national television last year and forced the major banks to forego their intended $5 debit card fees. Her on-line petition started a movement for the public to switch bank accounts from large banks to credit unions and community banks.

Katchpole set the tone for the conference, which had a strong youth component. She spoke to the plenary of her solid grounding in the experiences of her working class family, her dad having worked for 30 years as a machinist. It's a mistake, she said, for the current budget battles to exclude or under-represent the young people because "we'll be one third of the electorate in 2016." She continued, " I look at the make-up of the Congress. Where are the machinists, the fire fighters the teachers, the youth representatives? It doesn't look like America."

In speaking of the effort to keep the interest rate on student loans from doubling this July 1, Molly had all the conference participants stand and repeat to each other, "I stand with you, the youth."

Van Jones, founding president of Rebuild the Dream, in his rousing presentation to the plenary, referred, too, to the energy and the courage of the youth. "Look at these extraordinary young people. They are blessed with not knowing that what they want is impossible."

"He then spoke of the courage of the "Dreamers," those undocumented immigrant youth who came from all over the country, at great peril to themselves, to sit in at government offices in Washington, resulting in President Obama last week granting immunity from deportation under certain conditions for those under the age of 30.

It was the young, Jones said, who sent a message to the administration by engaging in the Tar Sands civil disobedience last fall, who heightened the gender equality discussion, who, by their tenacity in the Occupy movement, put income inequality on the national agenda and "bought us a year." They showed us that if you struggle, you can win.

Youth activism was the central focus of several of the first-day "strategy sessions" at the conference, among them: The 99% Movement: Next Steps; and Student Debt Explosion: Trillion Dollar Trouble.

One theme that came out of the workshops was that while youth are boldly taking the lead in a number of anti-corporate direct actions such as at Walmart and at Wells Fargo and Verizon shareholder meetings, they count on the support and knowledge of older generations. Intergenerational struggle was recognized as essential for taking on corporate power. And it works both ways. An older participant suggested that the League of Women Voters could use some help from young activists in registering people to vote in the current voter-suppression climate.

An additional theme emphasized by plenary and strategy session speakers alike was the idea of the "fiscal cliff," which falls on the day after the Nov. 6^th elections until the end of December when fiscal issues such as the payroll tax extension, the unemployment extension, the Bush Tax cuts and "all the other cans that have been kicked down the road," as Van Jones put it, will be decided. What's at stake in these elections couldn't be clearer.

Plenary sessions and select breakout sessions of the conference were streamed live and are available on demand at both the OurFuture.org/takeback and FreeSpeech.org websites.

Photo: Take Back the American Dream conference June 20.

Musicians getting same harsh treatment as steelworkers

Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:32:00 +0000

Violinists of the world, unite? Orchestra musicians across the U.S. are getting the same harsh treatment by management as steelworkers, city and state workers and others.

Gail Kruvand, assistant principal double bassist for the New York City Opera Orchestra, says her orchestra board and other nonprofit arts organizations these days are trying to run their institutions "like corporations."

Following a bitter contract struggle with musicians earlier this year, her orchestra management slashed the number of performances per season from 100 to 16, making the musicians essentially part-timers. As a result, said Kruvand, who has been with the orchestra 21 years, she is "working way less" and her income is "down about 90 percent."

The renowned Philadelphia Orchestra filed for bankruptcy last year. According to The New York Times, orchestra management "saw the filing as a way to eliminate pension costs and uncertainties as well as reduce musician salaries and operating bills."

As part of its plan to get out of bankruptcy, the orchestra got the musicians to agree to cuts in pay and the number of musicians. It also pulled out of the American Federation of Musicians and Employers' Pension Fund. That triggered a requirement that it compensate the fund by $35 million. It then got the fund to agree to accept $1.75 million instead.

In addition, just like steel companies dodging pension obligations, the orchestra wants to transfer its unfunded pension liabilities to the federally backed Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. The PBGC says the liabilities are $62 million, but the orchestra proposes to pay $1.3 million.

The plan still has to be approved by a judge.

American Federation of Musicians President Ray Hair called the bankruptcy filing "a clumsy , flatfooted attempt by management to free itself from musicians' pension benefit obligations and leverage unjustified contract concessions from the orchestra."

Philadelphia is only the latest in a wave of orchestra bankruptcy filings. Hair said musicians are being hurt by "employers' use of bankruptcy as an escape hatch from unwanted labor agreements."

The Louisville and Honolulu orchestras filed for bankruptcy in 2010. The Syracuse Symphony Orchestra filed for bankruptcy last April.

Last August, the AFM put the Louisville Orchestra on its "Unfair List ," when the orchestra got out of bankruptcy without an agreement with its union musicians. Then the orchestra began recruiting non -union "scab " replacement musicians. Finally orchestra musicians agreed to cuts in the number of musicians and performances, effectively cutting their pay.

Other orchestras are also cutting full -time professional musicians down to seasonal employees.

There have been orchestra strikes or strike authorizations across the country, including Columbus, Ohio; Shreveport, La.; and Seattle.

Last year, after a six-month strike, Detroit Symphony Orchestra musicians wound up agreeing to slash their own pay by a whopping 23 percent.

The Cleveland Symphony Orchestra two years ago tried to get wage cuts and higher health premiums from its musicians. The musicians successfully beat back those efforts, but they had to agree to other concessions.

Some orchestra managements have not adopted the CEO anti -worker mindset and are doing well with that approach. But many, echoing Republican governors (and some Democrats) and CEOs, argue that musician pay, benefits and pensions are unaffordable in today's economy.

Those costs are indeed a major factor for orchestras. But why not? Would there be music to hear without musicians, highly trained and talented, who devote their lives to their profession?

Some orchestras have been trying to block unionization of their musicians by forcing them to agree to be classified as independent contractors. But last December, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that orchestra musicians are statutory employees, not independent contractors, and therefore have the right to collective bargaining with their employers. The NLRB noted that orchestra management sets work hours, pay schedules, dress codes, standards for behavior, and discipline.

Michael Kaiser, president of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, strongly disputed the idea that unions are the cause of arts organizations ' financial woes.

"It is not the fault of union members that we are selling fewer tickets or raising less funds," he wrote. "We can blame a terrible economy, lack of arts education in our schools, substantially lower government grants at every level and new forms of entertainment that compete for the time and resources of our audiences for much of the reduction in resources."

Poor management is a key factor, he said. "Cutting wages is not a long term strategy for success. The only way to assure success for any not for profit is to build a sustained and growing revenue producing capability."

San Francisco Chronicle music critic Joshua Korman wrote that venerable orchestras got into trouble "the same way Lehman Bros. and Bear Stearns did: through poor - and specifically shortsighted - leadership. And just like on Wall Street, the people making these decisions aren't really the ones whose livelihoods are on the line."

Federal, state and local public funding generates just 13% of typical arts organizations' budgets. Orchestras are heavily dependent on private donors (rich people and corporations) and foundations.

It appears many orchestra boards have jumped on the Scott Walker bandwagon of blaming their problems on workers (musicians) and unions.

Not everyone is an orchestra fan, but everyone has a stake in the flourishing of arts in our society, and that means the flourishing of those who produce the art. Violinists , clarinetists of the world , unite - indeed !

Photo: Detroit Symphony Orchestra Musicians Official Facebook page

Memphis Bus Riders Union rolls into summer

Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:14:00 +0000

MEMPHIS - Considering the climate-controlled environments many of us live in, it's easy to forget that summer officially started June 20. As temperatures across the mid-south climb to near 100 degrees, Memphians who rely on public transportation will not be so lucky. Many bus riders report that in an effort to save money, the transfer hub at 50 Poplar does not run its air conditioning. Even more have attempted to alleviate the sweltering heat on an overcrowded bus by opening a window only to find the window screwed closed.

Founded in February, the Memphis Bus Riders Union was created to "raise the level of service and dignity provided by the public transit system as well as ensuring greater accountability and public input over ... policies and practices."

Laura Sullivan says that, "Public transportation is a civil rights issue," and that the old bus routes, "still reflect Jim Crow." With the white flight to the suburbs from inner-city Memphis, many of the bus lines in Memphis were created to transport domestic workers to and from the suburbs. To this day, Memphis Area Transit Authority has yet to change its routes.

Of the available jobs in Memphis, only 26 percent are reachable via public transportation in less than 90 minutes and 80 percent of public transit users have no other form of transportation. Considering that nearly 89 percent of MATA customers are African American and 60 make less than $18,000 a year, MATA is a blatant example of the institutionalized racism that pervades the American South.

Furthermore, since 2009 MATA has raised fares twice, and reduced bus service three times in 2011 alone. Considering that "40 percent of Memphians need access to public transit and nearly 25 percent of Memphis live beneath the poverty line, it is unconscionable," says Paul Garner "to combine fare increases with reduced routes and times."

According to the Brookings Institute, Memphis public transportation system is one of the worst in the nation (69th out of 100).

At its founding meeting, Emmett Miller a retired bus driver expressed the frustration many felt before the founding of the union when all one could do was "ask for change in MATA from the same people who cut, slashed, and decimated the system." Miller suggested that the union "appeal to a much wider populace... that it should [appeal] to every citizen in the metro area."

Inspired by the example of similar organizations in places like Los Angeles, the Memphis Bus Riders Union has high hopes for the future. At a June union meeting, Bennett Foster pointed out that, "Twenty years ago in L.A. they were able to increase the fleet, change the routes and expand the running hours."

One of the main differences however, is that the Memphis Bus Riders Union is a volunteer movement made up of public transit dependent Memphians.

This week, members of the Memphis Bus Riders Union, all dressed in their telltale yellow and black t-shirts attended a MATA meeting chaired by General Manager Will Hudson. Hudson was condescending, dismissive, and rude to the union members present except when they had complaints about how they have been treated by the drivers.

According to, local artist and activist Paul Garner, "MATA is trying to scapegoat the drivers." Garner felt that, "Hudson encouraged complaints about the drivers' and often referred to drivers as "bad apples."

The Memphis Bus Riders aren't falling for it. The "bad apples" General Manager Will Hudson refers to are members of the Amalgamated Transit Union. Hudson would like nothing more than to use one union to break the power of another.

After the meeting, Garner said, he would "like to see driver-rider unity." Drivers and riders standing in solidarity against cuts and managerial abuses could do a lot to take the heat off of the people riding and driving the busses and shine some sunlight on the racist policies that guide the Memphis Area Transit Authority.

Photo: Memphis Bus Rider Union member addresses the audience at the union's recent meeting. Emmaline Raines/PW

Supreme Court strikes down most of Arizona immigration law

Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:52:00 +0000

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down three parts of Arizona's immigration law today, but permitted one of the key parts to stand in a split decision.

The court declared that Arizona overstepped its authority by creating state crimes targeting undocumented people.

One of those provisions in the Arizona law made it a state crime for undocumented people who fail to carry registration papers, and another made it a state crime to solicit work. The third part of the law struck down allowed state and local police to arrest immigrants without a warrant in some cases.

The Court permitted a key part of the law to stand. The provision requires state and local police to check the immigration status of people they've stopped or detained if a "reasonable suspicion" exists that they're in the country illegally.

But the High Court indicated that even that remaining section could face further legal action.

"The Supreme Court's decision to invalidate most portions of Arizona's SB 1070 is an important victory for fair-minded Americans," said Javier Morillo, president of Minesota's Service Employees International Union, Local 26. "Although the most odious part of the law, 'the show me your papers' provision, was not enjoined, we take heart in the reaffirmation by the Court that we cannot have a patchwork of 50 different state immigration laws.

"To any politician who supports laws like SB 1070, we say this: We will remain vigilant, we will be in the streets protesting and we will be at the ballot box voting."

On perhaps one of the most important issues at stake the court agreed that only the federal government should regulate immigration. The court also left open future challenges, which unions and immigrant rights groups - in other lawsuits against SB 1070 - are pursuing.

SEIU's Secretary-Treasurer Eliseo Medina declared, "Today, the Supreme Court agreed with us that only the Federal government can regulate immigration but let stand the most egregious section of the law. We will mobilize so that such discriminatory laws never again make it onto the books in any state of the union."

Georgetown Law professor David Cole, a vocal civil liberties advocate, had a positive reaction to the decision and said it validated recent moves on immigration reform by the Obama administration.

He called the decision "almost a total victory for the Obama administration," which had challenged the constitutionality of the Arizona law.

He said the decision signals that Obama's recent immigration directive, halting deportations for many young undocumented immigrants, was legal. The court underscored, he said, that the federal government has broad discretion under the law to decide who to deport.

The judges ruled, in part: "Congress has specified which aliens [his words] may be removed from the U.S., and the procedures for doing so. Aliens may be removed is they were inadmissible at the time of entry, have been convicted of certain crimes, or meet other criteria set by federal law. Removal is a civil, not criminal matter. A principle feature of the removal system is the broad discretion exercised by immigration officials.

"Discretion in the enforcement of immigration law embraces immediate human concerns. Unauthorized workers trying to support their families, for example, likely pose less danger than alien smugglers who commit a serious crime. The equities of an individual case may turn on many factors, including whether the alien has children born in the U.S., long ties to the community, or a record of distinguished military service."

Kris Korbaci, an immigration advisor to Mitt Romney, said that the Obama order was illegal, an apparent disagreement with the Supreme Court ruling.

Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion upheld the entire Arizona law. In a lengthy part of his dissent argument, Scalia too blasted the Obama order.

Photo: Supporters of immigrant rights rally at the Supreme Court in Washington. Charles Dharapak/AP

Southwest baggage handlers fight privatization

Mon, 25 Jun 2012 11:49:00 +0000

The baggage handlers at Chicago's Midway Airport are used to doing some heavy lifting. But their efforts to preserve their living wage jobs against outsourcing by corporate giant Southwest Airlines may take all the muscle they've got.

With their contract negotiations set to begin in July, Transport Workers Union Local 555 reports little progress has been made in countering the airlines demand to outsource up to 20 percent of the ramp agents jobs at Midway, Southwest's largest hub.

"We aren't just talking about money," explains Daniel Chriss, station rep for the 700 local members who work at Midway. This huge unseen workforce doesn't just make sure everyone's suitcase makes it on the right airplane. They also handle critical safety functions, including the winter de-icing of planes. According to Chriss: "We basically handle everything under the wing of the plane." Outsourcing these jobs will inevitably lead to them being filled by temps or even day laborers without the skills, experience or motivation to do what these career employees do.

It's not just muscle, but skill, coordination and hustle that let three to four ramp agents turn a plane around in 25 minutes, explains Juan Cordova, 35, who has worked as a ramp agent for 14 years. Southwest has brought in bigger planes carrying more passengers and their luggage, but is always trying to cut the work force handling them. "We're up to 243 flights a day here at Midway," and mandatory OT is going up. Cordova is the union's alternate district rep. A resident of the Chicago suburb of Blue Island, he is a family man and the father of two. Chriss, 31, a Chicago resident and 12-year employee, is the father of five, ages four to nine, including a pair of twins.

Being career employees means a lot to both men who say their work has been an important part in building the company's success. "We don't want to outsource our jobs," Cordova says. "We're gonna keep on fighting till we get a decent contract."

On June 19, Chriss, Cordova and more than a dozen of their co-workers were off the ramps for a change and inside the cool air conditioning of Midway's terminals. They planned to spend the day reaching out with printed information and conversation to the passengers they serve, explaining their struggle.

Ironically, it turned out it was the flying public reaching out to them: Southwest's computer system had taken a nosedive and an interminable line snaked through the terminal. Anxious passengers turned to the friendly ramp agents for directions and reassurance. Even though the ramp agents were off the clock, they responded cheerfully, directed an elderly passenger to the wheelchair ramp, earnestly outlining the airline's baggage policy, or giving reassurance that flights would still take off. And their luggage would definitely find its way back in to their hands. Clearly these career employees do have a high commitment to their customers and jobs.

The ramp agents said they found the public generally union friendly and supportive.

"These guys are out here on their own time. They must really care about their jobs," said one New York-bound business passenger. "I wonder where the CEO is?"

As a matter of fact, CEO Gary Kelly could be an issue to the public. His 2011 compensation of $3.5 million is more than 50 times that of the guys and gals doing the heavy lifting. He rides a corporate jet, not in 6-across seating like his passengers. Fares are up 10 percent. And some might question why a company whose revenue exceeded $4.1 billion last year with first quarter profits of nearly $100 million is focusing its efforts on eliminating and downgrading jobs and packing more passengers in planes.

"I guess you could say we're not feelin' the love," said the traveler.

Photo: Nick Hopkins/PW

Toronto bans plastic bags

Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:44:00 +0000

In Toronto, Canada, the City Council on June 11 made a snap decision to ban all single-use plastic bags. The resolution came after city Mayor Rob Ford asked council to do away with a bylaw that required stores to charge five cents for plastic bags. Instead, council opted to excise the bags altogether.

The council voted 24-20 to disallow retailers from selling or giving out any plastic shopping bags, effective January 1, 2013.

Though Toronto will follow in the footsteps of U.S. cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle in banning plastic bags, it will notably have become the first major Canadian city to impose such a rule. This development may serve as a glimmer of hope for concerned environmental activists, particularly in light of planned cuts to the Canadian government's environmental assessment process, including the recent firing of top ocean scientists.

Councilor David Shiner said he spontaneously came up with the motion in the middle of the meeting. He noted the importance of environmental concerns and dismissed plastic bags as "junk." He called the ban "the most progressive move that this council has ever made.

"Less plastic use equals less plastic garbage, less litter in the street, and ultimately less cost to taxpayers. Has [this move] been a success? Absolutely, it has."

Activists believe many stores in Toronto will now switch to paper shopping bags, which don't harm wildlife, break down faster, and originate from a renewable source (trees), unlike their plastic counterparts. However, a 2006 British government study raised concern that the actual production of paper bags may have negative environmental impact.

Major supermarkets, however, are expected to eventually use reusable non-paper bags, which will likely have environmental benefits.

"A substantial shift to more durable bags would deliver environmental gains through reductions in greenhouse gases, energy and water use, resource depletion, and water," concluded a 2007 Australian study for a state agency.

Toronto's decision has now drawn the attention of other green-minded councillors across Canada, who are perhaps wondering if they could follow suit:

In Alberta, Alderman Gian-Carlo Carra said his city - Calgary - needs to "embrace the inevitability of the future and get rid of those things," meaning plastic bags.

And in Vancouver, a city that has pledged to become the world's greenest by 2020, getting rid of plastic bags is part of their 10-year plan to reach that goal. But unlike Toronto, said Councillor Andrea Reimer, Vancouver does not currently have the power to impose that kind of legislation, so they're relying on the province.

Fortunately, British Columbia Premier Christy Clark reportedly seemed more open to the idea after Toronto imposed the ban.

"Los Angeles [also] banned them, about [two weeks] before Toronto," said Reimer. "In the time since the Los Angeles ban and Toronto's, we went from saying 'no, we're not considering,' to 'well, we'll put it on the table.' So that's very positive."

Photo: A sign in Palo Alto, Calif. encourages the use of reusable bags in place of plastic ones. Two major California cities - Los Angeles and San Francisco - have now banned plastic bags. Toronto became the first major Canadian city to do the same thing. Paul Sakuma/AP

Obama builds commanding lead among Latinos

Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:54:00 +0000

MIAMI - Latinos seem to be increasingly certain as to who is on their side and who is not.

A new poll released by Latino Decisions and America's Voice shows that President Barack Obama has increased his standing amongst Latinos in battleground states to a "commanding lead" over GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.

Obama recently moved to halt deportations of young undocumented immigrants while continuing to make the case for passing the DREAM Act. The proposed legislation would give undocumented young people who are in college or serving in the military a path to citizenship.

Romney and other members of his party have condemned Obama's move, accusing him of "going around" Congress. Speaking earlier today in front of the National Association of Latino Elected Officials convention in Orlando, Obama answered that charge. "In the face of a congress that refuses to do anything on immigration," he said, "I've said that I'll take action wherever I can. My administration's been doing what we can without the help [of] Congress for more than three years now. Last week we took another step ... We announced that we're lifting the shadow of deportation of deserving young people who were brought to this country as children. It's not amnesty. It falls short of where we need to be, a path to citizenship."

Obama continued, calling on Congress to do more. "Precisely because [the move is] temporary, Congress still needs to come up with a long-term immigration solution, rather than argue that we did this the wrong way, or for the wrong reasons," Obama said. "To those who are saying Congress should be the one to fix this - absolutely. To those who say we should do this in a bipartisan fashion - absolutely. My door's been open for three and a half years. They know where to find me. I've said time and again, 'Send me the DREAM Act, and I'll sign it right away.' And I'm still willing to work with anyone from either party to work for real reform."

For his part, Romney has said that, were the DREAM Act to come across his desk as president, he would veto it.

For the new poll, five swing states - Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, and Virginia - were studied. Obama trounced Mitt Romney by a margin of 63 to 27 percent.

Of course, Latinos are a heterogeneous group, and different Latino national groups tend to have different opinions, some more liberal, some more conservative. For example, Obama has a lesser lead in Florida, beating Romney by only 53 to 37 percent. Here, though the population is diversifying, the largest Latino group is still Cuban Americans, who have traditionally been more conservative and Republican than other Latinos. Still, the Florida results are an improvement in Obama's favor: the results seem to be an increase from a January poll, which showed Obama beating Romney 60-40. Statistically, though, there may have been no change, as the results are within the poll's margin of error.

In the southwest, where the immigration issue looms much larger, Obama took a far greater lead over Romney. In Arizona, Obama received 74 percent support, compared to 18 percent for Romney. The figures for 70 to 22 percent and 69 to 20 percent in Colorado and Nevada, respectively.

The poll also found that Latinos are becoming more supportive of Obama's change to immigration rules favoring DREAM Act-eligible young people. On June 17, two days after Obama announced a halt in deportations of most undocumented youth, another poll, conducted by the same groups found that 49 percent of Latinos were more enthusiastic of Obama, and 14 percent less so. A later poll showed that as people learned more details, they became more enthusiastic about the president, with 58 percent of Latinos now saying they are enthusiastic, and only 9 percent saying they are less so.

All of this could lead to an uptick in turnout of Latino voters at election time. In November 2011, a poll from Latino Voices and Univision found that 33 percent of Latinos were more enthusiastic about voting in 2012 than in 2008; now 48 percent say they are more enthusiastic about voting this year, compared to only 29 percent who say they were more enthusiastic four years ago.

Obama argued that Latinos, and especially the undocumented have no friend in Romney, saying, "In his speech, [Romney] said when he makes a promise to you he'll keep it. Well, he has promised to veto the DREAM Act, and we should take him at his word."

Nationally, 400 people were interviewed in each of the five states, and were weighted appropriately. Overall, the poll had a margin of error of 2.2 percentage points, but because samples were smaller, the margin of error for each state was about 4.9 points. In releasing the poll results, Latino Decisions announced a new website, Latino Vote Matters, aimed at tracking the Latino communities' polling information.

Photo: Obama in the White House Rose Garden June 15, announcing the new rules for undocumented young people, via White House photo service.