Communist Party of Indiana CPUSA

Save Now

2011-02-16T18:21:00.001-05:00

Labor Day Parade in Princeton, IN

2009-08-29T08:58:00.009-04:00

This is an invitation to all Single-Payer supporters to join with the California Nurses Association (CNA)/National Nurses Organizing Committee (NNOC) in the 123rd Labor Day Parade in Princeton, Indiana. The parade is part of the Labor Day Celebrations which is one of the oldest in the Nation and is made up of thousands of working men and women and their families from
the Tri-State area. Join with us in exposing thousands to the concept of Single-Payer. If you have a blue Medicare for All t-shirt we encourage you to wear it. Any pro Single-Payer logo is welcome including signs and banners. We will have a trailer for those who need to ride.

Who: All Single-Payer Supporters

What: Labor Day Parade

When: September 7, 2009 Labor Day 9:00 A.M. Central Standard Time

Where: Princeton, Indiana which is 25 miles north of Evansville

This parade takes two hours to complete depending where you are in the parade line up. We are unit number 3 which means we will get through the parade route in less time.

The best way to get to the parade staging area is to go to the Gibson County Fairgrounds where the parade will end and park your car and then ride the bus to the staging area. I have attached a map of the Fairgrounds that shows the parking areas in black. You can access the parking areas from either entrance. Buses will run back and forth from these areas to the staging area
until the parade starts. After the parade the buses will again make runs to the down town staging area for those who park near the staging area. The main highway and streets in Princeton will close during the parade so driving into or out of the city is very difficult during the parade. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of getting there early. The ideal
time to catch the bus at the Fairgrounds is 7:30 A.M. Central Standard Time but they will continue to run up until starting time.

In addition to the map of the Fairgrounds I have attached the map of the parade route and the additional parade information. You can also access this information and much more at the web site www.labordayassoc.com. There are food booths at the Fairgrounds.

Web site directions: Go to www.labordayassoc.com and on the left side click on “Celebration 2009”. When this page opens up you will see Parade Map and Parade information. This is the same information that is attached. Check out the pictures of past parades. There are more old pictures being added each year.

Directions to the Gibson County Fairgrounds or parade staging area: Coming from the North on US 41 take the first Princeton exit on the ramp into Princeton. This is the second ramp which you will be going east into Princeton on Broadway/Indiana State Road 64. Do not confuse this with
Interstate 64.You will travel 1.25 miles and turn left on Embry Street. This street goes by both the entrances to the Fairgrounds (this is where you can catch the buses to the staging area). Or you can continue east on Broadway/64 for .4 miles to the staging area. You will go to the Courthouse Square and on the east side is Main Street. Turn right onto Main which is
the staging area. You can also get to the staging area by going to the second Princeton Exit off US 41 which is Main Street. You follow it into the staging area.

Coming from the South on US 41 you can take the first exit for Princeton which is Main Street. Follow it north until you arrive at the Parade staging area. To get to the Fairgrounds go the second Princeton exit and take the first ramp which you will be going East on Broadway/Indiana State Road 64.

Do not confuse this with Interstate 64. Go 1.25 miles to Embry Street and turn left. There is a sign for the Fairgrounds but it is easily overlooked. Embry will take you by both entrances to the Fairgrounds.

You can also come into Princeton from the East on Indiana State Road 64. Do not confuse this with Interstate 64. Coming from the North you can take Indiana State Road 57 South or 231 South. Both of these cross 64. Turn right on to 64 and go west until you come to Princeton. The second stop light is Main Street turn left and you will be in the Parade staging area. If you are
going to the Fairgrounds continue on to Embry Street and turn right and follow the street to the entrances to the grounds.

If you have any questions feel free to call me at 812-215-9848 or email me at gfritz@calnurses.org.

See Hoosiers for a Commonsense Health Plan and Citizens United for Universal Health Care/HCHP Northeast Chapter for more information.

See the Labor Day Association for more parade information.

Top Five Health Care Reform Lies—and How to Fight Back

2009-08-13T08:59:00.001-04:00

| PA Editors Blog | August 12, 2009

Lie #1: President Obama wants to euthanize your grandma!!!

The truth: These accusations—of "death panels" and forced euthanasia—are, of course, flatly untrue. As an article from the Associated Press puts it: "No 'death panel' in health care bill." What's the real deal? Reform legislation includes a provision, supported by the AARP, to offer senior citizens access to a professional medical counselor who will provide them with information on preparing a living will and other issues facing older Americans.

Lie #2: Democrats are going to outlaw private insurance and force you into a government plan!!!

The truth: With reform, choices will increase, not decrease. Obama's reform plans will create a health insurance exchange, a one-stop shopping marketplace for affordable, high-quality insurance options. Included in the exchange is the public health insurance option — a nationwide plan with a broad network of providers — that will operate alongside private insurance companies, injecting competition into the market to drive quality up and costs down.

If you're happy with your coverage and doctors, you can keep them. But the new public plan will expand choices to millions of businesses or individuals who choose to opt into it, including many who simply can't afford health care now.

Lie #3: President Obama wants to implement Soviet-style rationing!!!

The truth: Health care reform will expand access to high-quality health insurance, and give individuals, families, and businesses more choices for coverage. Right now, big corporations decide whether to give you coverage, what doctors you get to see, and whether a particular procedure or medicine is covered—that is rationed care. And a big part of reform is to stop that.

Health care reform will do away with some of the most nefarious aspects of this rationing: discrimination for pre-existing conditions, insurers that cancel coverage when you get sick, gender discrimination, and lifetime and yearly limits on coverage. And outside of that, as noted above, reform will increase insurance options, not force anyone into a rationed situation.

Lie #4: Obama is secretly plotting to cut senior citizens' Medicare benefits!!!

The truth: Health care reform plans will not reduce Medicare benefits. Reform includes savings from Medicare that are unrelated to patient care — in fact, the savings comes from cutting billions of dollars in overpayments to insurance companies and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.

Lie #5: Obama's health care plan will bankrupt America!!!

The truth: We need health care reform now in order to prevent bankruptcy — to control spiraling costs that affect individuals, families, small businesses, and the American economy.

Right now, we spend more than $2 trillion dollars a year on health care. The average family premium is projected to rise to over $22,000 in the next decade — and each year, nearly a million people face bankruptcy because of medical expenses. Reform, with an affordable, high-quality public option that can spur competition, is necessary to bring down skyrocketing costs. Also, President Obama's reform plans would be fully paid for over 10 years and not add a penny to the deficit.

We're closer to real health care reform than we've ever been—and the next few weeks will decide whether it happens. We need to make sure the truth about health care reform is spread far and wide to combat right wing lies.

Union families show anti-Obama rally 'what real Americans want'

2009-08-08T11:40:00.009-04:00

Paul Kaczocha | People's Weekly World | August 6, 2009

WAKARUSA, Ind. – In just a few hours on Aug. 5 the Steelworkers Union organized a bus load and several cars from Gary, Ind., to take the two hour trip to this small sleepy town near Elkhart and in the middle of the Amish area also known for RV and trailer construction.

More than 1,200 people from around the area gathered to support President Barack Obama and health care reform amongst other issues.

In contrast, The Young Republicans organized a smaller effort to protest Obama and health care reform efforts.

Earlier in the week many of these same protesters tried to disrupt a forum on health care with Congressman Pete Visclosky, sponsored by the Democratic Alliance group in Chesterton, Ind. The protesters are mounting “recess rallies” nationwide targeting Democrats and the president.

Obama spoke at the bankrupt and recently-purchased Monaco Coach RV manufacturer while supporters and protesters rallied outside. Unemployment in the area is nearly 20 percent in the state where it has reached 11 percent. Obama announced a $39 million stimulus grant to the company that purchased Monaco to make 400 electric trucks.

Ula Woods a school bus driver from Gary said she came to the rally, “to support Obama and his health care plans.” JC, also of Gary and a SEIU member and custodian, said he came “for health care reform and jobs. I am laid off with 59 others.”

Helen Johnson of South Bend, Ind. said “She came to show Obama that we support his efforts to get health care for all the people that don’t have it.”

Mike Olszanski, a retired steelworker from LaPorte, who was standing amongst the anti-Obama protesters with his sign calling for a single payer solution for health care.

“I’m for socialized medicine, and these people are saying that they don’t want the government to do anything with health care. I’m glad I came to show these young Republicans what real Americans want,” he said.

Portuguese Trade Union Job Safety and Health Seminar Sparks Discussions and Demands

2009-08-06T00:07:00.003-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July 30, 2009

Dr. Mariana Alves Pereira from the University of Lusofona located in Lisbon, Portugal sent a strong message to over 75 transportation union leaders that Vibration Acoustical Disease VAD is a problem that requires their immediate attention. She presented study results from over 20 years of research that impressed Seminar participants. This is a relatively new area of research.

This Seminar, organized by the National Federation of Transport and Communication Unions FECTRANS, was led by its coordinator, Amavel Alves. FECTRANS represents subway [metro], railway, bus and truck drivers. Alves opened the Seminar by stating the need for safe and healthier conditions; the need for more studies and research as part of the European Campaign for a safer transportation system.

The main topics of the Seminar, a Seminar that was in part supported by the European Union organizations in charge of transportation, focused on worker fatigue and ergonomics, i.e., musculo-skeletel diseases.

Pereira spoke at length about the growing dangers of Vibro Acoustic Diseases stemming from Low Frequency Noise. She said that many neurological problems which heretofore have been left undiagnosed, now can be labeled and treated.

Manuela Calado an official with the Portuguese government, and related to the European National Agency, reported on efforts by the government to protect workers. But, she said that, it would take the pressure of the trade unions, like FECTRANS, to get these government agencies to do the right thing.

Dr. Frank Goldsmith, former director of Occupational Health for Local 100, Transport Workers Union from New York City, reported on the study of the Health Status of Urban Mass Transit Workers that was conducted a few years ago by Dr. Steven Markowitz of Queens College, City University of New York. The study covered all 60 job titles of the 38,000 bus and subway transit workers employed by the New York City Transit authority.

That groundbreaking report was the first stage of an in-depth study that will be continued in the near future. Problems such as steel dust in the subways, job stress and ergonomic issues for bus operators, and general issues of occupational exposure to carcinogens and respiratory problems were described.

Goldsmith represents the World Federation of Trade Unions at the United Nations.

In an extensive discussion following these reports, the Portuguese union leaders from all part of Portugal, including Lisbon and Porto from the north, reported on their working conditions and the need for continued strong trade union support and demands at the appropriate government agencies. Bus operators, lorry drivers [over the road truck drivers] and subway workers gave example after example of their working conditions and their strategies to protect their members.

Many of them agreed that vibration and noise issues are present in their places of work. The issue of vibration acoustic disease they said was a new one for them, but they were pleased that it was reported and looked forward to taking the appropriate actions.

Fatigue

Anabela Vogado, the occupational health specialist for FECTRANS, in the afternoon session, reported extensively about the increasing pressure to work longer and longer hours per day and week. This has made worker fatigue a major labor issue. She cited European directives in describing the need for trade union actions.

Vogado's report sparked lengthy comments from many of the Seminar participants.

Jose Manuel Oliveria, President of the Railway workers Union [SNTSF] voiced strong support for all the reports and urged quick action.

At the close of the Seminar Alves, himself a subway train operator said that these reports and comments would NOT be put on the shelf. They will be used to develop plans to be brought to the proper officials for action.

The conference was simultaneously translated into both Portuguese and English.

He said that in the current period of economic and financial crisis, all of these issues are all the more important to address. Sitting back and doing nothing is NOT an option.

National Health in Portugal: Specialty Care

2009-08-06T00:04:00.003-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July 26, 2009

Portuguese National Health Service Remains Strong

Based on the post Dictatorship Constitution, the Portuguese National Health Service was established in 1979. Over 90% of the population uses its system of public hospitals and salaried physicians. This needs to be said, because recently, the directives of the European Union, followed too closely by the governing Socialist Party, has allowed some of the funding for the NHS to deteriorate. This opened the door to the insurance monopolies.

This has resulted in the selling of private insurance policies to some people. On the other hand recent attempts to regionalize the NHS were soundly defeated. The struggle continues.

Abortion Rights

Under the NHS, and since a couple of years ago, there are full abortion rights up to 10 to 14 weeks. This being a Catholic country, these rights are all the more significant. It took mass pressure to uphold the rights of women in this regard. In Spain, there are full abortion rights for over 20 years…there the law allows abortions up to 12 weeks.

Personal Medical Records on Data Base

There is a national database of individual medical records so that everyone in the system can have their records pulled up when traveling to any part of the country. This is still a dream on the U.S.

When traveling out of the county and when health services are needed, the cost of the services are fully reimbursed upon return.

Specialized Care? ORGAN TRANSPLANTS

Since 1979, again the new Constitution, organ transplants are a common medical procedure. Under the law, in accidents and similar occurrences, all organs are made available. Only, if people specifically reject this possibility will the organs not be removed. That is the kind of default system that works.

Cost? NO COST AT ALL AT THE TIME OF THE SURGERY AND ALSO THE FOLLOW UP MEDICINES THAT STOP ORGAN REJECTION BY THE BODY.

There is a National Registry of Organs.

As the U.S. goes through its latest struggle to beat off the insurance carriers, medical device, supplies and equipment companies; drug companies and the banks; here in Portugal the people enjoy full health care rights.

Maybe the U.S. needs a constitutional Amendment for the right to health care like what was needed for other crisis and important economic and social issues?

Coalition Politics Portuguese Style: A Case in Point

2009-08-06T00:02:00.002-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July 26, 2009

As most people know, the Portuguese Communist Party is a strong and powerful Marxist – Leninist Party. It has historically taken very robust positions on all of the issues of the international working class movement.

What is not known is that it has an equally aggressive mass electoral policy.

Peniche, For Example

In an earlier Blog, I referred to the United Democratic Coalition –CDU where the PCP along with the Greens and many independent work together. In these coalitions, the final outcomes in terms of leadership, when they win, are not always predetermined.

For example, in the historic town of Peniche with a population of 16,000 people, the Socialist Party has held the Mayor position for decades. Peniche is where the fascist/dictatorship of Salazar jailed members of the Communist Party and others. [It is the 35 anniversary of April 25, 1974 when the dictatorship was overthrown; and 75 years since that prison was built.]

CDU IN PENICHE

Four years ago, the CDU for that town put forward candidates for the:

Town Council
Municipal Assembly/Parliament
Local Boroughs

The CDU was and is made up of the CPC, the Greens and many independents. They all agreed, however, to the Platform of the CPC. The program had simple things like: street lights; taking care of green and garden areas; playgrounds; social support systems and local school development.

The Town Council has 11 members and the CDU won over 50% of the votes. They also won the Assembly and most of the boroughs.

This made Peniche a "Communist Town." As reported earlier, there are 308 towns in Portugal and the PCP heads up 33 of them.

The different thing about Peniche is that the Mayor of the town is not a member of the PCP; which is fine with everyone. Of course, he ran on the PCP platform.
Now that is non-sectarianism at its best.

Note: In Portugal, there are about 60,000 members of the PCP with about one-third being elected to government positions, or about 20,000 PCP serving the public.

Portuguese Transportation Union Leader: Main challenges

2009-08-05T23:58:00.004-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July 27, 2009

Privatization Struggle Highlights Union Focus

Amavel Alves is the co-ordinator of National Federation of Transport and Communication Unions [FECTRANS.] He comes from the subway Metro workers union where he was a train operator/an engineer.

He said that main goal of the labor federation over the past few years was to better focus its work under one umbrella: Industrially and Geographically. He said that FECTRANS is the largest federation of its kind; there is another one, which is far smaller. It is affiliated with the CGTP the National Federation in Portugal.

International Solidarity

While FECTRANS is not officially affiliated with any of the two international federations it works strongly on international labor solidarity. He said that FECTRANS believes in class-oriented trade unionism, "Without a Shadow of a Doubt." He said that the union works with the Trade Union International - TUI associated with the World Federation of Trade Unions.

Three Main Challenges

Alves said that there are three main challenges before the union:

A. Fighting Against the Wage of Privatization. We are struggling to keep our work in the public domain. He said that the current financial and economic crisis caught the privateers "red-handed." "They are a bit more cautious these days." He said that unemployment in Portugal is at it's highest since the end of the dictatorship: 1974.

B. Fighting Against Recent Labor Codes. The labor movement is struggling against the anti-union direction of the European Union and also the current Portuguese government.

C. Struggling to Maintain and Improve Working Conditions. The struggle against increasing working hours is crucial, he reported. Also, casual labor is causing troubles. Truck/lorry drivers are facing increasing driving hours.

More to come; stay tuned

Portugal Takes its Ballots and Street Heat Seriously

2009-08-05T23:55:00.005-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July 24, 2009

In Portugal: 35 Years Since the Revolution:
BALLOTS AND STREET HEAT AT THE FRONT

Traveling to Portugal and of course Lisbon, or any place that you're not familiar with, you always buy a guide to help to focus your limited time. The "Green Guide" by Michelin gives a good description of Portugal and even mentions the dictatorship of Salazar. You learn that it ended in April, 1974. Foders guide marks that date, but little more.

The Lonely Planet guide is far more political, it is published in England. The town of Peniche was highlighted as a good place to visit. Stating that it was the location of one of Salazar's main prisons.

But, what is missing for more politically minded travelers is that Peniche, the Abu Ghraib and Guantanomo, of its time, and after having Socialist mayor's for many years, elected a Communist Party leader as its Mayor three years ago. They could have also said that this wasn't a fluke. Of the 308 municipalities in Portugal, 33 have Communist Party or over 10%.

Thirty-five years ago, April 25, 1974, the dictatorship, lead by Salazar, came an end. The military and peoples' movement brought democracy to the Portuguese people and ever since the Portuguese Communist Party [PCP] has been in the leadership of keeping the promise of democracy, economic and social rights; and peace a reality for workers' and their families.

Year 2009 Balloting/Elections

In the year 2009, the PCP has won important victories in the European Parliamentary elections; and, is looking forward to the elections for national government offices and municipalities in September and October of 2009. After decades of right wing and dictatorships, they take democracy seriously in Portugal.

While the wave of ultra right wing parties had some success in the large European countries; the Communist Parties of Greece and Portugal out paced them. They were not rubbed out completely, but they did not do very well.

At the same time, the Party leads mass demonstrations throughout the country to make it possible for the thoughts and ideas of workers and communities have a voice. As is explained, every form of expression is needed to pressure the government and the employers.

Ballots

In the 2009 EU Parliamentary elections, the PCP polled 10.67% of the vote, which was higher than achieve in the previous similar election in 2005, or 9.1%. The most recent national elections vote, 2005, of the PCP was 7.8%; which was an increase from the 7.0% four years earlier. Municipal elections found the PCP candidates doing even better in 2005 than in the previous local elections where they were voted into 30 municipalities.

In the EU Parliament and the Portuguese Parliament the PCP representation stayed the same.

Street Heat

Keeping the streets hot with demonstration is a hallmark of the PCP. On May 13, 2009, over 250 trade unionists hit the streets to protest the new Labor Code by the National government. On April 25 the 35th Anniversary of the Revolution, over 50,000 marched. On May 1st, MAY DAY, Lisbon had a demonstration of over 250,000 with demonstrations in 55 other Portuguese cities.

And, then on May 25, a coalition of political parties demonstrated for peoples' rights; about 85,000 strong.

Elections in September

National elections will take place on September 27 this year; with municipal elections two weeks later. The Party hopes to improve upon its 7.8% of four years ago; and improve on its 33 cities with Communists in the municipal elections

The Annual Festival of the PCP will precede these national and local elections, September 3-5, 2009. Each year, the Party attracts over 550,000 people. This festival has the traditional foods and speeches and debates.

The main issues have been:

The directives coming from the European unions of increased privatization; cutbacks on pensions and health benefits; increasing the age to retire and other anti-working class and anti women issues; these demonstrations and elections will keep worker and their families alert to the dangers ahead.

They will also, as reported, voice solidarity with trade unions and workers from other EU countries to stop the assault.

More to come; stay tuned!!!

For a relatively small country with 11 million people and 1 million in Lisbon proper [2.3 great Lisbon] this population is ready to fight. [Sweden has 3 million people.]

Portuguese Railway Workers in Major Struggles Against Privatization

2009-08-05T23:50:00.004-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July 25, 2009
Railways in Portugal/European Union: The Union Perspective Against Privatization

As most U. S. railway travelers who look forward to rail travel in Europe and parts of Asia know, similar experiences in the U.S. are rare. The "fast trains" of France, the TGV, are reaching ever corner of the European Union countries. This is both good news and bad news.

Jose Manuel Oliveira, President of the Railway Workers Union [SNTSF], reports this mixed experience.

On the positive side, there are plans to link Lisbon in two ways to the rest of Europe. The "fast train" link would be to France and up to Paris; and the other would be a direct link to Madrid, Spain. These are fully supported by the SNTSF. Another project which does not have their support is to put a similar "fast train" on the cost of Portugal, linking Porto to Lisbon and then South. Oliveira said that the current travel time for that route is already quite short; so the use of valuable resources to reconstruct that line would be a mistake.

There is a problem with the rail gauge between Portugal and the rest of Europe. The Portuguese gauge is narrower; so, it would have to be rebuilt in conformance with the rest of Europe.

The main problem part of these projects is what has not been determined: if these expansion projects would be: fully public; joint ventures with other governments such as the Spanish; or would they be fully private. Regardless of who runs the lines, public money would be main, if not only, financing of the expansion.

After the Dictatorship

The Portuguese system, called the CP system, since the end of the dictatorship in 1974, has been completely public. In a note, Oliveira said that since that same date, all the buses were also made fully public. That meant that there is a fully articulated system between the public trains and buses that needs to be maintained as we go forward, he said.

But, over the past years the public bus lines have been severely cut to the rural areas. This has forced people to buy cars. This has come as a result of EU directives and the government of Portugal going along. It is against all environmental and climate change imperatives.

Suburban train lines are under attack. The new train between Lisbon and the town of Setubal was built with only public moneys but it was turned over to a private company for its running. And, the practices of those running that suburban line are to strongly discourage those workers from joining the union. Security cameras document the activities of the workers and especially if these workers are being engaged by the union.

Wage Growth

From 1993 to the present time the union has been able to win 23 wage increases for the workers; but at the same time the managerial personnel's salaries were increased by 120%.

INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY

Olivier said that his work in the World Federation of Trade Union's Trade Union's, Trade Union International [TUI] for the International of Rail and Transport unions is essential to their work. He is the President of that TUI and the General Secretary is from Brazil. With powerful political organizations such as the European Union making decisions that directly affect workers lives, the WFTU-TUI on this issue can help deter those most dangerous attacks on workers rights and solidarity. Of course, the EU is just a part of the G8's efforts to maintain the goals of the neo-liberal agenda.

This TUI is an independent formation whose members come from the WFTU and the more centrist International Trade Union Confederation ITUC.

The Greens and Portuguese Communist Party Combine in National Elections; A Word On Health and Labor Rights

2009-08-05T23:44:00.007-04:00

Mike Tolochko | PA Editors Blog | July/August 2009 | Portugal
Saturday, July 25, 2009

The Greens and the Portuguese Communist Party United in Elections: A Word About National Health &
Workers Rights: The 1975 Constitution

In the last national elections, the Portuguese Communist Party and the Portuguese Green Party coalitioned under the banner of the CDU: The United Democratic Coalition. In those elections, 4 years ago the CDU elected 15 for the national parliament. The Parliament has a total of 230. The 15 number is determined by the voting strength at the polls and the use of proportional representation. Within the CDU, the PCP won 13 and the Greens 2 to the Parliament.
In the upcoming September 27th elections the CDU will again be the coalition to run. This very different from the actions of the Green Party of Germany and France which acts as a front for corporate interests and opposes labor unions and peoples' economic and social rights.

A Word About Health and Workers' Rights/Vacations

The peoples' victory over the Dictatorship in April 25, 1974 brought about the demand for a new constitution. The dictatorship's constitution was completely discarded and for over a year the peoples' movements discussed and debated a new one. On April 2, 1976 a new Constitution was made legal.

In that Constitution a new set of labor and workers rights were emblazoned in print and law. More on that soon.

In the field of health rights for the people, the Constitution made health care a legal right for all Portuguese. This would cover both the private and public sectors. However, about 30 years later, in 2004, changes started creeping into the system stemming from the lessoning of public financing support for the national health care systems of public hospitals and salaried physicians. This has cleared the way for private insurance companies to offer policies to fill the gaps. Sound familiar? More on this soon.

Under current law, every worker receives 22 days of vacation a year. Under the labor code there is a possibility of adding 3 days.

A Travel Note:

In traveling by car from Lisbon to the southeast areas, you travel over a relatively new bridge that bears a resemblance to the San Francisco Bay Bridge. In fact, with the small streetcars, which resemble the cable cars of the San Francisco in the historic Alfama District; and, the common disasters of earthquakes and fire, in Lisbon in the mid-1770s and in San Francisco in 1906….the comparison are very significant.

That bridge was finished during the Dictatorship in the mid-1960s and it was named the Salazar Bridge. After the revolution, the bridge is now named, the April 25th Bridge.

Stay tuned………..

The invisible program

2009-08-02T09:59:00.001-04:00

New York Times
Paul Krugman
August 1, 2009, 12:05 pm

Matthew Yglesias leads us to a commenter at Marginal Revolution who looks at life expectancy and concludes that “semi-socialized medicine” is good for the young but bad for the old. Tyler Cowen made the same argument in the Times a while back:

On average, European systems are relatively good for the young, who are generally healthy and need treatment for obvious accidents and emergencies, with transparent remedies. European systems are less effective for the elderly, the primary demanders of discretionary medical benefits.

As Yglesias points out, such arguments weirdly miss the fact that older Americans are covered by Medicare. If you say that American health care works well for the elderly, then the part of our system you’re praising is the “socialized” part.

This is part of a broader phenomenon. Everyone’s favorite story about the evils of socialized medicine is the fact that Canadians wait longer for hip replacements. But who pays for hip replacements in the United States? Medicare, in most cases.

So we make fun of people who want to keep the government’s hands off Medicare. But Medicare blindness isn’t just a problem for the rubes.

AFL-CIO NOW BLOG | AFL-CIO Executive Council Calls for Round 2 of Economic Recovery

2009-07-29T13:12:00.005-04:00

The nation’s working families and the economy desperately need a second installment on the Obama administration’s economic recovery plan. That plan, says the AFL-CIO Executive Council,

must focus like a laser beam on job creation.

Along with approving an economic policy statement outlining the urgent need for more economic recovery initiatives, the council, convening for a one-day meeting yesterday in Washington, D.C., also welcomed two new members, Letter Carriers (NALC) President Fredric Rolando and AFGE Vice President Rogelio Flores.

The council honored former council members William Young, who recently retired as NALC president, and AFGE Vice President Andrea Brooks, who died in April. To help support the work of the Alliance for Retired Americans, the council proposed the creation of the Preserving Union Values Charitable Foundation.

Although the first round of economic stimulus has made huge strides is shoring up our economy, the council pointed out in its statement that the Bush administration’s economic legacy created such “economic devastation—in finance, housing and jobs,” that

The challenge of fixing this economic mess is enormous—and urgent. Creating good jobs that cannot be outsourced is central to the solution.

Unemployment is expected to hit 10 percent later this year and remain high in 2010. So far 6.6 million jobs have disappeared since the beginning of the recession in 2007, including 1.9 million manufacturing jobs and 1.3 million construction jobs. For those with jobs, wages are stagnant or shrinking and many workers face forced furloughs. As the council statement says:

It is crystal clear that urgent action from the federal government is needed to boost economic growth and jobs, and invest in America’s future.

Among other investments, a second recovery plan should:

Extend unemployment benefits immediately, by at least seven weeks, to help the hundreds of thousands of workers who would otherwise exhaust their benefits in the near term.
Increase food stamp spending as needed to help families cope with the downturn.
Increase aid to state and local governments.
Bolster the financial stability of independent government agencies such as the U.S. Postal Service.
Increase spending for needed infrastructure and clean energy projects, even for those projects with a time horizon longer than two years.
Click here to read the full statement.

New council member Rolando served as the union’s executive vice president before taking over from Young, who retired earlier this month. In its statement honoring Young’s service, the council says Young, who became NALC president in 2002, took the reins at a time when

the NALC—and the entire union movement—were fighting hard to resist a viciously anti-union White House and Congress….Young is widely recognized as a leader not only of the NALC but of the entire union movement.

Flores joined AFGE in 1968 and held various local and district offices until he was elected as a national vice president in 1996. He takes over the council seat that Brooks occupied from 2005 until her death in April.

Brooks began her union career at Ft. Benjamin Harrison in Indianapolis, rising through the ranks of AFGE while working at the Department of Veterans Affairs. She served for 10 years as president of AFGE Local 490 at the Veterans Affairs regional office in Los Angeles; She was also vice president of the California Labor Federation.

In 2000, she was elected as AFGE’s vice president for women and fair practices in 2000. In its statement, the council says:

Brooks’ name became a synonym for the good causes she believed in and fought for: civil rights, human rights, women’s rights. She declared that she wanted to help mobilize a civil rights movement of every race, culture, orientation and gender identity. She did exactly that…we honor the legacy of more justice and fairness and equality she left behind for us.

In the statement proposing the new charitable foundation, the council says many union workers are concerned that their children and grandchildren may not be able to experience and “cherish the richness of a life of involvement with the labor movement.”

The Preserving Union Values Charitable Foundation would allow active and retired union members to make tax-exempt contributions for

the purpose of preserving and carrying forward the proud heritage of the union movement. We believe many people associated with the labor movement would choose to leave a legacy in this way if given the opportunity….The proposed charitable foundation would ensure that current and future generations of Americans have an opportunity to benefit from the values that made the labor movement a defining force in American history.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney has agreed to head the proposed foundation following his upcoming retirement. Funds raised would be split between the National Labor College (NLC) and the Alliance, which, says the council statement, “has consistently excelled with the quality and effectiveness of its field work.”

Afghanistan: Another Untold Story

2009-07-29T05:05:00.005-04:00

Afghanistan: Another Untold Story
By Michael Parenti

December 05, 2008 "Information Clearinghouse" -- Barack Obama is on record as advocating a military escalation in Afghanistan. Before sinking any deeper into that quagmire, we might do well to learn something about recent Afghan history and the role played by the United States.

Less than a month after the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, US leaders began an all-out aerial assault upon Afghanistan, the country purportedly harboring Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist organization. More than twenty years earlier, in 1980, the United States intervened to stop a Soviet “invasion” of that country. Even some leading progressive writers, who normally take a more critical view of US policy abroad, treated the US intervention against the Soviet-supported government as “a good thing.” The actual story is not such a good thing.

Some Real History

Since feudal times the landholding system in Afghanistan had remained unchanged, with more than 75 percent of the land owned by big landlords who comprised only 3 percent of the rural population. In the mid-1960s, democratic revolutionary elements coalesced to form the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). In 1973, the king was deposed, but the government that replaced him proved to be autocratic, corrupt, and unpopular. It in turn was forced out in 1978 after a massive demonstration in front of the presidential palace, and after the army intervened on the side of the demonstrators.

The military officers who took charge invited the PDP to form a new government under the leadership of Noor Mohammed Taraki, a poet and novelist. This is how a Marxist-led coalition of national democratic forces came into office. “It was a totally indigenous happening. Not even the CIA blamed the USSR for it,” writes John Ryan, a retired professor at the University of Winnipeg, who was conducting an agricultural research project in Afghanistan at about that time.
The Taraki government proceeded to legalize labor unions, and set up a minimum wage, a progressive income tax, a literacy campaign, and programs that gave ordinary people greater access to health care, housing, and public sanitation. Fledgling peasant cooperatives were started and price reductions on some key foods were imposed.

The government also continued a campaign begun by the king to emancipate women from their age-old tribal bondage. It provided public education for girls and for the children of various tribes.

A report in the San Francisco Chronicle (17 November 2001) noted that under the Taraki regime Kabul had been “a cosmopolitan city. Artists and hippies flocked to the capital. Women studied agriculture, engineering and business at the city’s university. Afghan women held government jobs—-in the 1980s, there were seven female members of parliament. Women drove cars, traveled and went on dates. Fifty percent of university students were women.”

The Taraki government moved to eradicate the cultivation of opium poppy. Until then Afghanistan had been producing more than 70 percent of the opium needed for the world’s heroin supply. The government also abolished all debts owed by farmers, and began developing a major land reform program. Ryan believes that it was a “genuinely popular government and people looked forward to the future with great hope.”

But serious opposition arose from several quarters. The feudal landlords opposed the land reform program that infringed on their holdings. And tribesmen and fundamentalist mullahs vehemently opposed the government’s dedication to gender equality and the education of women and children.

Because of its egalitarian and collectivist economic policies the Taraki government also incurred the opposition of the US national security state. Almost immediately after the PDP coalition came to power, the CIA, assisted by Saudi and Pakistani military, launched a large scale intervention into Afghanistan on the side of the ousted feudal lords, reactionary tribal chieftains, mullahs, and opium traffickers.

A top official within the Taraki government was Hafizulla Amin, believed by many to have been recruited by the CIA during the several years he spent in the United States as a student. In September 1979, Amin seized state power in an armed coup. He executed Taraki, halted the reforms, and murdered, jailed, or exiled thousands of Taraki supporters as he moved toward establishing a fundamentalist Islamic state. But within two months, he was overthrown by PDP remnants including elements within the military.

It should be noted that all this happened before the Soviet military intervention. National security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski publicly admitted--months before Soviet troops entered the country--that the Carter administration was providing huge sums to Muslim extremists to subvert the reformist government. Part of that effort involved brutal attacks by the CIA-backed mujahideen against schools and teachers in rural areas.

In late 1979, the seriously besieged PDP government asked Moscow to send a contingent of troops to help ward off the mujahideen (Islamic guerrilla fighters) and foreign mercenaries, all recruited, financed, and well-armed by the CIA. The Soviets already had been sending aid for projects in mining, education, agriculture, and public health. Deploying troops represented a commitment of a more serious and politically dangerous sort. It took repeated requests from Kabul before Moscow agreed to intervene militarily.

Jihad and Taliban, CIA Style

The Soviet intervention was a golden opportunity for the CIA to transform the tribal resistance into a holy war, an Islamic jihad to expel the godless communists from Afghanistan. Over the years the United States and Saudi Arabia expended about $40 billion on the war in Afghanistan. The CIA and its allies recruited, supplied, and trained almost 100,000 radical mujahideen from forty Muslim countries including Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Algeria, and Afghanistan itself. Among those who answered the call was Saudi-born millionaire right-winger Osama bin Laden and his cohorts.

After a long and unsuccessful war, the Soviets evacuated the country in February 1989. It is generally thought that the PDP Marxist government collapsed immediately after the Soviet departure. Actually, it retained enough popular support to fight on for another three years, outlasting the Soviet Union itself by a year.

Upon taking over Afghanistan, the mujahideen fell to fighting among themselves. They ravaged the cities, terrorized civilian populations, looted, staged mass executions, closed schools, raped thousands of women and girls, and reduced half of Kabul to rubble. In 2001 Amnesty International reported that the mujahideen used sexual assault as “a method of intimidating vanquished populations and rewarding soldiers.’”

Ruling the country gangster-style and looking for lucrative sources of income, the tribes ordered farmers to plant opium poppy. The Pakistani ISI, a close junior partner to the CIA, set up hundreds of heroin laboratories across Afghanistan. Within two years of the CIA’s arrival, the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderland became the biggest producer of heroin in the world.

Largely created and funded by the CIA, the mujahideen mercenaries now took on a life of their own. Hundreds of them returned home to Algeria, Chechnya, Kosovo, and Kashmir to carry on terrorist attacks in Allah’s name against the purveyors of secular “corruption.”

In Afghanistan itself, by 1995 an extremist strain of Sunni Islam called the Taliban---heavily funded and advised by the ISI and the CIA and with the support of Islamic political parties in Pakistan---fought its way to power, taking over most of the country, luring many tribal chiefs into its fold with threats and bribes.

The Taliban promised to end the factional fighting and banditry that was the mujahideen trademark. Suspected murderers and spies were executed monthly in the sports stadium, and those accused of thievery had the offending hand sliced off. The Taliban condemned forms of “immorality” that included premarital sex, adultery, and homosexuality. They also outlawed all music, theater, libraries, literature, secular education, and much scientific research.

The Taliban unleashed a religious reign of terror, imposing an even stricter interpretation of Muslim law than used by most of the Kabul clergy. All men were required to wear untrimmed beards and women had to wear the burqa which covered them from head to toe, including their faces. Persons who were slow to comply were dealt swift and severe punishment by the Ministry of Virtue. A woman who fled an abusive home or charged spousal abuse would herself be severely whipped by the theocratic authorities. Women were outlawed from social life, deprived of most forms of medical care, barred from all levels of education, and any opportunity to work outside the home. Women who were deemed “immoral” were stoned to death or buried alive.

None of this was of much concern to leaders in Washington who got along famously with the Taliban. As recently as 1999, the US government was paying the entire annual salary of every single Taliban government official. Not until October 2001, when President George W. Bush had to rally public opinion behind his bombing campaign in Afghanistan did he denounce the Taliban’s oppression of women. His wife, Laura Bush, emerged overnight as a full-blown feminist to deliver a public address detailing some of the abuses committed against Afghan women.

If anything positive can be said about the Taliban, it is that they did put a stop to much of the looting, raping, and random killings that the mujahideen had practiced on a regular basis. In 2000 Taliban authorities also eradicated the cultivation of opium poppy throughout the areas under their control, an effort judged by the United Nations International Drug Control Program to have been nearly totally successful. With the Taliban overthrown and a Western-selected mujahideen government reinstalled in Kabul by December 2001, opium poppy production in Afghanistan increased dramatically.

The years of war that have followed have taken tens of thousands of Afghani lives. Along with those killed by Cruise missiles, Stealth bombers, Tomahawks, daisy cutters, and land mines are those who continue to die of hunger, cold, lack of shelter, and lack of water.

The Holy Crusade for Oil and Gas

While claiming to be fighting terrorism, US leaders have found other compelling but less advertised reasons for plunging deeper into Afghanistan. The Central Asian region is rich in oil and gas reserves. A decade before 9/11, Time magazine (18 March 1991) reported that US policy elites were contemplating a military presence in Central Asia. The discovery of vast oil and gas reserves in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan provided the lure, while the dissolution of the USSR removed the one major barrier against pursuing an aggressive interventionist policy in that part of the world.

US oil companies acquired the rights to some 75 percent of these new reserves. A major problem was how to transport the oil and gas from the landlocked region. US officials opposed using the Russian pipeline or the most direct route across Iran to the Persian Gulf. Instead, they and the corporate oil contractors explored a number of alternative pipeline routes, across Azerbaijan and Turkey to the Mediterranean or across China to the Pacific.

The route favored by Unocal, a US based oil company, crossed Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. The intensive negotiations that Unocal entered into with the Taliban regime remained unresolved by 1998, as an Argentine company placed a competing bid for the pipeline. Bush’s war against the Taliban rekindled UNOCAL’s hopes for getting a major piece of the action.

Interestingly enough, neither the Clinton nor Bush administrations ever placed Afghanistan on the official State Department list of states charged with sponsoring terrorism, despite the acknowledged presence of Osama bin Laden as a guest of the Taliban government. Such a “rogue state” designation would have made it impossible for a US oil or construction company to enter an agreement with Kabul for a pipeline to the Central Asian oil and gas fields.

In sum, well in advance of the 9/11 attacks the US government had made preparations to move against the Taliban and create a compliant regime in Kabul and a direct US military presence in Central Asia. The 9/11 attacks provided the perfect impetus, stampeding US public opinion and reluctant allies into supporting military intervention.

One might agree with John Ryan who argued that if Washington had left the Marxist Taraki government alone back in 1979, “there would have been no army of mujahideen, no Soviet intervention, no war that destroyed Afghanistan, no Osama bin Laden, and no September 11 tragedy.” But it would be asking too much for Washington to leave unmolested a progressive leftist government that was organizing the social capital around collective public needs rather than private accumulation.

US intervention in Afghanistan has proven not much different from US intervention in Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama, and elsewhere. It had the same intent of preventing egalitarian social change, and the same effect of overthrowing an economically reformist government. In all these instances, the intervention brought retrograde elements into ascendance, left the economy in ruins, and pitilessly laid waste to many innocent lives.

The war against Afghanistan, a battered impoverished country, continues to be portrayed in US official circles as a gallant crusade against terrorism. If it ever was that, it also has been a means to other things: destroying a leftist revolutionary social order, gaining profitable control of one of the last vast untapped reserves of the earth’s dwindling fossil fuel supply, and planting US bases and US military power into still another region of the world.

In the face of all this Obama’s call for “change” rings hollow.

Michael Parenti’s recent books are Contrary Notions: The Michael Parenti Reader and the forthcoming God and His Demons. For further information, visit www.michaelparenti.org.

This article also available on Michael Parenti's web site here.

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH CARE HIGH, WEEK OF JULY 16-22, 2009

2009-07-29T03:52:00.004-04:00

Subject: 103+ million minorities suffer disparities in health care system

More struggle is necessary, lets keep it growing! Health Care Reform Now!

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH CARE HIGH, WEEK OF JULY 16-22, 2009
by CASH MICHAELS
The Wilmington Journal
Originally posted 7/28/2009

A newly released report this week by progressive advocates for health care reform cites higher infant mortality rates, lower quality of care, and shorter life expectancies for blacks and other communities of color as just some of the reasons why they fully support President Obama's public option proposal to improve health care, and drive down costs, and provide greater access overall.

The study comes as the Senate Health committee chaired by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) passed a $600 billion health care reform bill Wednesday. The Senate Finance Committee will now have to wrestle with how to pay for the plan. A totally different health care reform package is over in the House with a controversial surtax on the wealthy.

President Obama reiterated this week that he wants health care reform before the August Congressional recess.

The report, "Unequal Lives: Health Care Discrimination Harms Communities of Color in North Carolina," is sponsored by Health Care for America Now (HCAN), a national grassroots movement of progressive organizations.

According to the study, over "103 million people of color [nationally] suffer disproportionately in the health care system." The quality of life and life expectancy for African-Americans, non-white Latinos, Native American and other communities of color is thus considerably less compared to non-Latino whites.

"Communities of color too often have fewer opportunities for regular health services, fewer treatment options, and lower-quality care. People in communities of color are also less likely to have access to comprehensive health care since they have lower incomes and higher rates of uninsurance and underinsurance," noted Dr. Leroy Darkes, director of the Rex Senior Health Center.

In North Carolina, "the infant death rate for whites is 6.3 per 1,000 live births, compared with 11.8 for African Americans," the report says. "Overall life expectancy for African Americans in North Carolina is 6 to 10 years shorter than that of whites. About 54 percent of Hispanics and 22 percent of African Americans in North Carolina are uninsured, compared with 14 percent of whites."

Tar Heel state health disparities, according to the HCAN report, are even grimmer yet:

* In North Carolina, about 14 percent of African-American adults have been diagnosed with diabetes, more than two and a half times the rate for Latinos, and more than 50 percent higher than for whites.

* Among adult African Americans in North Carolina, 10 percent have asthma, compared to 8 percent of whites and 3 percent of Latinos.

* In North Carolina, 31 percent of babies born to Latina women received no prenatal care, compared with 23 percent for African Americans and 10 percent for whites.

* The infant mortality rate for African Americans in North Carolina is more than two and a half times that of whites.

* The mortality rate for blacks in North Carolina is 20 percent higher than for whites and more than three times the rate for Latinos.

* Despite growing evidence of racial disparities in health status and medical services, no system exists in state for collecting comprehensive state and local data on disparities. As a result, many questions about the health of people of color in state remain unanswered. For example, it is not known how many African Americans or Latinos (compared to whites) have forgone care because they can't afford it.

* The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 11.1 percent of North Carolina's labor force is unemployed.

*In North Carolina, 1,547,212 people were uninsured in 2007.

*About 54 percent of Latinos in North Carolina are uninsured, almost four times the rate for whites.

*Health insurance premiums for North Carolina working families have skyrocketed, increasing 75 percent from 2000 to 2007.

*The full cost of employer-sponsored health insurance in North Carolina is projected to grow at an annual rate of 6.9 percent, compared to a 0.6 percent decrease in income.

*About 790,000 working non-elderly adults in North Carolina lack health insurance. That comprises 65 percent of the total non-elderly uninsured population.

The report's facts came from the US Census bureau, the National Center for Health Statistics, the Kaiser Family Foundation, and the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Public Health and Sciences.

Nationally, according to the HCAN study, "Heart disease, diabetes, and cancer account for two-thirds of all U.S. health care costs. African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Native Americans and others who tend to live in neighborhoods with limited opportunities for healthful lifestyles have higher rates of all these diseases, and they fare worse in treatment. Were racial disparities absent from our society, the deaths of more than 880,000 African Americans would have been averted from 1991 to 2000, according to a recent analysis of mortality data."

"Compared to non-Latino whites, African Americans and Latinos are more likely to go without health care because they can't afford it," the report continued. "A larger share of African Americans and Latinos lack a usual place of health care, and they are less than half as likely as whites to have a regular doctor."

"Low-income Americans and people of color always score lower in measures of preventive health, such as frequency of cancer screenings and other well-visit checkups, ''the HCAN report states." Inequities in health are accompanied by disparities in health insurance coverage. They also have the highest rates of uninsurance. The lack of quality, affordable coverage makes these populations less likely to receive medical care and more likely to fall into poor health and die early, according to government analysts.''

"The implications…," the report maintains, given that the US Census Bureau projects that 62 percent of the US population will consist of people by the year 2050, ''…are profound.''

When it comes to fixing the disparities, the HCAN report recommends:
*Coverage should be backed by adequate reimbursement rates and effective performance incentives that promote provider participation, change the inefficient behavior of doctors and hospitals, and promote improved health for people of color.

*Substantial improvements in health and life expectancy will be achieved by addressing the social determinants of health, including a clean environment, occupational safety, safe neighborhoods and access to nutritious food.

*The nation must address chronic shortages of health professionals in communities of color and marginalized populations.

* Congress should implement mechanisms to support safety-net institutions and drive quality-improvement initiatives in all health care settings.

* Stakeholders and the public should be given good data by insurers and health care providers on race, ethnicity and ethnic sub-population, socioeconomic position, primary language, age, gender, and gender identity.

HCAN recently lobbied Congress to support Pres. Obama's health care plan, and specifically pressured Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) to join the effort.

"My colleagues and I on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee have been working on a plan to reform the health care system in this country," Sen. Hagan, whose office says she was always in support of Obama's public option, said in a statement last week. "We have crafted a plan that will stabilize health care costs and includes a Community Health Insurance Option, which I support. It is a backstop option for people without access to affordable coverage. Health care providers will not be required to participate, payment rates will be set in a competitive fashion, and the community health insurance option will compete on a level playing field with private health insurance plans in the gateway."

Hagan voted with the Democratic majority on the committee Wednesday to approve that measure.

Part of the pressure on Hagan came from a telephone conference call she had with NCNAACP Pres. Rev. William Barber, Lynice Williams, executive director of NC Fair Share, and community activist Stella Adams. It was during that call that it was made clear to the Guilford County Democrat that forcing private health insurers to compete with a government-run health care insurer would indeed allow more of the poor an communities of color access and the coverage that they need.

"Organizing works," declared Williams, whose NC Fair Share is one of the HCAN advocacy groups that released the report Wednesday. "It took a while, but after weeks of relentless pressure from her constituents, including busloads coming from North Carolina to Washington, D.C., Sen. Kay Hagan endorsed a strong public option."

CEOs Get One-Third of All Pay; Bank of America Uses Taxpayer $$ for Lobbying

2009-07-27T21:23:00.004-04:00

by Tula Connell
AFL-CIO Blog
July 22, 2009

Two news items out today highlight how far the nation needs to go in re-balancing the economy toward working people.

First, Think Progress points to a Wall Street Journal analysis that shows more than one-third of all pay in the U.S. now goes to executives and other highly-paid employees.

Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total U.S. pay in 2007, the latest figures available. The compensation numbers don't include incentive stock options, unexercised stock options, unvested restricted stock units and certain benefits.

The Wall Street Journal based its analysis on Social Security Administration data, which doesn't count billions of dollars more in pay that remain off federal radar screens that measure wages and salaries.

Next, it turns out that Bank of America, which received $45 billion in taxpayer-funded bailout support, has spent more than $1.5 million lobbying on Capitol Hill.

The Charlotte, N.C., company wants flexibility on spending the bailout funds and also wants to fend off restrictions on executive compensation, home mortgage lending and credit card fees. The bank also is lobbying on a consumer rights bill, on student lending issues, on a bill that would've allowed bankruptcy judges to alter mortgages and on a proposed federal regulatory oversight agency.

And none of its positions on any of these bills would help working families.

As we noted in April when we released the AFL-CIO Executive PayWatch data, the Bank of America lost nearly $2.4 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008 due to deeper than expected trading and loan losses. Even after receiving billions of dollars in taxpayer money, the bank plans to eliminate up to 35,000 jobs over the next three years-but CEO Kenneth Lewis collected nearly $10
million in 2008, more than 400 times the average amount a bank teller is paid each year. Since becoming CEO in April 2001, Lewis received $134 million in pay, bonuses,
stock awards and pension accruals.

As Think Progress notes, between 1979 and 2006, the inflation-adjusted after-tax income of the richest 1 percent of households increased by 256 percent, compared with 21 percent for families in the middle income quintile.

While U.S. worker productivity has skyrocketed over the past 30 years, wages have not kept pace.

America's working middle class made it clear last November that they wanted change-and reshaping the nation's economic framework to strengthen the middle class and close the wage disparity between the very top and the rest of us, is fundamental to that change.

Autoworkers Letter to Obama

2009-07-23T13:22:00.002-04:00

To: President Barack Obama
From: Concerned Autoworkers, Retirees And Supporters
Re: Auto Industry Crisis & Global Climate Change

Date: July 14, 2009

Dear President Obama,

Your administration has reported that 400,000 jobs in the auto industry have been lost during the economic downturn. Though some jobs have been saved, many more will be lost through the bankruptcy restructuring implemented by the Auto Task Force at Chrysler and GM. Economists are predicting a slow recovery at best and, in any event, the market for autos and trucks will remain diminished for years to come. We in Detroit and in the automobile and manufacturing centers throughout the Midwest are faced with a major crisis for which a comprehensive solution is required.

We believe that the economic crisis is interwoven with an environmental one - that, in the words of NASA scientist Jim Hansen, we face an "irreversible tipping point" if we don't act swiftly to reduce our carbon footprint and therefore positively impact global climate change. We believe this fact requires rethinking our country's manufacturing priorities. Instead of laying off workers and devastating working-class communities, we believe the combination of crises demands a bold proposal that can put people back to work and address global climate change. We believe this
can be done, and done creatively.

Until the recent fall in vehicle sales, auto use was contributing 20% of all annual U.S.greenhouse gas emissions (more than four tons per person) and 40% of
all U.S. oil consumption. Yet of the 90% of Americans who drove to work in 2007, 76% drove alone. Fewer than 5% used public transportation. Eighty percent of the total U.S. population lives in metropolitan areas, with 30% in the cities. Yet few cities outside New York City have an adequate system of public transportation.

Clearly we must turn from an energy-inefficient, auto-centered society to one that increasingly uses mass transit along with energy-efficient vehicles. That means prioritizing buses, light rail, high-speed trains and the tracks they run on. Manufacturing also needs to
be geared toward building wind and water turbines as well as solar panels. Instead of attempting to resuscitate automobile companies, we should be building a Transportation and Energy Industry for the 21st century.

Your administration has taken a positive first step by creating two blue ribbon task forces; The White House Task Force on Middle Class Families, called "Promoting American Manufacturing in the 21st Century", chaired by Vice-President Biden, and the "White House Council on Automotive Communities and Workers", under the leadership of Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis and Larry Summers, your Chief Economic Advisor. You have charged them with the tasks of preparing American industry for the future and supporting "manufacturing communities and workers."

We welcome these initiatives and urge you to ensure that the size of the ideas being considered match the size of the problems we face. The problems confronting us must be addressed holistically, the leadership must be visionary in its approach and the solutions must be innovative and far-reaching rather than politically expedient crisis management. To that
end, we offer the following ideas:

First, because, we the people are now major stockholders in GM and Chrysler, we believe that it
would be in the national interest to assume direct ownership of the GM and Chrysler plants that are closed or closing (as interest on our investment) to expedite
the retooling and conversion of these plants for the manufacture of the products that we have mentioned above.

We must start now, so that by 2010 we will be well on our way to creating the jobs of tomorrow. We have the facilities, the equipment, the skilled workers to be able to complete this in record time. All we need is the political will to do so.

We know this is not a pipe dream because it was at the start of U.S. involvement in World War II that a massive conversion of existing auto plants for war-time production was completed in just eight months. The obstacles that had to be overcome were not technical, but political. It behooves you and your administration to take on the threat of global climate change - and
the dislocations in the automobile industry - with the same sense of urgency and gravity that President Franklin Roosevelt acted upon then.

Additionally, it is our understanding that Chrysler and GM own a large number of patents for green technology. We encourage a thorough review of these patents and believe that any technology that GM and Chrysler own that they have no plans on utilizing in the next three years, be appropriated (again, as interest on investment) and uses found for these technologies.

Your administration is in a position at this moment of great peril, to create a new paradigm - for addressing the US role in industrial manufacturing and taking the
lead on combating global warming. We urge that - in this defining moment - you reiterate your pledge that "yes we can!"

Signed,

Bill Alford, former President, UAW Local 235 (AAM),Detroit, MI
Theresa Barber, UAW Local 663, Anderson, IN
Al Benchich, former President, UAW Local 909 (GM), Warren, MI
Edward Blakley, UAW Local 653, Pontiac, MI
Michael Bloom, UAW 549, Mansfield, OH
Tony Browning, UAW Local 1700, Sterling Heights, MI
Brenda Caldwell, retiree, UAW Local 977, Marion, IN. Metal Fabricating Plant
Allen Cholger, Staff Rep., United Steelworkers, District 2
M. Crosby, UAW Local 2209, Ft. Wayne, IN
Connie DeVol, retiree, UAW Local 2151, Coopersville, MI(closed)
Dave Elsila,
Katie Elsila, UAW Local 1981
Dianne Feeley, UAW Local 235 (AAM), Detroit, MI
Bill FletcherJr., Center for Labor Renewal, co-author - SolidarityDivided
Lydia Fischer Ghana Goodwin-Dye, President, UAW Local 909, Warren, MI
David Green, Detroit Democratic Socialists of America,
Frank Hammer, UAW-GM International Representative, retired
Julie Hurwitz, Attorney
Michael Heaton, C.A.W Local 1285 (Chrysler)
Robert Ingalls, UAW (retired)
Barbara Ingalls, ITU/CWA
Glenn Jackson, UAW Local 5960, Lake Orion, MI
Cheryl Jameson, UAW Local 292, Kokomo, IN
Michael S. Japowicz Sr., UAW Local 594, Pontiac, MI
Florence Katroscik, UAW Local 909 Retiree, Warren, MI
John Kavanaugh, UAW Local 235(AAM) Detroit (retired)
Jack Kiedel, UAW Local 686, Lockport, NY
Thomas Lacas, G.M. Unit, CAW Local 199, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
Sharon McAlpine, UAW Local 235, AAM, Detroit MI, Toolmaker
Lew Moye, UAW Local 110 Retiree, St Louis, MO
Elly Leary, UAW Local 422, Framingham, MA
Robert E. Niethe, UAW Local 686, Lockport, NY, retired
Hiroko Niethe, UAW Local 686, Lockport, NY, retired
Glenn Brian Reday, GM UAW recently retired, Local 435 Wilmington, DE
Eric V. Reuther, son of UAW pioneers, Victor and Sophie Reuther
John S. Reuther, son of UAW Pioneer, Victor G. Reuther
Alexander "Sasha" Reuther, grandson of UAW Pioneer Victor G. Reuther
Michael Rynca, UAW Local 5960, Pontiac, MI
Joretta Rynca, UAW Local 651, Flint, MI
Paul Schrade, former UAW International Executive Board Member
Clay Smith, UAW Local 2166, Shreveport, LA
Jeffrey Stallman, IUE798, GM Moraine (closed Dec. 23, 2008)
Sam Stark, UAW retiree
Thomas W. Stephens, Policy Analyst, City of DetroitCity Council
James Theisen, UAW Local 212, Sterling Heights, MI
Wendy Thompson, former President UAW Local 235 (AAM) Detroit, MI
Carole Travis, former President,UAW Local 719, LaGrange, IL (retired)
Jerry Tucker, former UAW International Executive Board Member
Brett Ward, UAW Local 1700, Sterling Heights, MI
L. M. Wittek, UAW Local 2151, Retired, Coopersville, MI
Robert M. Woods, UAW Local 699, Saginaw, MI

Please send all correspondence to:

Autoworker Caravan
c/o Frank Hammer
20033 Renfrew
Detroit, MI 48221

Reprinted from Portside
portside.org

Media on ‘card check’ Wrong or just missing the point?

2009-07-23T13:13:00.000-04:00

Author: John Wojcik
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 07/23/09 12:59

Just days after the New York Times and other media outlets reported recently that a group of senators “dropped” the majority sign-up provision of the Employee Free Choice Act, the Service Employees International Union responded with an online petition campaign demanding that both houses of Congress schedule an up or down vote on the provision, either as part of the EFCA or by itself.

When he released the petition SEIU President Andy Stern said, “By giving workers the fair choice to join unions and not their bosses, majority signup allows workers to have a voice on the job. Congress needs to hear about your support for majority signup.”

“As we have said from day one, majority signup is the best way for workers to have the right to choose a voice at their workplace,” he said.

When the stories about the “death of card check” broke, a spokesperson for Sen. Tom Harkin, the Iowa Democrat who is shepherding the bill through the Senate, denied the existence of any such agreement.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney indicated that what he called “speculative reports” about the “dropping” of card check were not the main issue regarding the legislation.

“A bill will be signed into law this year giving workers – not their bosses – the choice about how to form a union,” he declared.

Stern pointed out, “The Employee Free Choice Act is going through the usual legislative process and we expect a vote on the majority signup provision in the final bill or by amendment in both houses of Congress.”

The so-called deal that the media reports claimed would scuttle “card check,” as majority signup is sometimes called, was just one of many “compromises” floated recently among senators. All the compromises considered seriously by Harkin, the senator has said, involve keeping the intent of majority signup while finding a way to get the 60 votes needed to prevent a Republican filibuster against the EFCA.

None of the media reports about the negotiations pointed out that majority signup has been the way workers designate a union as their representative since the Wagner Act was passed during the Great Depression. Taft-Hartley amended that after World War II to allow companies the option of requiring a “secret ballot” election.

There would be no need for any talks about compromise were it not for several Blue Dog conservative Democratic senators who claim they support labor law reform but want to preserve secret ballot elections in the process.

Some of the proposed compromises discussed involve workers mailing their signed union authorization cards or even completed ballots directly to the NLRB.

Senators Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania are among the senators Harkin and the unions have been pressuring, according to one of the People’s Weekly World’s labor sources who said, “The thinking there probably is that if Pryor goes along with something, so will Blanche Lincoln and the rest of the ones sitting on the fence.”

There are reports that among the revisions are ones that would require union elections five days after 30 percent of the workers signed authorization cards, another that would forbid companies from requiring workers to attend captive audience meetings, and one that would give union organizers access to company property.

The reports in the Times and elsewhere also neglected to mention that Harkin has said he will not agree to any measure that does not uphold three basic principals – workers getting the right to make an unhampered choice, stiffer penalties for companies that violate labor law, and provisions for arbitration when employers drag their feet in negotiations.

They also did not report that, according to Harkin, in the event of a move to gut any of the core principals, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has agreed that the original measure will be brought to the Senate floor for an up or down vote so “everyone can see where each senator stands.”

The pro-business Workforce Fairness Institute continues to churn out press releases indicating that even a bill without majority signup would be unacceptable. “We see it as a hostile act to have arbitrators telling businesses what they have to do,” the statement reads.

“Majority signup is based in a simple idea,” Stern said as he called for signatures on the SEIU petition. “If a majority of workers say they want a union, they should get a union. It’s the best way to make sure workers have a full and free choice to join a union without interference or harassment.”

jwojcik@pww.org

International Indigenous Hip Hop Gathering - Which Side Are You On?

2009-07-21T15:00:00.002-04:00

This is a great example of fighting working class culture in action. Which side are you on? Click here to listen.

Employee Free Choice Stuggle for Card Check

2009-07-17T11:18:00.007-04:00

The New York Times today reported Democrats Drop Key Part of Bill to Assist Unions. Evidently,

A half-dozen senators friendly to labor have decided to drop a central provision of a bill that would have made it easier to organize workers.

Card check is the most important provision of the legislation, and would have "required employers to recognize a union as soon as a majority of workers signed cards saying they wanted a union."

Efforts continue to add provisions to the revised legislation that would offer some protections to workers involved in union drives. One would require employers to give union organizers access to company property. Another would bar employers from requiring workers to attend anti-union sessions that labor supporters deride as “captive audience meetings.”

While these provisions may be helpful, the struggle for card check may continue if the AFL-CIO leadership and rank and file organized labor maintains the focus on that important initiative.

In a period of a continuing attack on real wages, the importance of working people uniting to fight to meet our needs and limit or end exploitation at the work place is vital. The claims by business forces that card check is anti-democratic can only be characterized as cynical and hypocritcal, coming from people who do everything possible to limit democratic rights in the work place and in the larger society in favor of their own self-interest.

The New York Times article can be found here.

In a related statement on July 13th, a few days before the Senator's statement, "President Barack Obama is telling labor leaders he remains committed to passage of a bill that would make it easier to form unions, but he's not offering any timeline." This reinforces the need to continue to struggle for card check. A strong union force in the United States is a key component to dealing with many of the social challenges we face today, balancing the power of big business, and bringing millions of people's voices to the table.

Hard-hit Gary stops garbage pickup

2009-07-16T16:36:00.008-04:00

Paul S. Kaczocha
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 07/15/09 16:19

GARY, Ind. – In another sign of the economic crisis hitting working class cities around the country, angry residents and laid off city workers rallied in front of this city’s new General Services building. The crowd brought uncollected garbage and dumped it in front of the building sign. This was only the second day of a stop in the collection of household waste here.

The issue started in October last year when Mayor Rudy Clay announced that the city was going to privatize the garbage collection and start charging its over 28,000 households a $12 monthly fee for trash pickup, under a no-bid contract with Allied Waste, a subsidiary of RSG Inc. which made over $2 billion last year.

The citizen group, Miller Citizen Corporation (MCC), took the city to court, arguing that garbage collection was part of the property taxes residents pay. Ultimately the courts ordered the city to bid the contract, declaring that the fee had to be approved by the City Council and that people’s water could not be cut off for lack of payment of the garbage fee.

Another citizens group, the Central District Organizing Project (CDOP), also joined the fight supporting the 49 laid-off city workers, many of whom were at the rally.

The MCC charged that according to the city’s own figures it cost only $2.9 million annually to pay the workers with benefits, pay for fuel and maintain the equipment, while Allied Waste was charging over $5 million on top of the $2 million tipping fee the city already pays to them. The city argues that it is trying to save money and close a $26 million dollar gap in the budget.

The issue came to a head last week when the City Council voted 6-3 against charging residents the $12 fee, many arguing that there was not even a signed contract yet with Allied. As a result garbage collection ceased this week.

The head of the MCC, attorney Douglas Grimes, charged at the rally that the city “did not need to privatize a basic service that had been done by the city for over 100 years.” He also charged that Allied had a 36 percent profit margin.

“Private enterprise is not here to help you unless they can help themselves, privatization is rarely cheaper,” he added. “The city can rehire these workers and begin to collect garbage again. Just walk down the street and you can see the garbage trucks behind the fence.” The MCC and CDOP, which organized the rally, urged citizens to take their garbage to City Hall.

Lori Peterson, from the CDOP, charged the city with dereliction of duty for saying that they were no longer going to pick up the garbage. “It’s like saying they won’t send out an EMT, fireman or police if someone calls in need,” she stressed.

The workers also spoke about how they had taken 23 percent in cuts to save their jobs and had been lied to when the city laid them off. The Teamsters Union is fighting the layoffs, which did not occur by seniority amongst other issues. Allied had rehired some of the younger, less experienced workers.

“We all live here in Gary, and they hired a company from out of the city and hire outside the city,” the workers charged.

Both the MCC and CDOP are demanding a rehiring of the workers, an end to the fee and the resumption of city-based collection.

Healthcare: Change the Debate Support a Real Public Option

2009-07-15T16:22:00.005-04:00

Dear Friends,

In mid-May, in an effort to reach consensus, President Obama secured a deal with the health insurance companies to trim 1.5% of their costs each year for ten years saving a total of $2 trillion dollars, which would be reprogrammed into healthcare. Just two days after the announcement at the White House the insurance companies reneged on the deal which was designed to protect and increase their revenue at least 35% The insurance companies reneged on the deal because they refuse any restraint on increasing premiums, copays and deductibles - core to their profits. No wonder a recent USA Today poll found that only four percent of Americans trust insurance companies. This is within the margin of error, which means it is possible that NO ONE TRUSTS insurance companies.

Then why does Congress trust the insurance companies? Yesterday HR 3200 "America's Affordable Health Choices Act," a 1000 page bill was delivered to members. The title of the bill raises a question: "Affordable" for whom?.

Of $2.4 trillion spent annually for health care in America, fully $800 billion goes for the activities of the for-profit insurer-based system. This means one of every three health care dollars is siphoned off for corporate profits, stock options, executive salaries, advertising, marketing and the cost of paper work, (which can be anywhere between 15 - 35% in the private sector as compared to Medicare, the single payer plan which has only 3% administrative costs).

50 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 million are under insured while for-profit insurance companies divert precious health care dollars to non-health care purposes. Eliminate the for-profit health care system and its extraordinary overhead, put the money into healthcare and everyone will be covered, everyone will be able to afford health care.

Today three committees will begin marking up and amending HR3200. In this, one of the most momentous public policy debates in the past 70 years, single payer, the only viable "public option," the one that makes sound business sense, controls costs and covers everyone was taken off the table.

In contrast to HR3200 ... HR676 calls for a universal single-payer health care system in the United States, Medicare for All. It has over 85 co-sponsors in Congress with the support of millions of Americans and countless physicians and nurses. How does HR-676 control costs and cover everyone? It cuts out the for-profit middle men and delivers care directly to consumers and Medicare acts as the single payer of bills. It also recognizes that under the current system for-profit insurance companies make money NOT providing health care.

This week is the time to break the hold which the insurance companies have on our political process. Tell Congress to stand up to the insurance companies. Ask members to sign on to the only real public option, HR 676, a single-payer healthcare system.

Hundreds of local labor unions, thousands of physicians and millions of Americans are standing behind us. With a draft of HR3200 now circulating, It is up to each and every one of us to organize and rally for the cause of single-payer healthcare. Change the debate. Now is the time.

The time to act is now!

Sincerely Yours,
Dennis

PS - Over the next several months, I will be engaging all of you with frequent updates and will ask you to continue a movement to fight for what needs to be done now; ending this war in Iraq and stopping the escalation in Afghanistan, attaining true single-payer healthcare for all Americans, standing up for my brothers and sisters of organized labor.

After you have contacted your member of Congress, please tell us your thoughts and ideas on how you are organizing your friends and neighbors towards a single-payer movement and all of the other issues that are important to us.

Contact us at feedback@kucinich.us.

Jobs or Income Now for Working Families In The Current Economic Crisis

2009-07-11T02:41:00.017-04:00

Ok, here are the facts as reported on July 9 in the New York Times and elsewhere:

The official national unemployment rate is 9.5%. That is huge. Unofficial figures run closer to 15% unemployment.

The count for continuing unemployment claims is 6.88 million people today, many of those people part of a struggling family and community. This is the most people officially unemployed since records started to be kept in 1967. And this doesn't include the many millions of people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits.

GM has emerged from bankruptcy. After receiving over $30 billion tax dollars to help it deal with the economic crisis, the "new" GM plans to layoff between 30,000 and 40,000 people in the USA.

The New York Times in a different article on July 1 reported "In the first report, construction spending fell more than expected in May, a sign the problems facing the nation’s builders are far from over."

In a report entitled Joblessness Hits 9.5%, Deflating Recovery Hopes, on July 2 the New York Times reported

“The numbers are indicative of a continued, very severe recession,” said Stuart G. Hoffman, chief economist at PNC Financial Services in Pittsburgh. “There’s nothing in here to show that the economy and the market are pulling out of the grip of recession.”

What is the point of all this doom and gloom? Something is wrong with the way we are responding to the current economic situation.

People need to be working. We have a social responsibility to ensure that the basic needs of working families are met by providing work at living wages or equivalent funds to keep us going while unemployed.

Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman wrote on July 2 that,

[s]ince the recession began, the U.S. economy has lost 6 ½ million jobs — and as that grim employment report confirmed, it’s continuing to lose jobs at a rapid pace. Once you take into account the 100,000-plus new jobs that we need each month just to keep up with a growing population, we’re about 8 ½ million jobs in the hole.

And the deeper the hole gets, the harder it will be to dig ourselves out. The job figures weren’t the only bad news in Thursday’s report, which also showed wages stalling and possibly on the verge of outright decline. That’s a recipe for a descent into Japanese-style deflation, which is very difficult to reverse. Lost decade, anyone?

Wait — there’s more bad news: the fiscal crisis of the states. Unlike the federal government, states are required to run balanced budgets. And faced with a sharp drop in revenue, most states are preparing savage budget cuts, many of them at the expense of the most vulnerable. Aside from directly creating a great deal of misery, these cuts will depress the economy even further.

As a society we have to take care of our working families. We have, in my opinion, a social responsibility to provide work or wages to all our unemployed regardless of legal status or country of origin, bar none. Families should not be homeless. People should not be forced to beg for food money on the medians between traffic lanes. Our youth should graduate high school and college with work available to them.

The brutality of the current situation is not a result of the policies or practices of working people in the United States. The current crisis is a crisis of overproduction. It is not a result of the lack of foresight or lack of savings by working families. It is a result of the internal systemic problems endemic to capitalism.

The situation has to be addressed with urgency. Families are suffering. People are going hungry. Foreclosures and evictions continue to run rampant.

A program for Jobs or Income Now is needed today.

Sign the Petition for a National Cesar E. Chavez Holiday!

2009-07-10T14:43:00.003-04:00

The United Farm Workers and the Cesar E. Chavez Foundation are proud to support the grassroots efforts of the Cesar E. Chavez National Holiday Coalition.

Cesar was in Sen. Robert F. Kennedy’s words, "one of the heroic figures of our time." He led the historic non-violent movement for farm worker rights and dedicated himself to building a movement of poor working people that extended beyond the fields and into cities and towns across the nation.

He inspired farm workers and millions of people who never worked on a farm to commit themselves to social, economic and civil rights activism. Cesar’s legacy, like the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., continues to educate, inspire and empower people from all walks of life. He is a role model for all Americans and for generations to come.

Please help us ensure all Americans learn about Cesar’s life and work. The Cesar Chavez National Holiday Coalition is gathering signatures on petitions asking Congress to designate March 31, Cesar’s birthday and the day the UFW was founded, as Cesar Chavez Day. Sign the petition today. Help ensure Cesar's legacy is recognized and celebrated throughout our nation with a federal paid holiday and a day of service and learning in our public schools.

The petition is available here.

Full Petition Text:

Petition to President Obama and members of the U.S. Congress

I call on the U.S. Congress to establish an official federal paid holiday in honor of Cesar E. Chavez, the late president of the United Farm Workers, on his birthday, March 31. This should include a Cesar Chavez day of service-learning and community action.
Signed by:

[Your name]
[Your address]

Let Senator Bayh Know We Stand for HR676 and S. 703

2009-07-08T16:44:00.006-04:00

As the discussion on health care moves forward, its important to participate in the process, and not to leave it to the big business interests to define what kind of health care system reforms are enacted. Please take a moment to call Senator Bayh and let him know you stand with the thousands who have expressed support nationally for HR676 - the National Health Care System, also known as Medicare for All. The senate version of this bill is called S. 703.

Senator Bayh can be contacted at:

1650 Market Tower
10 West Market Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 554-0750

or

131 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-5623

Contact information for the Senator's other regional area addresses are available here.

Background information on this issue is available from Hoosiers for a Commonsense Health Plan and Physicians for a National Health Program.

Tell Senator Bayh that single-payer health reform is the only practicable way to achieve his stated goal of universal, comprehensive coverage at an affordable price.

Only single payer, by redirecting the vast sums wasted annually on bureaucracy and paperwork back into care, can assure high-quality coverage for everyone with no net increase in U.S. health spending. Only single payer can rein in costs.

Lesser reforms, with or without a “public option,” won’t fix our broken system.

The World Condemns the Coup in Honduras, Supports Zelaya's Return

2009-07-06T16:46:00.027-04:00

The struggle to reunite the Honduran people with their democratically elected president, Manuel Zelaya, continues today.

Many in the United States find ourselves watching aghast and angered as the Honduran coup criminals act with flagrant brutality against the people of Honduras to try to achieve an anti-democratic strike against the Honduran working people's struggle.

The coup leader's desperate attacks on the Honduran people in an attempt squash support for President Zelaya is resulting in many woundings and deaths.

As reported in El Pais:

A nurse whose name cannot be mentioned guided him through rooms full of people wounded by bullets. "They have been arriving for several nights," she explained, "the police bring them and leave them here. All of them were shot during the coup. Some of them are in very bad shape. ... None of this is reported in the newspapers."

Did President Zalaya break Honduran law, as the coup leadership claims? No!

As reported by ALBERTO VALLENTE THORENSEN in CounterPunch's article Behind the Honduran Coup: Why Zelaya's Actions Were Legal:

The Honduran Supreme Court of Justice, Attorney General, National Congress, Armed Forces and Supreme Electoral Tribunal have all falsely accused Manuel Zelaya of attempting a referendum to extend his term in office.

According to Honduran law, this attempt would be illegal. ...

Nevertheless, this is far from what President Zelaya attempted to do in Honduras the past Sunday and which the Honduran political/military elites disliked so much. President Zelaya intended to perform a non-binding public consultation, about the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly....

Furthermore, the Honduran Constitution says nothing against the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly, with the mandate to draw up a completely new constitution, which the Honduran public would need to approve. ...

...The National Constituent Assembly’s mandate would come directly from the Honduran people, who would have to approve the new draft for a constitution, unlike constitutional amendments that only need 2/3 of the votes in Congress. This popular constitution would be more democratic and it would contrast with the current 1982 Constitution, which was the product of a context characterized by counter-insurgency policies supported by the US-government, civil façade military governments and undemocratic policies.

For what crimes against the rich is President Zelaya being persecuted? As reported by Interconnect:

Since Zelaya became president Honduras has:

a.. Increased the minimum wage.
b.. Improved working conditions of teachers.
c.. Instituted measures to re-nationalize energy-generating plants and the telephone system.
d.. Joined Petrocaribe, the oil-sharing plan begun by Venezuela.
e.. Joined ALBA, the Venezuelan-led trade bloc.
f.. Delayed formal accreditation of US Ambassador Hugo Llorens.
g.. Called for a national referendum to replace the Honduran constitution.

Zelaya has worked to loosen the death grip of US capital and Honduran oligarchies on the country's resources, supported labor, and tightened relationships with regional partners.

The Organization of American States, the European Union, and most Latin American countries have denounced the coup. President Obama has not yet called the coup a coup, which would have legal ramifications in the United States, but he has expressed support for the people protesting against the coup. Some Honduran towns have declared they do not recognize the coup government, and two army battalions are standing against the coup.

It is urgent to express support for the democratic rights of the people of Honduras. Please call President Obama at 202-456-1111 and ask that he call for the return of President Zelaya and Chancellor Rodas, and denounce the coup as a coup, which would result in ending US aid to Honduras until President Zelaya's return.

Central Indiana Club Asks Indianapolis' 7th Congressional District To Support HR676

2009-07-02T08:23:00.011-04:00

The Communist Party CPUSA Central Indiana Club is initiating a letter writing campaign to request of our Congressman, Andre Carson, that he renew his support for a single-payer national health insurance system by co-sponsoring HR 676, the U.S. National Health Insurance Act. HR 676 is also known as the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act.

Single-payer national health insurance would save enough on administrative paperwork - more than $300 billion per year - to provide comprehensive coverage to all Americans. It would provide full choice of doctor and hospital for patients, and unleash physicians from arbitrary corporate dictates over patient care. It would control the health expenses currently crippling our economy and provide for a wholesome revitalization of our democratic values.

Congressman Carson, like his grandmother Julia Carson, has a proud history of strongly supporting HR 676. Congressman Carson co-sponsored the bill in the 110th Congress.

More information on HR676 is available at Hoosiers for a Common Sense Health Plan, Physicians for a National Health Program, and HealthCare-NOW!.

Please write personal letters and snail mail them to Congressman Carson at:

Congressman André Carson
Julia Carson Government Center
300 East Fall Creek Parkway North Drive, #300
Indianapolis, IN 46205
Phone: (317) 283-6516
Fax: (317) 283-6567

We believe that a personal letter is the best way to get your support for HR676 heard by the Congressman.

Reforming health care requires getting rid of the insurance companies. Anything less may have some positive overall effect but won't get to the heart of the matter; the health insurance companies siphoning off billions of dollars for useless administrative fees and big dollar executive pay. HR 676 reinstates the patient-physician relationship as the primary health care relationship, increases democratic control over one of the biggest and most expensive sectors of our economy, and removes a layer of parasites from the health care system. Retraining for current workers in that sector is included in the bill.

We hope that you will take the time to write to Congressman Carson and ask that he again endorse HR 676, the National Health Insurance Bill.

A sample letter is included below.

Thank you.

Sample Letter:

Congressman André Carson
Julia Carson Government Center
300 East Fall Creek Parkway North Drive, #300
Indianapolis, IN 46205

Dear Congressman Carson:

Thank you for your past support for HR 676, the United States National Health Care Act.

Now that Democrats control Congress, the time is ripe to rally round a comprehensive solution for America’s failed, fragmented, irrational, cruel, wasteful, and costly health care system.

While the elderly and the disabled are covered by popular Medicare and the poor have Medicaid, most working families must rely on the shrinking value of employer-based private health insurance or they are among the 46.6 million who have no health insurance at all. This disarray persists even as we spend more than two trillion dollars a year on health care, two to three times per capita of any other country.

Reforms around the edges of the system won't work. The administrative cost of keeping the many insurance companies, with their redundant and complex paper work and costs, must be removed from the system in order to use that money to provide actual health care benefits.

Currently, unions worry about the affordability of adequate coverage and businesses struggle with the soaring costs of coverage while foreign competition, mostly countries with national health insurance, is totally free of that expense.

Please renew your support for the comprehensive solution, HR 676, the Conyers Medicare For All Bill, also known as the United States National Health Care Act. Huge savings would accrue from drastically simplified administration plus the proven efficiency of a universal risk pool. In the last Congress, you joined with at least 79 other Democrats in resisting the well-financed opposition of the insurance industry and signed on as a cosponsor of HR 676. Please let me know you are now ready to renew your commitment to a single-payer health system or, if not, why not. I look forward to your response on this most pressing domestic issue.

As Martin Luther King said in 1966, "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane."

Sincerely,

Your Name

Leaflet/Petition for Single Payer Healthcare (HR676)

2009-06-12T10:41:00.003-04:00

Please feel free to use this leaflet to petition for Single Payer Healthcare, HR676.

Write info@indianacp.org if you would like the leaflet in ODT or DOC format for editing.

What is going on?

2009-02-17T20:57:00.003-05:00

Today's New York Times (NYT) is reporting that GM told the federal government it needs

to increase its loan request to $30 billion, $12 billion more than it had initially sought, to avoid a bankruptcy filing.

At the same time GM announced it

planned to cut 47,000 jobs out of a total of 244,000 around the world by the end of the year. About 20,000 of the job losses will come in the United States, as well as five more plant closings beyond those previously announced.

What is the point of a bailout during a fiscal crisis that results in tens of thousands of jobs lost? The only way to approach the fiscal crisis is to think in terms of the actual lives of working families. Ridiculous paper bailouts that provide billions to corporations so they can be on a better footing for their rich investors while slashing jobs is a travesty of the crisis that is devastating the lives of millions of working people today.

Comforting the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted

2009-02-13T08:22:00.004-05:00

According to the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02/04/business/20090205-bailout-totals-graphic.html) the government has already actually dispersed $2 trillion, and made commitments of $8.8 trillion in trying to respond to the fiscal crisis.

The way the money was committed:

$4.6 trillion: The Government As Investor
$2.4 trillion: The Government As Lender
$1.8 trillion: The Government As Insurer

Jobs saved=0

A.I.G. alone received commitments of $53 billion.
Bear Stearns alone received commitments of $29 billion.

35% of the new "stimulus" bill passed is tax breaks that will help the rich.

See the Krugman pieces below. Its stark. As Krugman points out:

Will those public-private partnerships end up being a covert way to bail out bankers at taxpayers’ expense? Or will the required “stress test” act as a back-door route to temporary bank nationalization (the solution favored by a growing number of economists, myself included)? Nobody knows.

I don't know. I don't have the stomach yet to read the bill.

Krugman, in Obama on nationalization, the second article below, says:

Nationalization is actually as American as apple pie.

What threatens to be the abject failure of the Obama administration to produce a viable and realistic plan to address the fiscal crisis is at its heart the result of his lack of a class struggle outlook and focus on bipartisanship, which objectively undermines working class interests.

Again, I'll quote Paul Krugman from The Destructive Center, attached below.

All in all, the centrists’ insistence on comforting the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted will, if reflected in the final bill, lead to substantially lower employment and substantially more suffering.

But how did this happen? Is President Obama’s belief that he can transcend the partisan divide — a belief that results in warping his economic strategy - a sound basis for dealing with the fiscal crisis?

After all, many people expected Mr. Obama to come out with a really strong stimulus plan, reflecting both the economy’s dire straits and his own electoral mandate.

Instead, however, he offered a plan that was clearly both too small and too heavily reliant on tax cuts. Why? Because he wanted the plan to have broad bipartisan support, and believed that it would. Not long ago administration strategists were talking about getting 80 or more votes in the Senate.

We are asked to be grateful that something, anything, was done to address the fiscal crisis. The whole discussion around dealing with the criris, and its focus on the institutions of wage slavery (banks, mortgage vendors, insurers, and other rotten meat clinging to the terminally ill body of the capitalist vulture), is wrong.

We need as a society to focus on the needs of working families. Let the bankers drown in their red ink. Working families have mouths to feed and homes to warm.

To reiterate:

Nationalization is actually as American as apple pie.

There are different types of nationalization. The best reform response to the current fiscal crisis is to nationalize the structures of the economy and bring them under centralized and democratic control of the government. In the end, socialism is the only real solution to this crisis, and the ones that will follow as long as we wallow in the morass of capitalism, a system that is out of tune with its own productive forces and the needs of the people who must survive its inequities.

February 13, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
Failure to Rise
By PAUL KRUGMAN
By any normal political standards, this week’s Congressional agreement on an economic stimulus package was a great victory for President Obama. He got more or less what he asked for: almost $800 billion to rescue the economy, with most of the money allocated to spending rather than tax cuts. Break out the Champagne!

Or maybe not. These aren’t normal times, so normal political standards don’t apply: Mr. Obama’s victory feels more than a bit like defeat. The stimulus bill looks helpful but inadequate, especially when combined with a disappointing plan for rescuing the banks. And the politics of the stimulus fight have made nonsense of Mr. Obama’s postpartisan dreams.

Let’s start with the politics.

One might have expected Republicans to act at least slightly chastened in these early days of the Obama administration, given both their drubbing in the last two elections and the economic debacle of the past eight years.

But it’s now clear that the party’s commitment to deep voodoo — enforced, in part, by pressure groups that stand ready to run primary challengers against heretics — is as strong as ever. In both the House and the Senate, the vast majority of Republicans rallied behind the idea that the appropriate response to the abject failure of the Bush administration’s tax cuts is more Bush-style tax cuts.

And the rhetorical response of conservatives to the stimulus plan — which will, it’s worth bearing in mind, cost substantially less than either the Bush administration’s $2 trillion in tax cuts or the $1 trillion and counting spent in Iraq — has bordered on the deranged.

It’s “generational theft,” said Senator John McCain, just a few days after voting for tax cuts that would, over the next decade, have cost about four times as much.

It’s “destroying my daughters’ future. It is like sitting there watching my house ransacked by a gang of thugs,” said Arnold Kling of the Cato Institute.

And the ugliness of the political debate matters because it raises doubts about the Obama administration’s ability to come back for more if, as seems likely, the stimulus bill proves inadequate.

For while Mr. Obama got more or less what he asked for, he almost certainly didn’t ask for enough. We’re probably facing the worst slump since the Great Depression. The Congressional Budget Office, not usually given to hyperbole, predicts that over the next three years there will be a $2.9 trillion gap between what the economy could produce and what it will actually produce. And $800 billion, while it sounds like a lot of money, isn’t nearly enough to bridge that chasm.

Officially, the administration insists that the plan is adequate to the economy’s need. But few economists agree. And it’s widely believed that political considerations led to a plan that was weaker and contains more tax cuts than it should have — that Mr. Obama compromised in advance in the hope of gaining broad bipartisan support. We’ve just seen how well that worked.

Now, the chances that the fiscal stimulus will prove adequate would be higher if it were accompanied by an effective financial rescue, one that would unfreeze the credit markets and get money moving again. But the long-awaited announcement of the Obama administration’s plans on that front, which also came this week, landed with a dull thud.

The plan sketched out by Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, wasn’t bad, exactly. What it was, instead, was vague. It left everyone trying to figure out where the administration was really going. Will those public-private partnerships end up being a covert way to bail out bankers at taxpayers’ expense? Or will the required “stress test” act as a back-door route to temporary bank nationalization (the solution favored by a growing number of economists, myself included)? Nobody knows.

Over all, the effect was to kick the can down the road. And that’s not good enough. So far the Obama administration’s response to the economic crisis is all too reminiscent of Japan in the 1990s: a fiscal expansion large enough to avert the worst, but not enough to kick-start recovery; support for the banking system, but a reluctance to force banks to face up to their losses. It’s early days yet, but we’re falling behind the curve.

And I don’t know about you, but I’ve got a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach — a feeling that America just isn’t rising to the greatest economic challenge in 70 years. The best may not lack all conviction, but they seem alarmingly willing to settle for half-measures. And the worst are, as ever, full of passionate intensity, oblivious to the grotesque failure of their doctrine in practice.

There’s still time to turn this around. But Mr. Obama has to be stronger looking forward. Otherwise, the verdict on this crisis might be that no, we can’t.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/obama-on-nationalization/
Obama on nationalization
Paul Krugman
Felix Salmon is impressed by President Obama’s response to a question about nationalization of banks. Me, not so much.

Yes, Obama is impressively articulate and well-informed — and his response shows that he has actually considered the issue. It’s light-years better than what we’ve grown accustomed to in recent years.

But his two main arguments aren’t actually very good. Yes, we have thousands of banks — but the problems are concentrated in a handful of big players. In fact, the Geithner plan, such as it is, already acknowledges this: the “stress test” is to be applied only to banks with assets over $100 billion, of which there are supposed to be around 14.

And the argument that our culture won’t stand for nationalization — well, our culture isn’t too friendly towards bank bailouts of any kind. Yet those bailouts are necessary; and even in America they may be more palatable if taxpayers at least get to throw the bums out.

Oh, and not a week goes by without the FDIC taking several smaller banks into receivership. Nationalization is actually as American as apple pie.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/opinion/09krugman.html
February 9, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
The Destructive Center
By PAUL KRUGMAN
What do you call someone who eliminates hundreds of thousands of American jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, undermines schools, but offers a $15,000 bonus to affluent people who flip their houses?

A proud centrist. For that is what the senators who ended up calling the tune on the stimulus bill just accomplished.

Even if the original Obama plan — around $800 billion in stimulus, with a substantial fraction of that total given over to ineffective tax cuts — had been enacted, it wouldn’t have been enough to fill the looming hole in the U.S. economy, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will amount to $2.9 trillion over the next three years.

Yet the centrists did their best to make the plan weaker and worse.

One of the best features of the original plan was aid to cash-strapped state governments, which would have provided a quick boost to the economy while preserving essential services. But the centrists insisted on a $40 billion cut in that spending.

The original plan also included badly needed spending on school construction; $16 billion of that spending was cut. It included aid to the unemployed, especially help in maintaining health care — cut. Food stamps — cut. All in all, more than $80 billion was cut from the plan, with the great bulk of those cuts falling on precisely the measures that would do the most to reduce the depth and pain of this slump.

On the other hand, the centrists were apparently just fine with one of the worst provisions in the Senate bill, a tax credit for home buyers. Dean Baker of the Center for Economic Policy Research calls this the “flip your house to your brother” provision: it will cost a lot of money while doing nothing to help the economy.

All in all, the centrists’ insistence on comforting the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted will, if reflected in the final bill, lead to substantially lower employment and substantially more suffering.

But how did this happen? I blame President Obama’s belief that he can transcend the partisan divide — a belief that warped his economic strategy.

After all, many people expected Mr. Obama to come out with a really strong stimulus plan, reflecting both the economy’s dire straits and his own electoral mandate.

Instead, however, he offered a plan that was clearly both too small and too heavily reliant on tax cuts. Why? Because he wanted the plan to have broad bipartisan support, and believed that it would. Not long ago administration strategists were talking about getting 80 or more votes in the Senate.

Mr. Obama’s postpartisan yearnings may also explain why he didn’t do something crucially important: speak forcefully about how government spending can help support the economy. Instead, he let conservatives define the debate, waiting until late last week before finally saying what needed to be said — that increasing spending is the whole point of the plan.

And Mr. Obama got nothing in return for his bipartisan outreach. Not one Republican voted for the House version of the stimulus plan, which was, by the way, better focused than the original administration proposal.

In the Senate, Republicans inveighed against “pork” — although the wasteful spending they claimed to have identified (much of it was fully justified) was a trivial share of the bill’s total. And they decried the bill’s cost — even as 36 out of 41 Republican senators voted to replace the Obama plan with $3 trillion, that’s right, $3 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years.

So Mr. Obama was reduced to bargaining for the votes of those centrists. And the centrists, predictably, extracted a pound of flesh — not, as far as anyone can tell, based on any coherent economic argument, but simply to demonstrate their centrist mojo. They probably would have demanded that $100 billion or so be cut from anything Mr. Obama proposed; by coming in with such a low initial bid, the president guaranteed that the final deal would be much too small.

Such are the perils of negotiating with yourself.

Now, House and Senate negotiators have to reconcile their versions of the stimulus, and it’s possible that the final bill will undo the centrists’ worst. And Mr. Obama may be able to come back for a second round. But this was his best chance to get decisive action, and it fell short.

So has Mr. Obama learned from this experience? Early indications aren’t good.

For rather than acknowledge the failure of his political strategy and the damage to his economic strategy, the president tried to put a postpartisan happy face on the whole thing. “Democrats and Republicans came together in the Senate and responded appropriately to the urgency this moment demands,” he declared on Saturday, and “the scale and scope of this plan is right.”

No, they didn’t, and no, it isn’t.

598,000 Jobs Lost as Jobless Rate Hit 7.6% in January

2009-02-06T09:36:00.004-05:00

As a reminder of the urgency of help for working families, the New York Times reports on February 7, 2009 that the

country moved into its second year of uninterrupted job losses last month, with companies shedding another 598,000 jobs — the most since December 1974 — and the unemployment rate moving up to 7.6 percent, the Labor Department reported on Friday.

While the Congress dithers over political gains, the Republicans keep pressing for tax help for the rich, jobs have become an endangered species in the US economic environment.

Economists had forecast a loss of 540,000 jobs and a unemployment rate of 7.5 percent. The jobless rate is at its highest since September 1992.

Job losses were once again spread across both manufacturing and service industries, reinforcing the picture of an economy that is contracting at its fastest pace in decades.

Employers in the United States have shed jobs every month since January 2008, for an aggregate decline in payroll employment of about 3.2 million.

The Labor Department also revised its numbers from December, saying that the economy lost 577,000 jobs compared with an initial reading of a loss of 524,000.

It is not adequate to the challenge to talk about bailouts that don't address the day to day crisis in the lives of working families by halting foreclosures and evictions for any reason, by extending unemployment benefits to all who are unemployed regardless of the reason, by insuring that unemployment benefits provide a living wage, and by stopping businesses from taking bailout funds and using them to protect their own limited interests at the expense of their employees and the communities in they operate and to whom they provide services.

As the NYT reports,

“Businesses are panicked and fighting for survival and slashing their payrolls,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “I think we’re trapped in a very adverse, self-reinforcing cycle. The downturn is intensifying, and likely to intensify further unless policy makers respond aggressively.”

The idea that this is a self-reinforcing cycle highlights once again the structural nature of the crisis and the demands of the time to think outside the capitalist context and look at nationalization and other mechanisms to address the issues facing working families today.

Even as the concrete realities of the time tend to raise the question of socialism, so the media have hightened their endless ranting against the socialist alternative. As this article is being written NPR is airing a piece on the role of anti-communist Lech Walesa and Solidarity in Poland. The report is interviewing all sorts of anti-communist people from Eastern Europe on how "capitalism" is normal; effectively arguing that its better to starve under capitalism than eat under communism.

This does not address the real situation here in the United States today.

For the last several months, analysts said, the United States has increasingly been trapped in a vicious circle of slumping consumer demand, falling business investment, mounting losses in the banking system, and rising unemployment, which was 7.2 percent in December.

The problems are not going to disappear due to tax cuts or other magic pills that the henchmen of capital might propose; solutions that continue the trend toward the greater and greater disproportionate distribution of wealth that underlies the current crisis.

As a result, the monthly pace of job losses shot up to about 500,000 a month for the last three months of 2008. Economists see no hint that the bottom has been reached.

Most economic forecasters had been expecting a loss of roughly 500,000 jobs in January, at least as bad as in December, because other indicators of the job market had been trending down as well. Last week, the number of Americans filing first-time jobless claims reached a 26-year high, with 626,000 filling out initial applications.
Major retailers, rocked by one of the worst holiday shopping seasons in memory, have been shutting stores and laying of armies of workers in recent weeks. On Thursday, the nation’s retailers reported that sales fell 1.6 percent in January, the fourth consecutive month of steep sales declines.

And in sign that the country’s slowdown continues to reach beyond its borders, Canada, America’s largest trading partner, reported Friday that its unemployment rate jumped to 7.2 percent in January, from 6.7 percent in December.

In Washington, Friday’s gloomy job report put more pressure on Congress to pass an economic stimulus bill. The House passed a bill last week that would provide more than $800 billion in spending and tax cuts. In the Senate, still bogged down by objections from Republicans, lawmakers were hoping to be able to muster enough votes to pass a measure on Friday

For comparison, the unemployment rate was 4.9 percent in January 2008. But some analysts contend that the current unemployment rate understates the labor market’s problems because the percentage of adults participating in the labor force has slumped in recent years, and those people are not listed as “unemployed.”

Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland, estimated that if the labor force participation rate today was as high as it was when President Bush took office, the unemployment rate would be 9.4 percent.

Ian Shepherdson, chief North American economist for High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, N.Y., said the government had become the only source of energy left to break the cycle of slumping demand for goods and falling production.

“The public sector needs to act,” Mr. Shepherdson wrote in a note to clients. “It needs to prevent an endless spiral of attempts to increase saving, leading to reduced spending, leading to reduced incomes, leading to further attempts to raise savings, and so on.”

“We remain firmly of the view that the package now in Congress is the bare minimum required to slow the shrinkage of the economy over the next year.”

Many economists expect that the economy will continue to contract until July at the very least, but at a slowing pace in the second quarter. That would make it the longest recession since the 1930s, outlasting the two record-holders, the mid-1970s and early 1980s downturns. Each of these recessions lasted 16 months. The current recession, which started in December 2007, would reach that milestone in April.

The Federal Reserve continues to pump money into the financial system at a furious pace. Since September, the central bank has more than doubled its reserves, from $900 billion to more than $2 trillion, by literally creating new money.

The Fed has used some of that money to help bail out financial institutions, from Citigroup and Bank of America to the American International Group.

It has been pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into new lending programs, stepping in for banks and other financial institutions to buy up a widening array of corporate debt. Later this month, the Fed will begin a $200 billion program, in conjunction with the Treasury, to finance consumer debt ranging from car loans and credit card debt to student loans.

But analysts say that the big problem is not a shortage of money, but a shortage of demand for products by businesses and consumers. As a result, banks are overloaded with excess reserves, made available by the Fed, which they are often simply parking at the Fed.

Obama Set to Add Republican to Cabinet

2009-02-04T08:17:00.011-05:00

As Jeff Zeleny of the New York Times (NYT) mentions in his 2/3 article,

If a new political breeze is blowing in the capital, perhaps the best evidence can be found in this: A Democratic president selects a Republican senator to serve in the cabinet. The Democratic governor with the power to fill the Senate seat signals that he will leave it in Republican hands, depriving his party of a chance to reach 60 votes, a magic number when it comes to passing legislation.

Is bi-partisanship the change that sixty million people voted for? Is the focus on bi-partisanship a calculation based on the vote counts in the last election and designed to ensure support for an Obama second term? Will the Republican members of the Cabinet be effective advocates for the President's agenda. What is the class content of bi-partisanship?

Barack Obama Town Hall at Anderson High in Anderson, IN on April 26, 2008

Certainly Senator Judd Gregg is partisan. He told the Administration that "he would not serve if a Democrat was to fill his seat." Replacing Senator Gregg with an appointed Democrat would have consolidated the power of the Democrats in the Senate.

As Senator Gregg said:

“I have made it clear to the Senate leadership on both sides of the aisle and to the governor that I would not leave the Senate if I felt my departure would cause a change in the makeup of the Senate,” he said. “The Senate leadership, both Democratic and Republican, and the governor understand this concern, and I appreciate their consideration of this position.”

The focus on bipartisanship is evidently an overarching concern for President Obama.

Even when the possibility of putting a Democrat in Mr. Gregg’s Senate seat dimmed, Mr. Obama pressed ahead, telling his advisers that it was more important to build a bipartisan cabinet than increase his Senate majority.

As regards the class content of bipartisanship,

James M. Demers, a New Hampshire Democrat who was a leading supporter of Mr. Obama’s presidential bid, said selecting Mr. Gregg as commerce secretary would send a signal to Republicans that the president was serious about building a bipartisan team with diverse viewpoints. Mr. Demers said it could also ease suspicion among fiscal conservatives about Mr. Obama’s agenda.

The fiscal conservatives are among the folks that created the fiscal crisis. If fiscal conservatism relates to limiting debt or "fiscal responsibility" as a justification for attacking Social Security and Medicare in the current crisis then the class content is clear; these are anti-working class trends.

While the President continues to push for the much needed bailout, and for expanding labor's ability to organize, there are contradictory trends in the Administration. In the face of zero Republican votes in the House for the fiscal stimulus, the President continues to push for bipartisanship. This concern gives voice to a party, the Republicans, that suffered near complete renunciation at the polls in the last election. Rather than allowing the Republicans to water down the initiatives that the President desires to undertake on behalf of working families in the United States, it would be good to push hard to get as much as possible passed to undo the decades of conservative, primarily but not only Republican, financial devestation that has been wrought on working families.

The measure of success in a changed Washington is not how the Administration pursues bipartisanship in the mistaken belief that everyone wants what is best for the country as a whole. The measure of success is whether the needs of working families, those without access to health care, the unemployed, organized labor, the disabled, the immigrant, and the downtrodden, the young, and the oppressed get help in our struggle to live and meet our basic needs.

Class struggle from below in the form of large grass roots movements in support of the needs of working families and our allies is needed as much today as ever to counterbalance the influence of big business and their allies in the policy-making process and help to create space for the President to provide the promised change that goes far beyond bipartisanship, change that provides concrete help to working families.

I remember Winnie

2009-02-03T09:38:00.006-05:00

I remember Winnie
Author: Jarvis Tyner, executive vice chair, Communist Party USA
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 05/08/04 00:00

Henry Winston, the former national chairman of the Communist Party USA, was a great leader of our party. I had the honor and privilege of working with him for over 30 years. He was a wonderful comrade, my teacher and a very dear friend. I will always remember Winnie.

This year is the 93rd anniversary of Henry Winston’s birth. He was born April 2, 1911, in Hattiesburg, Miss. Winston’s grandparents lived under slavery. Born and raised under the system of Jim Crow, Winnie grew up to become one of the finest Marxist-Leninist thinkers and organizers that the U.S. working class has ever produced.

At the age of 11 his family moved to Kansas City, Mo. Hard economic conditions forced him to drop out of high school after two years. This was the beginning of the Great Depression. Like so many others, he ended up finding the movement of the unemployed. He took part in great struggles against hunger and unemployment and the movement to defend the Scottsboro youths. He was active in the Southern Negro Youth Congress and the National Negro Congress.

At age 19, Winston joined the Young Communist League, where his remarkable leadership abilities made it possible for him to rise from the post of Ohio organizer to that of national administrative secretary in a relatively short time. During that period Winston joined the Communist Party. He ultimately was elected the CPUSA’s national chairman at the Party’s 18th Convention in 1966. He spent over 20 years as national chairman as part of a team with Gus Hall, the Party’s outstanding general secretary.

I first met Henry Winston in 1961 in Philadelphia. He had recently been released from federal prison. Winston was a victim of the infamous anticommunist Smith Act. He had been convicted along with 11 other leaders of the CPUSA (for thinking, as Gus Hall often would say) and was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison. Their “crime” was basically being a leader of the Communist Party and advocating an end to war, racism, economic oppression and calling for a socialist USA. Like today under the Bush administration’s Patriot Act, the U.S. government then was trying to outlaw all dissent. Outlawing the Communist Party USA was the first step.

Winston and his comrades were political prisoners. By standing up for their rights, they were really upholding the highest principles of free speech and the right to advocate change,

including revolutionary change. They dared to stand up against the postwar anti-Soviet Cold War hysteria created by imperialism – and led by U.S. imperialism – in order to rationalize its drive for world domination.

They were real patriots and should have been treated like heroes for their great work on behalf of the working class and racially oppressed. Instead they were criminalized; they were hounded and persecuted. But through it all they consistently upheld the banner of the right to dissent, of peace, economic and social justice and freedom for all. They refused to join the anti-Soviet chorus of cold warriors who were acting on behalf of imperialism and its military-industrial complex. They were anti-imperialist and believed in proletarian internationalism and socialism. That was their “crime.”

From my time as a youth leader, I cherish the times I had with Winnie. To meet Henry Winston and to be a part of the Party headed by him and Gus Hall was a great experience for young revolutionaries. The Party was full of hundreds of seasoned working-class people of all races and nationalities, men and women who shared with us a wealth of knowledge. Henry Winston was the best. It could be said that he never left the youth movement because he gave his heart and soul to the education of the younger activists. We all loved him for that.

Winston’s organizational and political skills were legendary. I witnessed his mastery of the politics of organization every day for many decades. Having been a Communist political prisoner himself, Winston played a superb leadership role in the international fight for Angela Davis’ freedom. He truly understood the fight against racism, the need for unity and how to build broad, mass movements.

He played an outstanding pioneering role in the U.S. fight to free Nelson Mandela and in solidarity with the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. He led the Party’s work in the anti-apartheid struggle. His basic thinking helped make the U.S. movement in solidarity with Southern Africa a majority movement. He was the first in the U.S. to call for the boycott of the Republic of South Africa under the slogan of “isolate the racists.” Winston was in close contact with and highly respected by many of the top leaders of the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the African National Congress.

Winston was a master polemicist. The African Communist, the SACP publication, described Winston’s seminal work, “Strategy for a Black Agenda” (International Publishers, 1973), as a “fighting book, written at white heat by someone who is by no means an academic onlooker but a front-line participant in a main battlefield against imperialism.” They characterized the book as “an indispensable weapon for every fighter for the liberation of Africa and her sons and daughters in the USA and Africa.”

This book was soon followed by another, titled “Class, Race and Black Liberation” (International Publishers, 1977). He also delivered many remarkable reports and speeches. Many were made into pamphlets.

Winnie was a special victim of the racism in the U.S. prison system. The African American Communists convicted under the Smith Act were treated more harshly then the others. While serving time in prison, Winston developed a brain tumor. The prison authorities refused his demands for treatment. Winston suffered through weeks of inadequate care and excruciating headaches. Because he was denied proper medical treatment, Winston ultimately lost his sight.

He needed to be released from prison and put under the care of a specialist. The extraordinary lawyer for the Communist Party, John Abt, sprang into action. Abt led the campaign to win an early medical release for Winston. That effort eventually led to President John F. Kennedy granting Winston such a release in 1960.

When Winston was released he uttered these memorable words, “They have robbed me of my sight, but not my vision.”

Winston was quickly put under the care of an able U.S. eye specialist and then went to the USSR for emergency treatment. By that time, however, they were only able to save a small portion of his sight.

Eventually Winston became totally blind. But through all of that, Winnie found the means to be an active, vibrant Communist leader. In that regard Fern Winston, his wife and comrade who recently passed away, was indispensable, as were the various comrades who traveled with Winnie and helped him live an active life. I never saw it firsthand, but a very reliable source told me recently that Winnie loved to go bowling and did well at it. Everyone who knew him admired his great courage and steadfastness.

Despite having gone through what he had, Winston showed no bitterness. He was warm, kind and confident. He had a good sense of humor and a vast knowledge of history, politics and Marxist-Leninist theory. He was fiercely dedicated to the cause of the working class and all oppressed people, a militant foe of all forms of injustice. He was a highly skilled and experienced Party leader who had a great deal of confidence in his people and his class.

That idea of Winnie’s vision became a guide to life for all of us. His vision was the vision of a better world that tens of millions of people all over the world today believe is possible. Henry Winston died on Dec. 12, 1986.

We can move closer to Winston’s vision if we are able to defeat the Bush administration and their policies at the polls this November. Winnie would have been very happy to see that happen.

I will always remember Winnie for his enormous humanism and compassion. He headed what you could call the Party’s “sick and shut-in committee.” If someone was ever ailing for more than a day or so, he or she could expect a call from Winston. I also remember the wonderful barbecue picnics out at his country house and the great times sharing a delicious meal with him and Fern at their apartment in East Harlem.

I remember his great love for music and culture and the great camaraderie between him and Gus Hall, Jim Jackson, William L. Patterson, Ted Bassett, Vic Perlo, John Pittman, and Helen and Carl Winter and other stalwarts. I will never forget the great stories he’d tell and that wonderful smile and infectious sense of humor. But above all, I will remember most his great dignity and confidence as an African American Communist and worker.

Jarvis Tyner is executive vice-chair of the Communist Party USA. He can be reached at jtyner@cpusa.org.

*(see related article below)

Fight racism for unity and progress

By Henry Winston

The giant industrial monopolies, the big banks and insurance companies, the financiers and landowners, all spawn racism and use it as one of their chief class weapons to maintain and defend their regime of exploitation and oppression, of enmity among peoples, of imperialist wars of aggression.

It follows that all democratic and antimonopoly forces, with the working class and Black liberation movement in the van, can effectively defend the interests of the vast majority of people only when they actively further the struggle against racism. This is an essential precondition for the development of a fighting alliance which will unite all democratic and antimonopoly forces in the country.

Marx wrote long ago that “labor in a white skin can never be free so long as labor in the black skin is branded.” This profound observation points up the fact that racism is the consciously employed weapon of the white imperialist oppressors, who use it to create division in the ranks of the working class. And Marx correctly suggests that white workers must take the lead in the struggle against racism. This is the path which can lead to unity of Black and white workers in struggle, which can achieve Black equality and a real improvement in the conditions of all workers.

The conclusion which Communists must draw with respect to this most important question is that it is mere chatter to talk about trade union consciousness developing into class consciousness and advancing to socialist consciousness if there does not exist a conscious, unending struggle against racism.

No worker can be said to be class conscious who does not recognize the community of interests of all workers as a class. And for white workers this means, first of all, recognition of the community of their interests with those of Black workers and therefore of the need to fight for the rights of Black workers.

– From a lecture to a seminar of Communist Party organizers in 1971.

Madam C.J. Walker's fortune had its roots in hair products

2009-02-01T12:23:00.005-05:00

As we enter Black History Month, it is welcome to see the Indianapolis Star celebrating Madam C.J. Walker. Madam Walker left an enduring legacy of Black entrepreneurship that is one stream, and an important stream, of the African-American experience in the United States.

However, too often the celebration of Black History Month celebrates themes of African American's "pulling ourselves up by our own bootstraps" rather than themes of protest and struggle which are much influential overall to the experience of Black folks and working people in the United States.

The story provided to the reader by the IndyStar gave the only pieces of information that the Star felt would be important to know, and which essentially send the message "You think you have it rough, look what she overcame." Of course, there is another anti-working class message: "She got to be a millionaire starting with nothing and against tremendous odds. See what hard work and commitment to capitalism gets you?"

What do we find out from the Indy Star:

daughter of former slaves
parents died when she was 7
husband died when she was 20, leaving her with a 2-year-old daughter
perfected a formula for straightening the hair of black women (not sure if this is correct)
employed 20,000 agents
a self-made millionaire

Ms. Walker was successful in capitalist terms and helped many people to have a better life, even while there was an element of exploitation involved in her success due to the dynamics of capitalism. She is to be celebrated for her ability to overcome so much at an extremely difficult time in terms of people's attitudes toward Black people in general, and toward women.

It must be remembered that Ms. Walker would never have had an opportunity to become an entrepreneur without the tireless work of those who struggled against slavery including Frederick Douglas and Abraham Lincoln.

The celebration of capitalism that the IndyStar.com article implies rings hollow today when capitalism as an economic structure is in crisis and working people, and in particular Black and other people of color, struggle to survive.

A woman from the same time period as Ms. Walker but who took a very different path is Mary McLeod Bethune. Borth in 1875, Ms. Bethune was an educator and civil rights leader best known for starting a school for Black students in Florida, the Bethune-Cookman University, and for being an advisor to Franklin D. roosevelt.

Like Ms. Walker, Ms. Bethune was born to parents who had been slaves.

[S]he took an early interest in her own education. With the help of benefactors, Bethune attended college hoping to become a missionary in Africa. When that did not materialize, she started a school for black girls in Daytona Beach. From six students it grew and merged with an institute for black boys and eventually became the Bethune-Cookman School. Its quality far surpassed the standards of education for black students, and rivaled those of white schools. Bethune worked tirelessly to ensure funding for the school, and used it as a showcase for tourists and donors, to exhibit what educated black people could do. She was president of the college from 1923 to 1942 and 1946 to 1947, one of the few women in the world who served as a college president at that time.
Bethune was also active in women's clubs, and her leadership in them allowed her to become nationally prominent. She worked for the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932, and became a member of Roosevelt's Black Cabinet, sharing the concerns of black people with the Roosevelt administration while spreading Roosevelt's message to blacks, who had been traditionally Republican voters. Upon her death, columnist Louis E. Martin said, "She gave out faith and hope as if they were pills and she some sort of doctor."^[1] Her home in Daytona Beach is a National Historic Landmark,^[2] her house in Washington, D.C. in Logan Circle is preserved by the National Park Service as a National Historic Site,^[3] and a sculpture of her is located in Lincoln Park in Washington, D.C.^[4]
-- Wikipedia

Bethune was the Florida Chapter chair of the National Association of Colored Women from 1917-1925, during which time she focused on voter registration, and came into conflict with the KKK.

Bethune founded the National Council of Negro Women in New York City in 1935, bringing together 28 different organizations to form a council to facilitate the improvement of the quality of life for women and their communities.

About the organization, Bethune stated: "It is our pledge to make a lasting contribution to all that is finest and beastly in America, to cherish and enrich her heritage of freedom and progress by working for the integration of all her people regardless of race, creed, or national origin, into her spiritual, social, cultural, civic, and economic life, and thus aid her to achieve the glorious destiny of a true and unfettered democracy."

Bethune was a fighter for African-Americans as a nationality and as members of the working class. As she said:

There can be no divided democracy, no class government, no half-free county, under the constitution. Therefore, there can be no discrimination, no segregation, no separation of some citizens from the rights which belong to all... We are on our way. But these are frontiers which we must conquer... We must gain full equality in education ...in the franchise... in economic opportunity, and full equality in the abundance of life.

The struggles that Ms. Bethune championed remain with us today. It is good to remember the central role of struggle for equality and economic justice that is central to the experience of African Americans when we consider the rich history and the awesome promise of our community.

Layoffs will hit Mittal workers

2009-02-01T12:05:00.005-05:00

Layoffs will hit Mittal workers
http://www.post-trib.com/news/1407992,mittal.article

This story is about how the company whips saws plants against each other. Late last week I started hearing stories at work about how the production at our plant in Burns Harbor was going to pick up and we would be getting orders from the East Chicago plants which are the old Inland and LTV plants. Last year the company originally threatened to just about shut down the Burns Harbor plant by laying off 2500 out of 3400 and putting the rest of the workers on four days. They were going to transfer orders to Inland they said. The Union leadership resisted making a concessions agreement that the company wanted until the company actually started transferring the orders and slowing the steel producing side of the mill down. Then the agreement was made to eliminate all incentive plans and other local agreements on contracting out. Now it appears that the same thing is being done to Inland to get an agreement out of them. They are threatening them with layoffs and the transfer of work to Burns Harbor. Inland has a deep reserve of local agreements to bargain with as the company was originally bought before bankruptcy. The Inland workers never lost their pensions and all local agreements, like the former LTV and Bethlehem workers did. We can only wait to see what they negotiate to preserve jobs. - redsteel46403

February 1, 2009

By Jane Huh

Post-Tribune staff writer

EAST CHICAGO -- Steelworkers at two ArcelorMittal plants in Indiana Harbor are facing temporary layoffs, a crushing development that "just reinforces the point that we need strong and quick action for the economy," said Jim Robinson, District 7 director for United Steelworkers.

"It's hard to have a booming steel industry when nobody's buying steel," Robinson said Saturday.

ArcelorMittal officials told United Steelworkers on Friday that a limp economy forced the layoffs.

"As a result of market conditions, ArcelorMittal has notified the United Steelworkers and other required stakeholders about the need for temporary layoffs at our Indiana Harbor facility, effective immediately," company spokeswoman Katie Patterson said.

The number of employees affected will be determined after negotiations between the union and the company, officials said. The layoffs are expected to last less than six months, they said.

READ the whole story by following the link in the title.

Aides Say Obama’s Afghan Aims Elevate War

2009-01-29T08:53:00.006-05:00

In a move that is bound to result in more Afghan and US deaths, and to further undermine a country already in shambles due to US policy, the New York Times (NYT) reports on January 28th that President Obama

intends to adopt a tougher line toward Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, as part of a new American approach to Afghanistan that will put more emphasis on waging war than on development, senior administration officials said Tuesday.

...

Mr. Obama is preparing to increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan over the next two years, perhaps to more than 60,000 from about 34,000 now.

12,000 additional US troops are to be deployed to Afghanistan by midsummer 2009.

While the article focuses on the current administration's problems with Afghan President Karzai, the impact of the US policy on the Afghan people is the issue at hand. As the NYT article says, the Afghans are experiencing

a flourishing drug trade and the resurgence of the Taliban.

The drug trade can be traced to the lack of other forms of work in a country where 53% of the population lives below the poverty line, inflation is at 30%, and 80% of the labor force is involved in agriculture. (From Wikipedia, "Economy of Afghanistan".) This economy is the result of US policy in how the development of the Afghan economy was handled after the US invasion, and in the lack of economic development prior to the invasion.

The rise of the Taliban is a definite result of the US policy towards this country. Following US policy, the US worked to undermine the secular, progressive communist government that governed this country and strengthened the most distorted, fundamentalist, and retrograde sectors of the society, to the benefit of both the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

As detailed in the article "How the CIA Created Osama bin Laden" (GreenLeft.Org, 19 September 2001),

“Throughout the world ... its agents, client states and satellites are on the defensive — on the moral defensive, the intellectual defensive, and the political and economic defensive. Freedom movements arise and assert themselves. They're doing so on almost every continent populated by man — in the hills of Afghanistan, in Angola, in Kampuchea, in Central America ... [They are] freedom fighters.”

Is this a call to jihad (holy war) taken from one of Islamic fundamentalist Osama bin Laden's notorious fatwas? Or perhaps a communique issued by the repressive Taliban regime in Kabul?

In fact, this glowing praise of the murderous exploits of today's supporters of arch-terrorist bin Laden and his Taliban collaborators, and their holy war against the “evil empire”, was issued by US President Ronald Reagan on March 8, 1985. The “evil empire” was the Soviet Union, as well as Third World movements fighting US-backed colonialism, apartheid and dictatorship.

The GreenLeft.org article continues,

In April 1978, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) seized power in Afghanistan in reaction to a crackdown against the party by that country's repressive government.

The PDPA was committed to a radical land reform that favoured the peasants, trade union rights, an expansion of education and social services, equality for women and the separation of church and state. The PDPA also supported strengthening Afghanistan's relationship with the Soviet Union.

Such policies enraged the wealthy semi-feudal landlords, the Muslim religious establishment (many mullahs were also big landlords) and the tribal chiefs. They immediately began organising resistance to the government's progressive policies, under the guise of defending Islam.

Washington, fearing the spread of Soviet influence (and worse the new government's radical example) to its allies in Pakistan, Iran and the Gulf states, immediately offered support to the Afghan mujaheddin, as the “contra” force was known.

...

Between 1978 and 1992, the US government poured at least US$6 billion (some estimates range as high as $20 billion) worth of arms, training and funds to prop up the mujaheddin factions. Other Western governments, as well as oil-rich Saudi Arabia, kicked in as much again. Wealthy Arab fanatics, like Osama bin Laden, provided millions more.

Washington's policy in Afghanistan was shaped by US President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and was continued by his successors. His plan went far beyond simply forcing Soviet troops to withdraw; rather it aimed to foster an international movement to spread Islamic fanaticism into the Muslim Central Asian Soviet republics to destabilise the Soviet Union.

Thus the Afghan people were treated as pawns in a cynical US cold war chess game resulting in millions losing their lives; a decades long policy that undermined the Afghan economy and central government, violated the right of the Afghan peoples to self-determination, and rained death and destruction on an impoverished people struggling to survive.

The Obama administration appears to be acknowledging that the post-US invasion central government created by President Bush and lead by President Karzai does not extend beyond sections of the capital city. The

Obama administration would work with provincial leaders as an alternative to the central government, and that it would leave economic development and nation-building increasingly to European allies, so that American forces could focus on the fight against insurgents.

Evidently the Obama policy goals are very limited, focusing on achieving little more than policing:

“If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of Central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose,” Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who served under Mr. Bush and is staying on under Mr. Obama, told Congress on Tuesday. He said there was not enough “time, patience or money” to pursue overly ambitious goals in Afghanistan, and he called the war there as “our greatest military challenge.”

The administration is focusing on pressing for anti-corruption initiatives. This runs the risk of appearing to abandon central government in that country.

“If it looks like we’re abandoning the central government and focusing just on the local areas, we will run afoul of Afghan politics,” Mr. Khalilzad said. “Some will regard it as an effort to break up the Afghan state, which would be regarded as hostile policy.”

Mr. Gates said

“My own personal view is that our primary goal is to prevent Afghanistan from being used as a base for terrorists and extremists to attack the United States and our allies, and whatever else we need to do flows from that objective.”

Thus the Obama administration continues one of the policy mistakes of the Bush administration, seeing Afghanistan and that region through the lens of a "war on terror". This policy ignores the needs of the people in the region, and ignores the long history of US intervention that is the underlying cause of the rise of retrograde and reactionary trends in the political society of the region.

There does not appear to be a concensus in the US peace movement on Afghanistan, in part because of the belief that it served as the home base for Al Qaeda when the 9/11/01 attack on the World Trade Center took place.

This view ignores the US role in creating Al Qaeda and the Taliban, in undermining civil society, and in fostering thirty years of war in the country and in the region with no regard for the needs and goals of the people living there.

The peace movement is involved in a discussion on the question of Afghanistan, reflected in the United for Peace and Justice Organizing Discussion on the question.

The first important step in developing a clear position from the antiwar movement on Afghanistan is to generate more discussion about the situation there and how the peace movement can play a role in promoting peaceful solutions to the problems. We suggest several resources and critical questions for discussion which will help you in this process.

1. Organize discussions within our own group.
2. Raise questions with candidates.
3. Follow how your media is covering (or not) this issue and offer them resources to improve their reporting.
4. When your group feels it understands the issues well enough, organize a community forum.

Whatever our views on the U.S. military in Afghanistan, an escalation will mean more casualties, more hatred and more money wasted on war rather than rebuilding communities there and here. As the U.S. war machine tries to distract from its failures by shifting focus from the occupation of Iraq to the war in Afghanistan, we must adapt our strategy. It’s time to speak out now!

However, there is an active policy now in the Obama administration which demands protest. The US does not help countries that it invades and polices; it uses those countries for its own purposes. War does not destroy Al Qaeda and similar organizations, it acts as a recruiting tool. It is natural for a person to look at the cynical policies that the US and its allies have followed in the region and to see corruption and inhumanity whereever the US has extended its hand because that in fact is the reality of US policy.

The peace movement can consider

an end to the US war against the people of Afghanistan
respect for the right of the Afghan people to self-determination
withdrawal of all troops with no bases left behind
no-strings attached help for rebuilding Afghanistan

While the situation today is different in many dynamics from the period of anti-colonial struggle that some of us remember, there are also similarities. In many parts of the world we have peoples that are struggling against US imperial policies including occupation and long term destruction of civil society.

In the periods of anti-colonial struggle the nationalist and Marxist ideologies that imbued those movements with such humanity and power were augmented by the existence of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union no longer exists, and what ideologies and organizational forms people find available are those that the US created in its cynical and short-sighted battle against communism on behalf of exploiters and their allies.

It is no surprise that the anti-imperialist sentiment finds expression through these retrograde forms when those are what is available.

The US peace movement has a special task of looking beyond anger and fear to the struggles of the people against whom the US wages war, and building people-to-people, movement-to-movement bridges based on peace and mutual respect to overcome the wars, destruction, and the deaths. We can stand against US imperialism and cynical US policies that forget the people living in the countries it destroys.

We can say No War Against Afghanistan for the sake of our own youth and, just as much, for the sake of the struggling Afghan people.

Indiana's jobless rate is highest U.S. jump

2009-01-28T19:13:00.002-05:00

January 28, 2009

Post-Tribune staff and wire report

Indiana's unemployment rate soared to 8.2 percent in December, one of the largest jumps in jobless rates in the nation.

Unemployment in Northwest Indiana increased in line with the rest of the state, where the jobless rate nearly doubled from the same time last year.

The monthly unemployment report, released Tuesday by the Indiana Department of Workforce Development, showed Porter County coming in under the state average at 7.4 percent, but above the national average of 7.2 percent, while Lake County weighed in at 8.6 percent and LaPorte County stood at 9.2 percent.

East Chicago took the biggest hit locally, with unemployment jumping to 12.8 percent, third-highest in the state.

Follow the headline link for the full story

Republican Senators Say They Will Hold Up Solis Nomination

2009-01-28T19:09:00.002-05:00

Posted By James Parks On January 27, 2009

With unemployment at the highest level in decades, Senate Republicans are saying they will hold a vote on the nomination of a key Cabinet member in the fight to restore jobs in this ailing economy. Some conservative lawmakers are vowing to hold up a vote on Rep. [1] Hilda Solis’ (D-Calif.) confirmation as labor secretary because of their opposition to the [2] Employee Free Choice Act, which she supports.

Solis, who comes from a union family, has been a champion of workers for more than 15 years combined in Congress and the California legislature, where she was the first Latina elected to the state Senate.

Solis backers have created two Facebook groups in support of her nomination: ”[3] Americans for Hilda Solis as Secretary of Labor,” and “[4] 1,000,000 Strong For Hilda Solis as Secretary of Labor“—and each has some 300 members who signed up in the past few days. The groups give information on how to contact your senators to urge that Solis be confirmed. Sign up for both is open to any Facebook member.

Solis has a solid record on workers’ issues, says Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the [5] California Labor Federation. Solis, who was raised in a union family, is

a serious, thoughtful, dedicated and result-oriented leader on working family issues.

In her four terms in Congress, Solis co-authored the Green Jobs Act, which later became part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The Green Jobs Act authorized $125 million for workforce training programs targeted to veterans, displaced workers, at-risk youth and individuals in families under 200 percent of the federal poverty line.

Read the rest of the story by following the link in the headline of this story.

New NLRB Chairwoman Liebman a Welcome Change

2009-01-27T21:39:00.001-05:00

Posted By James Parks On January 26, 2009

Wilma Liebman

The union movement is praising President Obama’s nomination of Wilma Liebman as the next chairwoman of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

As an NLRB member over the past eight years, Liebman has challenged the Bush administration’s [1] war on workers. The board’s Republican majority made it harder to form unions through majority sign-up, limited the ability of illegally fired workers to recover back pay and allowed employers to discriminate against union supporters in the hiring process.

AFL-CIO President [2] John Sweeney says Obama made the right choice.

America’s working men and women will finally have the fair and committed leader they deserve with Wilma Liebman as chair of the National Labor Relations Board. What a refreshing change it will be to have a labor board that aims to safeguard rather than blockade workers’ rights. Liebman will work to help the NLRB serve one of its key missions–to undergird all workers’ right to collective bargaining as a cornerstone of our economy and democracy.

In a statement, Liebman says:

The Board’s work matters, just as it did when the National Labor Relations Act was passed in 1935. Democracy in the workplace is still basic to a democratic society, and collective bargaining is still basic to a fair economy. The statute we administer is the foundation of America’s commitment to human rights recognized around the world.

Liebman was first appointed to the NLRB by President Clinton in 1997. Her current term expires in 2011. Before joining the NLRB, Liebman served from 1994 to 1997 at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, first as special assistant to the director and then as deputy director. She began her legal career as an NLRB staff attorney in 1974, then served on the legal staff of two unions: the Bricklayers and the Teamsters.

Article printed from AFL-CIO NOW BLOG: http://blog.aflcio.org

Report: Employee Free Choice Act Needed to Make Economy Work

2009-01-27T01:40:00.000-05:00

Posted By Seth Michaels On January 23, 2009

The advocacy organization [1] American Rights at Work has produced a new report, “[2] The Employee Free Choice Act: Ensuring the Economy Works for Everyone,” that clearly explains how restoring the freedom to form unions and bargain can revitalize the U.S. economy.

Follow link for the full story.

Hatred Of Slavery Drove Darwin Ideas

2009-01-27T01:14:00.002-05:00

By Mike Collett-White
Reuters
Jan 23, 2009
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSLD55838020090123

LONDON, Jan 23 (Reuters) - A new book on Charles Darwin says a passionate hatred of slavery was fundamental to his theory of evolution, which challenged the assumption held by many at the time that blacks and whites were separate species.

2009-01-25T12:17:00.002-05:00

Indiana Stalls Jobless Aid
The AP article read "Indiana bolsters jobless aid", but it should have read "Indiana Stalls jobless aid" because that is what they are doing. There is a logjam of 42K unemployment claims. It is well documented that Indiana is out of money and wants more from the government to pay claims even though the governor just won re-election on the platform of a fiscally sound state. Just like a family that has to deal with a loss of income, Indiana is delaying paying their bills in hope that the check that is in the mail gets here. But for the families of people who are unemployed that is of little comfort. I have already heard from people who have been laid off for a month and haven't gotten any money. The state processes about 200K claims a week which is double a year ago. Part of the way they are stalling the claims is to tell people that they made an error in their claim and that keeps the wolves at bay so to speak.

2009-01-25T11:49:00.006-05:00

The following story is an example of the ongoing stuggle that the community and the EPA is having with the governor's IDEM. BP is building an multi billion dollar addition onto the East Chicago oil refinery, which happens to be the oldest refinery in the US. This new addition is to process tar sand oil. Environmental groups around the area and country and many legislators have questions the whole process for permits that BP has gotten. There was little time for public comment and then BP and IDEM conspired to stack the meetings with people in favor of the building of the addition.

IDEM cut short permit process, e-mail suggests
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1396176,bpmemo.article)

January 25, 2009

By Gitte Laasby

Post-Tribune staff writer

By insisting on processing the permit by June 1, regardless of what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said, IDEM also refused to help the EPA gather evidence that BP violated the law.

That's according to an e-mail obtained by the Post-Tribune.

Project 'dead' by June 1

When IDEM processed BP's permit application last spring, EPA had reason to believe BP had violated the Clean Air Act by emitting too much pollution. EPA said BP also modified a refinery unit before receiving a permit to do so. But EPA needed more evidence to prove it and wanted BP to agree to pay a fine for the violations. So EPA officials asked IDEM to help by not issuing the air permit until BP handed over the documents to EPA.

"They want us to hold up issuance of the permit until BP caves to whatever relief EPA would like(,) recognizing that BP must have the permit before June 1 or the entire project is dead," IDEM Commissioner Thomas Easterly said in an e-mail to Gov. Mitch Daniels' IDEM liaison, David Pippen, on Feb. 26, 2008.

Valparaiso environmental attorney Kim Ferraro wasn't surprised.

"It confirms what we knew; that they were really trying to push this thing through," Ferraro said.

IDEM rejected her request for more time to review BP's 1,351-page permit on behalf of residents, but granted her a 30-day extension to review a 100-page permit for a recycling company in Elkhart.

"When we ask about extensions of time, IDEM's usually pretty quick to say, 'We'll give you more time,' " she said. "It's completely inappropriate that you're trying to cut short a very needed public input into the process because you're trying to make it easy for the permittee."

Neither IDEM nor BP would directly answer who or what gave Easterly the idea that the project would be "dead" if the permit wasn't issued by June 1.

"All parties involved understood that the expiration of the emission credits would require portions of the permit to be re-evaluated," IDEM spokeswoman Amy Hartsock said in an e-mail.

BP received credits for reducing emissions of sulfur dioxide and fine particles at the Whiting refinery in 2003, earlier than required. The credits expire after five years. Using the credits allowed BP to avoid installing more stringent pollution control equipment or shutting down some of the polluting units to further reduce pollution.

BP spokesman Scott Dean wouldn't answer whether BP told IDEM the project would be dead by June 1. He referred to a 2008 company press release.

"If we do not have an air permit this year, some of our credits will expire and we will have to modify our permit application and recalculate the costs and timing of this proposed multibillion dollar, multiyear investment in the Midwest economy," the release stated.

Dean said BP reduced its overall air emissions by 68 percent between 2001 and 2006 and that credits help people get cleaner air sooner.

Hartsock said IDEM did help EPA with enforcement by providing documents EPA requested.

"You presume IDEM didn't want to help," Hartsock said in an e-mail. "IDEM simply wanted to follow case law recognizing long-standing EPA policy keeping permitting separate from enforcement."

Enforcement action

Easterly states in the e-mail that, "EPA's position seems to be that the permit cannot be issued until the enforcement action is resolved."

When authorities settle violations with a company, the agreement often requires the company to use new pollution controls to keep the violations from occurring again. Any such controls would be incorporated into a permit that was issued after the enforcement -- guaranteeing that BP?would emit less air pollution.

Ann Alexander, senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said if BP started construction early on a project that would increase emissions over a certain threshold, BP would need "far more stringent" pollution controls than IDEM's permit required.

"It would mean cleaner air in the region," she said. "They want to make sure if someone is doing a large expansion project that is, in fact, going to increase emissions, that companies have to face up to that and put in the controls necessary to make sure the community doesn't end up paying the environmental cost of the expansion."

To force IDEM's cooperation, EPA gave IDEM an ultimatum: Hold the public comment period on the air permit open until BP and EPA settle the enforcement case, or EPA will make negative public comments on the draft permit. But EPA backed off just a month later.

IDEM said EPA's request that permitting and enforcement be resolved simultaneously was only the opinion of one person -- Cheryl Newton, the acting director of EPA Region 5's air division.

" 'EPA' did not give IDEM advice; a single person, referenced in your question, suggested action which would have been a change in long-established EPA policy and reinforced by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals," Hartsock said in an e-mail. "EPA chose to follow its policy and the law and supplied IDEM with a letter confirming their approval of the permit."

EPA?would not comment. Spokeswoman Phillippa Cannon said EPA's two official comment letters on the BP permit summarize EPA's position on the overall permitting process and EPA's interactions with the state.

Change in EPA direction

Just one month after EPA?threatened to make negative comments on the permit, the agency backed off. In its comments, EPA pointed out only minor issues and requested that IDEM later add any details BP and EPA agreed on during enforcement.

NRDC's Alexander said as a result, the permit fails to address problems from the past and is based on "untenable" assumptions about emissions.

"Given that EPA had strong reasons to suspect there was a problem, they should have either gone to great lengths to demonstrate why there wasn't a problem or held off until it was resolved," Alexander said. "I don't think going ahead and issuing the permit without resolving the problem was a good solution."

Jane Jankowski, the governor's spokeswoman, denied that anyone from the governor's office interfered.

"The commissioner sent an e-mail to David Pippen, the governor's office liaison to IDEM," she said in an e-mail. "The governor's office took no action."

Contact Gitte Laasby at 648-2183 or glaasby@post-trib.com.

White House Memo: Great Limits Come With Great Power, Ex-Candidate Finds

2009-01-25T09:02:00.012-05:00

Newt Gingrich is reported, in the January 25th New York Times (NYT), to have said of President Obama:

“I thought he did very well during the transition on things like the dinner with George Will, and all the words sounded good,” said Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House. “But I think they are right at the cusp of either sliding down into a world where their words have no meaning or having to follow up their words with real behavior.”

This leaves one to wonder why anyone is quoting Newt Gingrich any more. Gingrich is the former speaker of the House and the Republican most associated with the retrograde "Republican Revolution" of 1994 that ended forty years of Democratic Party majorities in that institution.

One of the problems working toward broad bi-partisanship is that it gives power to people and a Party that was not earned at the ballot box and which goes against the democratically expressed will of the people. However, bi-partisanship is a goal for President Obama because he has to run for another term and, while the electoral college vote count in the 2008 elections was hugely in the President's favor, the actual ballots cast gave Obama a slimmer margin and showed a more divided nation. Further, the reelection period for those who have to run in 2010 is already started, and the calculus of political realities is already playing some role in political decisions today.

Given all that, it is still distressing to see Newt Gingrich ressurected to opine on questions of political moment. Does the focus on bi-partisanship in effect ressurect the dying embers of the ultra-right that saw crushing defeat at the polls? That may be the hope of Newt Gingrich and his ilk but hopefully the Administration will feel no pressure to respond to the hypocritical, racist, anti-working family, and destructive message that sector of the political spectrum has been spewing since the late 1970's when Newt Gingrich was elected. It should not be forgotten that the Newt followed Dick Cheney as House Minority Whip in 1989.

While not reporting the details in this article, the NYT mentioned that the President's

plan to build bipartisan consensus around an economic package ran smack into discontented House Republicans.

Should the Republicans, who had the Presidency for the last eight agonizing years of decline and destruction for this country, play any role in crafting a plan to address the wreckage for which the Republicans, as leading representatives of capital at the time, are responsible? If you have a wolf at the door of the hen house, would you ask the wolf how to protect the hens from being eaten?

The NYT said too that the President

wrestled with fresh challenges at every turn, found some principles hard to consistently apply and showed himself willing to be pragmatic — at the risk of irking some supporters who had their hearts set on idealism.

There is a consistent theme that counterpoises pragmatism with idealism, with pragmatism as the obvious winner. After all, idealists hope for that which can't be achieved while pragmatists get stuff done, which is at the heart of the US capitalist credo: Just Do It!

Some advocates for the needs of the masses of working people in this country and globally are looking at this and coming to the conclusion that the definition of pragmatism needs to be changed by mass grass roots organization around the issues that are of import to working families. According to Robert Kuttner of Demos, interviewed on Democracy Now,

a crisis is also an opportunity, and the crash on Wall Street was also the crash of right-wing ideology, the ideology that claimed that markets could do nothing bad and governments could do nothing good. We’re going to have reality making the most compelling case for activist government since the New Deal. The question is whether Obama seizes the moment. He will either be Roosevelt, or he will be Hoover. There’s no middle ground.

The programs instituted during the Roosevelt administration were the result of the people's movements of the time which made the President's decisions the pragmatic decisions, as evidenced by his three term presidency. The New Deal was not a one-man show; it was the result of mass movements and progressive thinking that challenged the status quo and effected real change in the lives of the majority of people in the country.

As Katrina Vanden Heuvel says in The Nation,

The President will only be as brave as ordinary citizens move him to be.

Vanden Heuvel continues:

President Barack Obama takes office at a time defined by hope and fear in equal measure. To confront this nation's many challenges he will need to act swiftly, show that he is on the side of people whose homes are being foreclosed and jobs lost and invest political capital--along with trillions of dollars--in a sustained recovery program. While many caution our new President to tread carefully, the reality is that half-steps will not lay the groundwork for a new economy that is more just and fair. Only by effectively marshaling the power of government can Obama improve the actual conditions of peoples' lives--and consign anti-government evangelists to the dustbin of history.

Fortunately, Obama has a mandate for change. People support reconstruction of America's crumbling physical infrastructure, and of our society

Certainly in this blog there have been many calls for a grassroots people's movement to counterbalance the pressure from the right, and surprisingly from the ultra-right that was considered by some to be superfluous and without any power.

The President's early signs of a commitment to pragmatism are not surprising; one does not get to be President of the United States without being pragmatic in building support across a wide political spectrum. In the case of the Obama presidency, the pragmatism was linked to an appeal to hope that evoked an amazing response in the US electorate and resulted in the election of the first African American to the highest office in the nation.

Hope is not about pragmatism or idealism, hope is about meeting the needs that the moment puts before the people and which the people see as priorities. These are bread and butter issues: work, health care, housing, education, peace, financial stability for the elderly, pension protection, and similar issues.

The issue of torture is one of those that motivated people to stand against the Bush administration. While running for office, President Obama

had tough criticism for the Bush administration’s use of harsh interrogation tactics, President Obama left himself some wiggle room in overturning that policy, by deferring a decision on whether some techniques should remain secret to keep Al Qaeda from training to resist them.

“I think it emphasizes a realist, a pragmatist, someone who is not on a strictly political or ideological exercise,” said Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, who is close to the president. “It underscores what I think is part of his leadership style, which is that there has to be some flexibility — a firm principle but a flexible application.”

This raises the question of how keeping the door open to torture represents firm principle but flexible application? At its core, this is another example of the tension between principle and pragmatism, with pragmatism winning out.

Republicans continue in their coercive style to threaten obstruction if the President doesn't respond to their foul demands. Talking about the bill to address the financial crisis:

“I said to him straight up, ‘I think your electoral success was largely based on the hope that you could deliver change to the way Washington works,’ ” said Representative Eric Cantor, the Republican whip. He said he had told Mr. Obama pointedly that he would lose Republican support unless House Democrats were willing to make some changes in the bill.

Republicans are proving once against that they are willing to hold the hopes of the many hostage to the machinations of the few.

While highlighting the tension between Republicans and the President, it must be noted that there are similar if more muted tensions within different sectors of the Democratic Party itself. The 1/25 NYT reports in a lead story on the Obama economic program that Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, a Democrat, does not include in his stimulus bill funds to pay for health insurance (COBRA) for laid off workers, nor for putting laid off workers who cannot pay for their own health insurance into state medicaid programs with federal funds meeting the costs. Further, recent extensions to unemployment benefits exclude people who are long term unemployed. This highlights the fact that the struggle to meet the needs of the working families in the United States today has to go beyond two-party politics and root itself in a class conscious grassroots movement that fights consistently for needs of the exploited and the oppressed.

While looking forward to a more sympathetic and certainly more intelligent administration, working people cannot afford to view the President as our leader and follow his lead, which will reflect many anti-working class pressures. Working families need to be an independent political voice during this administration's tenure. We may all live in one country, but we don't all have the same interests. Politics matters. Pragmatism under capitalism = death, literally.

Will the focus on pragmatic bi-partisanship undo the President by making it impossible for him to achieve any real change due to including so many conflicting interests that what results is mud?

The answer to this question cannot be up to the President, it is up to the people's movements in this country who engage in mobilization and education to ensure that pragmatism and hope coincide and that the needs of working families, the disabled, the young and the old, the unemployed and the underemployed, the unorganized who want to become organized, the soldier who wants to come home, are the needs that must be addressed when looked at through the sophisticated and possibly cynical lens of political pragmatism.

The calls of the few Newt Gingrichs of the world should be drowned out with the calls of the masses of people demanding help for the social problems that face this society, including protecting those programs like Social Security and Medicare that appear to be under attack based on fiscal pragmatism of the worst kind. The calls of Democrats who refuse to see beyond the current structures, or who are wedded to the forces of capital, for pragmatism in the face of need must to be overcome by a people's movement that is resolute on behalf of working families and our needs.

As many others are saying, its time to organize!

EPA again hits IDEM

2009-01-24T21:09:00.002-05:00

EPA again hits IDEM
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1395184,haze.article)

January 24, 2009

By Gitte Laasby

Post-Tribune staff writer

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management has still not submitted its plan to reduce regional haze in the country's national parks. The plan was due more than a year ago.

If IDEM?doesn't submit its plan within the next year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will have to formulate the plan instead. For now, EPA?is threatening to put Indiana on official notice in the Federal Register.

The EPA's?Regional Haze Rule from 1999 aims to improve visibility in 156 national parks and wilderness areas, such as the Grand Canyon and Yosemite. The rule requires states to develop and implement air quality protection plans to reduce the pollution that causes the haze.

Indiana isn't close to any of the parks EPA is concerned about, but IDEM?spokesman Rob Elstro said emissions from Indiana are transported there.

The EPA sent a letter to IDEM on Jan. 14, saying IDEM has not formally completed the public comment process for its plan or submitted limits on the best available technology that the most polluting facilities can install to control emissions.

"The letter we received wasn't unexpected. Indiana is one of 37 other states that are also in that situation. We are working with EPA?to submit the plan fully," Elstro said.

Part of the delay is that the plan involves making rules to flesh out details of the law.

See IDEM's plan at www.in.gov/idem/5795.htm

Read more about regional haze on IDEM's Web site at www.in.gov/idem/4499.htm

All Out for the Employee Free Choice Act

2009-01-24T14:17:00.034-05:00

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is the single most important initiative before the people of the United States and President Obama today.

The EFCA will help build an economy that works for everyone. Passage of this act will do more to help US working families over the longer term than any other single action to help end the current US fiscal crisis. As the AFL-CIO states

Supported by a bipartisan coalition in Congress and millions of workers around the country, the Employee Free Choice Act would level the playing field and put the power to choose a union back where it belongs—in the hands of workers. It will restore workers' power to bargain for a better life, rebuilding the middle class and strengthening the economy for the long term.

The full text of the EFCA is available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.800:

EFCA will help to rebalance the distorted distribution of wealth in this country which underlies the fiscal crisis. We live in a country where, in 2005, 1% of the population had 21.8% of the wealth. This trend has continued. The disproportianate distribution of wealth is even more pronounced today, despite the fiscal crisis.

Corporations and CEOs aren't treating workers fairly. They cut back on workers' health care and wages, while CEO pay skyrockets. They intimidate workers who join together to negotiate a contract, while protecting their own perks and benefits.

The Heritage Foundation is representative of the attack by business interests. In an article entitled "Employee Free Choice Act Would Disenfranchise 105 Million Workers", published on January 7,2008, they describe the secret ballot mechanism as a "fundamental right" of workers.

The Heritage Foundation and other business interests are lying to people, harping endlessly that

A fundamental principle of American democracy is that votes are private choices. Secret ballot elections ensure that voters can choose the candidate who truly represents them, not the candidate whom their friends or neighbors want them to support. Millions of Americans cherish this freedom, but many Members of Congress want to take it from American workers.

The Heritage Foundation continues:

The card-check process also denies workers the right to vote "yes" or "no" on joining a union. Workers can only vote "yes" by signing the card.

Both these statements by the Heritage Foundation are outright lies designed to scare working families into supporting business rather than our own interests.

The true "fundamental right" is the right to work and to join together in a union. Article 23 section 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares

(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Business interests are attempting to confuse people by replacing the meaningful democratic right to form a union with the mechanism of the secret vote, which they call a right and which does nothing for working families on its own. Workers can vote secretly all they want without bothering a boss. However, forming a union has real impact on workers lives, and on the boss's ability to pay as little as possible and keep the most for themselves.

Voting secretly is but one of a variety of mechanisms used to express the will of the people. History has shown that business interests are quite happy to subvert and undermine this mechanism in this country and elsewhere to achieve their goals. Rachel Maddow reports on widespread Republican efforts to block Democrats from exercising their rights to vote in the 2008 presidential election on her MSNBC show.

In the context of union organizing the secret ballot is a mechanism that works for the business owner, not for the worker. It gives the boss the ability to monitor the organizing activities, to identify and intimidate or fire key workers involved in organizing, and to apply terror tactics and lies to prevent workers from joining a union.

America's workers want to form a union. Nearly 60 million would form a union tomorrow if given the chance. It is the business practices, not the union organizing, that is anti-democratic and deprives workers of their rights.

As outlined by the AFL-CIO:

The Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 800, S. 1041), supported by a bipartisan coalition in Congress, would enable working peope to bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions by restoring workers' freedom to choose for themselves whether to join a union. It would:

Establish stronger penalities for violation of employee rights when workers seek to form a union and during first-contract negotiations.

Provide mediatation and arbitration for first-contract disputes.

Allow employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.

The EFCA makes it easier to organize a union by allowing the work of union oganizing to take place with less intervention from the management of the enterprise being unionized.

The EFCA does not take away the right to secret ballot should the workers want to use that mechanism. EFCA adds another form for a worker to express support for having a union.

The key section of the EFCA reads:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an employee or group of employees or any individual or labor organization acting in their behalf alleging that a majority of employees in a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining wish to be represented by an individual or labor organization for such purposes, the Board shall investigate the petition. If the Board finds that a majority of the employees in a unit appropriate for bargaining has signed valid authorizations designating the individual or labor organization specified in the petition as their bargaining representative and that no other individual or labor organization is currently certified or recognized as the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the unit, the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection (a).

On March 3, 2007 at a rally in support of the Employee Free Choice Act, now President Obama said

the union movement is the best way for working people to take care of themselves in the 21st century economy:

In coffee shops and town meetings, in VFW halls and right here in this crowd, the questions are all the same. Will I be able to leave my children a better world than I was given? Will I be able to save enough to send them to college or plan for a secure retirement? Will my job even be there tomorrow? Who will stand up for me in this new world?

The answer is you. It’s the men and women of the American labor movement.

Business interests are fighting the Employee Free Choice Act viciously, with lies. Workers and our allies can fight back.

Join the American Rights At Work Million Member Mobilization Campaign in support of the Employee Free Choice Act at http://www.freechoiceact.org/page/s/aflcio?source=aflcioweb.

Its time to stop letting the same business interests that caused today's fiscal crisis define what we can be paid and what our benefits should be. Working people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, not underpaid and overworked, or left without a pension or health care.

Let's win the Employee Free Choice Act now!

IDEM comes under attack by Evansville officials

2009-01-23T16:32:00.002-05:00

IDEM comes under attack
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1393375,idemletterfolo.article)

January 23, 2009

By Gitte Laasby

Post-Tribune staff writer

City officials in Evansville share outrage from Hammond and Gary over changes in enforcement at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.

They call the changes "absurd" and criticize IDEM's management for "emasculating" the agency. City officials are now taking their frustration to the Indiana General Assembly, where Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. has been asked to testify to a state House committee.

Several bills also are in the works and the EPA has sent a letter with concerns to IDEM.

"We had very little expectation anything we said or did to communicate with (IDEM Commissioner Thomas) Easterly or Gov. (Mitch) Daniels would matter," said Dona Bergman, director of Evansville's Environmental Protection Agency.

"Frankly, I think U.S. EPA, from that letter, is quite concerned. I?don't think IDEM bothered to consult with EPA?before they made these decisions. EPA staff we have spoken to were quite shocked."

Three changes are causing concern: IDEM's decision to eliminate funding for city agencies that monitor air, including those in Gary, Hammond and Evansville; a new enforcement policy that would narrow the category of environmental permit violations to comprise only violations that cause actual harm to human health or the environment; and the elimination of IDEM's Office of Enforcement.

Bergman said Evansville Mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel talked to Daniels, and that Evansville EPA?staff contacted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5.

As the Post-Tribune reported Thursday, the regional office of the EPA sent a letter to IDEM Tuesday raising questions about the changes.

McDermott welcomed the intervention. He and a Hammond environmental manager were asked to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee in early February, "probably to answer questions about this whole situation," McDermott said.

"Maybe this has something to do with the change in administration in Washington. I welcome EPA's involvement."

IDEM officials announced in December that IDEM was canceling city contracts to monitor air, saying it would enhance efficiency and that the agency would save $2 million by doing it in-house.

Bergman called it "absolutely absurd" and "dis-ingenuous" to claim IDEM would be as effective and efficient as local agencies.

She questioned the savings, citing top IDEM officials who said IDEM would need to hire at least four people to take over the responsibilities. Evansville legislators have asked IDEM for a fiscal analysis of where the savings would be, but IDEM has not provided answers, she said.

"I am not going to stand there and say this is going to enhance efficiency. None of that is true," Bergman said.

Hammond, Gary and Evansville officials have expressed concern that IDEM will be less responsive to complaints of residents and perform inspections less frequently.

"For the larger sources," such as U.S. Steel, BP and NIPSCO, "the ones that IDEM staff will have resources to inspect, 70 percent of those will get done only every two years. Thirty percent will be done every three years," Bergman said. "Local agencies did all those and a whole lot more every year."

Bergman is not optimistic that bills requiring IDEM to enter local contracts will go anywhere, but hopes EPA and public awareness will help.

"There are obviously people at (EPA) Region 5 who are concerned," she said. "I think there are a number of mid- and low-level IDEM personnel who want to do a good job, who really care about the environment and protecting the environment. They're very distraught by the system ... and now a management team that seems bent on emasculating the entire agency."

She's not optimistic that bills requiring IDEM to enter local contracts will go anywhere, but hopes EPA and public awareness will help.

"There are obviously people at (EPA) Region 5 who are concerned," she said. "I think there are a number of mid- and low-level IDEM personnel who want to do a good job, who really care about the environment and protecting the environment. They're very distraught by the system... and now a management team that seems bent on emasculating the entire agency."

Contact Gitte Laasby at 648-2183 or glaasby@post-trib.com.

Krugman: Employee Free Choice Key to Economic Recovery

2009-01-23T16:26:00.002-05:00

Krugman: Employee Free Choice Key to Economic Recovery

Posted By Seth Michaels On January 22, 2009 @ 10:54 am In Legislation & Politics | 2 Comments

In the latest issue of [1] Rolling Stone, Nobel Prize-winning Princeton economist Paul Krugman has written an open letter to President Obama detailing the steps needed to end our economic crisis and turn the country around.

Krugman’s prescription includes quick and large-scale actions to save jobs, rebuild infrastructure and protect those whose health care, housing and retirement have been put at risk—but it also includes longer-term strategies to make sure America is “a more just and secure society.” High on Krugman’s list? In addition to health care reform and an economic recovery package, he stresses restoring workers’ freedom to form unions and bargain for a better life by passing the [2] Employee Free Choice Act.

…you can do a lot to enhance workers’ rights. One is to start laying the groundwork to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it much harder for employers to intimidate workers who want to join a union…the legislation will enable America to take a huge step toward recapturing the middle-class society we’ve lost.

Krugman looks at another time when the United States and the world faced a serious threat to economic prosperity—the Great Depression—and says one of the most important factors to help the economy rise out of the Depression and into growth was what he describes as the “Great Compression”—the change from an unequal and economically divided society, rife with poverty, to a strong middle-class society. The ability of workers to form unions and bargain, made real by reforms to labor law, pulled the economy into prosperity:

…one important factor was the rise of organized labor: Union membership tripled between 1935 and 1945. Unions not only negotiated better wages for their own members, they also enhanced the bargaining power of workers throughout the economy. At the time, conservatives warned that wage gains would have disastrous economic effects—that the rise of unions would cripple employment and economic growth. But in fact, the Great Compression was followed by the great postwar boom, which doubled American living standards over the course of a generation.

As we’ve stated before, the economy is reeling from inter-related crises in housing, credit, manufacturing and health care, and one of the big factors fueling the nation’s economic crisis is the fact that workers have lost power in the workplace and have fallen behind as a result. Krugman, an economist respected around the world, recognizes that restoring balance to the economy will depend upon restoring power to workers.

Article printed from AFL-CIO NOW BLOG: http://blog.aflcio.org

URL to article: http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/01/22/krugman-employee-free-choice-key-to-economic-recovery/

URLs in this post:
[1] Rolling Stone: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/25456948/what_obama_must_do/print
[2] Employee Free Choice Act: http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/against.cfm

Obama issues appeal to Israel, Hamas

2009-01-23T09:14:00.004-05:00

In what can only be interpreted as a one sided approach to the peace process in the Palestinian struggle against occupation and Israel militarism, President Obama

said Hamas must end rocket fire at Israel, and Israel must "complete the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza." Although those steps were taken this week, low-level violence has marred the fragile cease-fire.

Obama said he would aggressively seek a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians while also always defending Israel's "right to defend itself."

This continues the line established by prior administrations that focused on the US's "special" relationship to Israel and viewed Israeli actions as defensive against the Palestinian people rather than as the aggressive and illegal acts of an occupying power.

In the meantime, Israel understands that in the eyes of many nations the Israeli attack on Gaza was a war crime. The VOANews.com reports

Israel's prime minister has assembled a team to defend the country against charges of war crimes in its recent offensive against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip.

While the VOANews.com report spins the offensive as if it were against "Hamas militants", the reality is that the Israelis devestated the entire region and murdered many women and children. The offensive was clearly designed to terrorize the entire population, following a blockade that had the same goal.

President Obama's naming of a new special envoy to the Middle East, Sen. George Mitchell, should be welcomed if it signals a commitment to work for a just peace in the region. However the statement on Israel and Hamas signal a policy of "more of the same" rather than "change we need".

The President's statements on continuing the Bush policy of a "War on Terror" are also unwelcome to those who were looking for a more sophisticated and sensitive, even if not anti-imperialist, foreign policy in the regions including Pakistan and Afghanistan. This is the region that President is declaring

"the central front" in the battle against terrorism and extremism. "There, as in the Middle East, we must understand that we cannot deal with our problems in isolation," he said.

A foreign policy that approachs the US issues in that region in context of the needs of the people of the region as well as those of the US people, and which puts the peaceful and mutually beneficial resolution to issues at the forefront of a policy, would be welcome. However, putting the relationships to Pakistan and Afghanistan in the context of the "battle against terrorism and extremism" draws lines that are sure to make diplomacy difficult, signaling an aggressive and combative approach to diplomacy there.

Finally, on Iraq, the NY Times report said that

Obama's top military officials said yesterday they will make sure he knows the potential downside of any timetable for pulling U.S. forces out of Iraq, including the 16-month deadline he set during his presidential campaign.

Here again we have to applaud the President in his desire to bring the troops home and hope that he does not take the occassion of various "downsides" to a timetable to move away from that goal.

All in all, for those who are proponents of peace and social justice, these first steps toward foreign policy send a message of continuity with some of the key components of the Bush administration's policies, and continue along lines that are not designed to achieve a just peace in the Palestinian struggle. Hopefully as the President continues involvement in these processes he will extend his tone of humanity and inclusiveness to the oppressed and the hungry of Palestine as much as to those of us here in the United States who look to him for humane and caring leadership.

Obama Seeks Halt to Guantanamo Trials

2009-01-21T09:19:00.003-05:00

In a wonderful beginnging to his administration, the New York Times reported that

U.S. President Barack Obama ordered military prosecutors in the Guantanamo war crimes tribunals to ask for a 120-day halt in all pending cases.

This is a welcome first action by the President and sends strong message that the injustices that were such a decisive and pervasive component of the Bush administration are to be ended.

Military judges were expected to rule on the request on Wednesday at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, an official involved in the trials said.

The request would halt proceedings in 21 pending cases, including the death penalty case against five Guantanamo prisoners accused of plotting the September 11 hijacked plane attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people.

Prosecutors said in their written request that the halt was "in the interests of justice."

The proceedings at Guantanamo were seen world wide as unjust due to the torture of prisoners there, holding of prisoners without due process, detention of child prisoners, and the lack of access to the prisoners by family, press, and legal representation. The fiction that the prisoners were not on US soil and therefore not covered by US law but rather by military law, and that the prisoners were not covered by the Geneva Conventions, all conspired to reinforce the world's opinion that President George Bush is a war criminal.

President Obama's move to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay is welcomed by all who love justice and human rights world wide.

The Inauguration!

2009-01-20T22:30:00.003-05:00

Today was the day so many of have been waiting for. Initially I was just looking forward to saying goodbye to the horror that has been the Bush II administration. Then Barack Obama became the President-elect and I started looking forward to saying hello to some positive changes, and to celebrating an extremely important marker in the history of the United States in the election of the first African-American president.

For me the day was only partially about the Presidential inauguration. It was also about the millions of people who participated by going to Washington and standing for hours in the cold to share in a collective sense of hope and positive anticipation. For some today marked a moment of pride in emerging from the shadows represented by the term "minority" or "special interest" and being fully recognized as participants in the US experiment.

The moments that were truly important were not the moments of pomp and circumstance today. The moments of humanity and caring that broke through the boundaries of the trappings of power to reassert a warmth and human connection, as much as any political promise, represents the hope that President Obama brings as capital to his first four years in office.

The Obama children looking happy and relaxed during the ceremonies. The clear warmth between the President and the First Lady as they danced together. The faces of older folks who were participating in a moment that they never thought would happen while they lived. The faces of younger people excited to be alive and wondering what would happen next. These were among the moments that most moved me.

Now comes the time to realize the dreams, to ensure that the promised change is instantiated in the lives of working families across this nation.

While the President may want to take a non-partisan approach that insists on the unity of all the people of the United States as a single people looking for solutions to today's problems, he faces a complex poliitical establishment and the contradictions between his vision and the interests of different participants in the dance of power will make for an interesting drama in which we can all participate by engaging in organizations in neighborhoods and work places, encouraging those organizations to express themselves and build constituencies around areas of concern to the members, and helping the President to achieve the goals so many working families depend on to ameliorate the difficulties in which we find ourselves due to social and economic stresses not of our personal making.

My best wishes to the President and to all in these United States that work together for positive change on behalf of working families, the disenfranchised, and the oppressed, and for an end to racism, exploitation for private profit.

In unity and struggle,
rico49

The Cuban Revolution and the liberation of Africa

2009-01-18T15:05:00.000-05:00

When the Cuban Revolution triumphed on Jan. 1 1959, its leaders openly declared their enmity for imperialism and colonialism, and began to organize material solidarity for revolutionary struggles in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

One of the first African countries on which Cuba focused was the Congo, a Belgian colony until 1960. Though rich in minerals, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (as it is now called) had been ruthlessly looted by Belgian, European and U.S. capitalists, who strove to make sure they could continue to do so unimpeded after the country became independent. The CIA and Belgium connived with Congolese traitors to murder the left-wing prime minister, Patrice Lumumba and replace him with a corrupt military man, Joseph Mobutu (later Mobutu Sese-Seko). Lumumba’s supporters carried out guerilla war against Mobutu and an army of foreign mercenaries the CIA brought in to support him.

Ernesto “Che” Guevara, one of the main leaders and theoreticians of the Cuban Revolution, showed up in the Congo with a small but highly-trained group of mostly Afro-Cuban volunteers, and worked with Congolese guerilla forces, trying to impart some of the ideological and tactical lessons learned in Cuba in a new context. Unfortunately, even with Cuban help, the organizational and leadership level of the insurgent forces was no match for the Mobutu army and the white mercenaries. Thwarted, Che left Africa for Bolivia, where he met a heroic death.

Cuba helped Algeria resist a Moroccan invasion, and helped the Portuguese colonies in Africa (Angola, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau, Cape Verde and Sao Tome-Principe) fight for independence. In 1974, the overthrow of the fascist regime in Portugal made possible the quick triumph of the independence struggles. In central Angola, the MPLA (People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola) formed a government, led by Marxist doctor Augustinho Neto, whom Che had met in Africa in 1965. However, two right-wing armed movements — the FLNA of Holden Roberto (Mobutu’s brother in law) and UNITA, led by a ruthless warlord, Jonas Savimbi — contested the MPLA’s power.

From the north, Roberto invaded with troops from Mobutu’s Congolese army, in an attempt to capture the Angolan capital, Luanda. South African apartheid troops, who had been fighting the SWAPO independence movement in Namibia, pushed north. Both these forces were fully aided by the CIA.

At this point, Cuba sent its own military forces to support the Angolan troops. It was not a matter of technical advisors, but of thousands of Cuban volunteers putting their lives on the line to defend the Angolan people’s freedom. Quickly, Cuban and Angolan troops defeated Holden Roberto’s forces, which ceased to be a factor in Angola, and then turned back the South African intervention.

In 1985, the South African army invaded Angola from Namibia once more, in coordination with Savimbi. Cuban President Fidel Castro quickly sent a force of 40,000 Cuban troops to help Neto (Fidel says eventually more than 300,000 Cuban soldiers and 50,000 technical helpers served in Angola — all of them volunteers).

From December 1987 to March 1988, Cuban and Angolan troops, with Soviet aid, defeated South Africa and UNITA in the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale, an Angolan military base which the South Africans and UNITA tried to capture with five unsuccessful ground assaults. Though South Africa claimed victory, there is no doubt it was for them not only a military but a huge political defeat. A short while later South African and Cuban troops were withdrawn from Angola and Namibia got its independence.

Most analysts consider that Cuito Cuanavale so rattled the South African regime that it led to the fall of hard-line racist prime minister P.W. Botha and his replacement by F.W. deKlerk, who convinced his colleagues in the ruling National Party that they must negotiate with the African National Congress. There followed Nelson Mandela’s release from prison and the crumbling of the apartheid state.

Today, Angola remains poor despite continued Cuban help, oil wealth and the death of Savimbi. The Democratic Republic of the Congo has still not recovered from Mobutu’s long and larcenous reign. But all over Africa, the Cuban contribution is recognized and extolled.

Nelson Mandela put it best: “Hundreds of Cubans have given their lives, literally, in a struggle that was, first and foremost, not theirs but ours. As Southern Africans we salute them. We vow never to forget this unparalleled example of selfless internationalism.”

Bailout Is a Windfall to Banks, if Not to Borrowers

2009-01-18T08:15:00.007-05:00

In a New York Times article of January 18, 2009 entitled Bailout Is a Windfall to Banks, if Not to Borrowers, Mike McIntire reports on the fact that the banks that received federal bailouts have not used the money to make loans.

The chairman of one bank, the Whitney National Bank in New Orleans, in explaining how his bank was going to use the $300 million it received of bailout funds, said

“Make more loans? We’re not going to change our business model or our credit policies to accommodate the needs of the public sector as they see it to have us make more loans.”

Highlighting the systemic nature of the financial crisis, despite over a trillion dollars being distributed in various forms of bailout and supports to the financial industry, things continue getting worse.

[A]s mounting losses at major banks like Citigroup and Bank of America in the last week have underscored, regulators are still searching for ways to stabilize the banking system.

According to the New York Times,

[T]he Obama administration could be forced early on to come up with a systemic solution....

The capitalist economic system in which the banks function incorporates no sense of commitment to the needs of working families or the larger society. This is reflected in the behavior of the people in the banking institutions.

An overwhelming majority saw the bailout program as a no-strings-attached windfall that could be used to pay down debt, acquire other businesses or invest for the future.

Most financial institutions don't see increased lending as a responsibility associated with the acceptance of the bailout funds, in part because the law authorizing the bailout funds did not stipulate that usage. At least on banker, Walter M. Pressey of Boston Private Wealth Management, sees the bailout money as a cash cushion.

“With that capital in hand, not only do we feel comfortable that we can ride out the recession,” he said, “but we also feel that we’ll be in a position to take advantage of opportunities that present themselves once this recession is sorted out.”

In the initial discussion about the bailout, the funds were expected to be used to buy up bad mortgages. Then the focus shifted after the money was allocated and the funds were used instead to "direct investments in individual banks in return for preferred shares of stock".

But a Congressional oversight panel reported on Jan. 9 that it found no evidence the bailout program had been used to prevent foreclosures, raising questions about whether the Treasury has complied with the law’s requirement that it develop a “plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners.”

The report concluded that the Treasury’s top priority seemed to be to “stabilize financial markets” by simply giving healthy banks more money and letting them decide how best to use it. The report also said it was not clear how giving billions to banks “advances both the goal of financial stability and the well-being of taxpayers, including homeowners threatened by foreclosure, people losing their jobs, and families unable to pay their credit cards.”

Mark Fitzgibbon, research director at Sandler O’Neill & Partners, which sponsored the Palm Beach conference, said banks seemed to be allocating the bailout money for four general purposes: increased lending, absorbing losses, bolstering capital and “opportunistic acquisitions.” He said those approaches made sense from a business perspective, even though they might not conform to popular expectations that the money would be immediately lent to consumers.

The bankers take different approaches, but in the end many of them

“...see TARP as an insurance policy,” he said. “That when all this stuff is finally over, no matter how bad it gets, we’re going to be one of the remaining banks.”

The priority of the banks for self-preservation by hoarding the federal bailout funds, or to use the money for opportunistic acquistions and expansion, directly contravenes the focus of the efforts to make the economy functional. However, the banks are acting totally logically from their own perspective. Here we have an example of the social contradictions built into capitalism that highlights the divergence between the needs of the great masses of the people in this country, the working families that include you and I, and the systemic needs of the financial institutions and the capitalists these institutions serve.

At a time when there is a growing acknowledgement that a restructuring of our economic system is required, it is important to present the socialist alternative. For example, rather than buying non-voting "preferred" stock in financial institutions, and thus effectively denying the Federal government a voice in the operation of the institution, it would save money for the society and bring the institutions under democratic control if they were bought at current market prices and absorbed into a single national bank under direct Congressional control. An alternative would be to seize the banks without restititution and create a national bank. Whatever the mechanism, and whatever the structure that emerged, the main structural differences that socialism would advocate would result in the financial institutions being under more public, democratic, control and having as a priority the needs of the vast majority of the people of this nation, the working families that actually keep our economy afloat.

To participate in a discussion on the question of structural change and meeting the economic challenges of our time, please join the Socialist Economics group at http://groups.google.com/group/socialist-economics/.

Cease Fire Now! End the Siege!

2009-01-17T23:06:00.003-05:00

Editor's note: This statement is published despite the report in the New York Times this evening that

Israel’s prime minister announced the unilateral cease-fire in Gaza late Saturday, saying all Israeli objectives for the war had been reached.

Israeli soldiers will remain in Gaza as an occupying force, and Hamas has pledged to carry on the struggle against the occupation.

Almost three weeks into "Operation Cast Lead," we call once more on Jews and others to speak out for a cease fire and against the siege of Gaza.

At Jewish Voice for Peace, we echo the report issued on January 14 by 9 Israeli human rights organizations: Israel's military operations in Gaza pose a "clear and present danger to the lives and well-being of tens of thousands of civilians." In Gaza, "the level of harm to the civilian population is unprecedented" while "military forces are making wanton use of lethal force."

We condemn Israel's assault on Gaza. As of today , more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli assault, including at least 335 children and many more civilians. Nearly 5,000 have been wounded, many paralyzed for life. Tens of thousands have fled their homes - but Gaza is entirely sealed off, so there is nowhere to hide, no safe haven for civilians, no escape corridor for civilians to flee the air, sea and land attacks. Electricity and running water are scarce, the health system has collapsed and sewage is running through the streets in some areas. Inside of Israel, rockets continue to rain down, hitting population centers like Beer Sheba and Ashkelon and causing widespread fear.

We condemn these ongoing rocket attacks, which indiscriminately target civilians. 13 Israelis have been killed, 3 of them civilians, with over 82 civilians injured.

Jewish Voice for Peace:

* Calls on all Americans to support Rep. Dennis Kucinich's resolution calling for an "immediate and unconditional ceasefire" and "unrestricted humanitarian access" to Gaza. Call your congressperson or write them today.

* Joins the call from Human Rights Watch (and others) for Israel to stop using white phosphorous, an incendiary tool permissable in the laws of war as an "obscurant" - but when used in densely populated Gaza, causes widespread, horrific burning of the skin.

* Demands an end to the vicious siege on Gaza, which brought the population to the brink of humanitarian disaster with extreme shortages of food, water, fuel and medical supplies.

* Calls for an end to the 41 years of occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, including an immediate end to the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Only when Palestinians and Israelis are both equally free to decide their own sovereignty will there be peace.

One bright spot in the midst of this terrible darkness is the explosion of dissent in all corners of the globe. We are especially moved by the Israelis who refuse to fall in line with the drumbeat of war: those like Nomika Zion in southern Gaza who, despite living terrified under rocket fire, stand up to say "Not in my name...The bloodbath in Gaza is not in my name nor for my security." or the group "Other Voice", made up of Israelis living under the threat of qassams, who call for Israel to end the attack and strike a truce with Hamas.

We are inspired by those Israeli soldiers who refuse to fight this civilian population, some of whom are already in jail for their refusal; those Israelis who gather every week to demand their country halt its assault and end the siege, or protest everyday at countless intersections throughout the country; and especially those Israelis who stand outside Sde Dov airforce base in Tel Aviv every morning to remind the pilots that every day they drop their bombs, they drop them on civilians.

In North America, we are inspired by the thousands of people who have gone into the streets for protests, in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and elsewhere, and especially the Jewish women who held a sit-in the Israeli consulate in Toronto, telling the Israeli authorities that "we'll end our occupation when you end yours."

And we are motivated by the tens of thousands who have signed petitions and sent letters calling for Congress to work for an immediate ceasefire and end the siege, and by the tens of thousands who have signed up on JVP's email list and sent thank-you letters to Jon Stewart (www.thankyoujonstewart.com). We are hopeful that more journalists and op-ed page editors will tell the truth about Gaza and Israel (here are examples from the Washington Postand the Wall Street Journal.)

And we are grateful to our friends at Jewish Peace News for bringing us insightful analysis and timely reports on dissent against the war.

© Copyright by JewishVoiceForPeace.org

Obama Pledges Entitlement Reform; Moving Away from Employee Free Choice Act

2009-01-17T08:17:00.005-05:00

What is going to be the cost of the economic recovery plan to working families?

The President-elect is reportedly positioning the economic recovery in opposition to the "entitlement" programs, Social Security and Medicare.

As Michael D. Shear reported in the January 16, 2009 Washington Post,

President-elect Barack Obama pledged yesterday to shape a new Social Security and Medicare "bargain" with the American people, saying that the nation's long-term economic recovery cannot be attained unless the government finally gets control over its most costly entitlement programs.

What the President-elect means by getting control over these programs remains to be seen. However, just the fact that this discussion is being advanced must raise very serious concerns for anyone interested in the well being of our elderly, poor, and disabled family and friends in this country.

The article reported the President-elect as saying

"What we have done is kicked this can down the road. We are now at the end of the road and are not in a position to kick it any further. We have to signal seriousness in this by making sure some of the hard decisions are made under my watch, not someone else's."

At the same time, the President-elect is signaling a move away from support for the Employee Free Choice Act.

The president-elect also gave his support for legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize, but he said there may be other ways to achieve the same goal without angering businesses. And while many Democrats on Capitol Hill are eager to see a quick vote on that bill, he indicated no desire to rush into the contentious issue.

"If we're losing half a million jobs a month, then there are no jobs to unionize, so my focus first is on those key economic priority items I just mentioned," he said. "Let's see what the legislative docket looks like."

The President-elect reportedly

framed the economic recovery efforts more broadly, saying it is impossible to separate the country's financial ills from the long-term need to rein in health-care costs, stabilize Social Security and prevent the Medicare program from bankrupting the government.

The president-elect said

"Social Security, we can solve. The big problem is Medicare, which is unsustainable. . . . We can't solve Medicare in isolation from the broader problems of the health-care system."

These statements raise more questions than they answer. It is too early to know what direction the President-elect intends to take these efforts to address fundamental problems in important programs that help everyone in the United States. The important thing for working families and our allies and organizations, and many are already doing this, is to continue to exert pressure to protect and expand these programs and to participate in providing counsel and support to the President-elect in any efforts he makes that move in that direction.

The President-elects outlook is

"The theory behind it is I set the tone," Obama said. "If the tone I set is that we bring as much intellectual firepower to a problem, that people act respectfully towards each other, that disagreements are fully aired, and that we make decisions based on facts and evidence as opposed to ideology, that people will adapt to that culture and we'll be able to move together effectively as a team."

This non-partisan, anti-ideological, managerial approach implies that one can in fact come to an understanding of data without applying an interpretive structure. Ideology or philosophy define the priorities and the goals of a decision making process. It causes concern to some that the President-elect sees himself in this anti-ideological context because to address the issues of the day demands a clear set of goals and a clearly defined context in which to make the decisions required to achieve those goals. Many of these questions create situations where win-win doesn't work because of the contradictions in the social structure. Where will the money for Medicare come from if it to be protected and expanded? From the beleagured backs of working families or from the overflowing coffers of the rich. If neither is an option, do we jettison the program? Does it get morphed into something very different? Just as with President Clinton's "welfare reform" initiative, can Social Security and Medicare be protected and expanded or will they be gutted or transmogrified in the name of fiscal responsibility?

There are fundamentally opposing interests at play in our society and our economy. These large questions about the "entitlement" programs and unionization could be viewed more fundamentally as discussions about the priorities for this nation. Do we want to continue the increasing accumulation of wealth in the hands of 1% of the nation's people while the other 99% see a continuing real loss in spending power? Do we see providing health care to the people of the nation as enough of a priority to challenge the insurance companies which, like vampires, feed off the financial blood of the healthy and leave the sick to rot untreated. Each solution to a problem involves winners and losers when an economy gets to the point we're in today, where there is little room left for padding.

The President-elect is a man of compassion and intelligence. In just a few days he will be the acting President of the United States. Let's look forward with positive anticipation to a humane and supportive administration crafting programs that benefit working families. We are all invited to participate through the Change.gov web site, participating in the policy discussion, and by participating in the Renew America Together days of service. However, keeping in mind the President-elect's background as a community organizer, we can also all participate by working in our neighborhoods and work places to build and expand a people's movement to help the new administration win the fights they must take on, and to provide pressure to ensure that working families needs are the priority for the next challenging period in our nation's history.

Communist Party of Greece: Theses of the CC on Socialism: 1 - The Contribution of the Socialist System

2009-01-17T00:23:00.013-05:00

The Communist Party of Greece Central Committee has offered a set of Theses of the CC on Socialism. The Theses deal with

-- the contribution of the Socialist system

-- theoretical positions on Socialism as the first, lower stage of Communism

-- Socialism in the USSR - Causes of the victory of counter-revolution

-- The necessity and relevance of Socialism, Enrichment of our programmatic conception of socialism

-- Epilogue

Certainly we in the United States are now living through a period of fundamental restructuring in the economic system due to the global crisis of Capitalism today. However, a restructuring is not a revolutary activity when it leaves the old power structures and priorities in place. As the Theses declare in their opening:

The development of capitalism and the class struggle inevitably brought communism to the historical limelight during the middle of the 19th century.

Communism is back in the limelight today in the United States, though seen through the lens of capitalist distortions and some liberal anti-communism.

However, the financial crisis forces fundamental questions before the working class and the capitalist class both, and in some ways capitalists have been more effective than the working class in responding. Just looked at in economic terms, the tally today would be capitalists $1.5 to $2 trillion, working class about zero.

There is much hope that this will change post-inauguration, with the administration of President-elect Obama. However, there are both good and disturbing signs of future plans. For example, the $700 billion fiscal kick-start to put people to work is a very positive down payment on what should end up being $1 to $2 trillion in funds if the need is to be met.

However, on the disturbing side one finds talk about the need to review "entitlements" like social security and medicare, two programs at the very heart of our limited but vital social support system for working people, and especially the elderly. Both these programs need to be protected and expanded, not reviewed due to a fake lack of resources for the Federal government. A good recent action that would argue against the idea that an attack on Social Security and Medicare might be waiting in the wings is the recent vote for the extension and expansion of the SCHIP program.

I say "fake lack of resources" in the paragraph above because the obscenely disproporationate distribution of wealth to the top 1% of the population's benefit has not been addressed. Until the distribution of wealth is made more democratic and realistic through very progressive and redistributive taxation, there should be no talk of anything but protecting and expanding programs that help working families, immigrants, the disabled, and the young. There is plenty of money available; it is just tied up in the hands of the very few richest people in the United States.

The Theses mentions that

Despite the various problems of socialist countries, the socialist system of the 20th century proved its superiority over capitalism and the huge advantages that it provides for peoples’ lives and working conditions.

While the anti-Soviet mill continues to spew out its selective and distorted vision of an evil empire, the reality was as more complex. The Theses outlines:

[E]veryone had guaranteed work, public free health care and education, the provision of cheap services from the state, housing, and access to intellectual and cultural pursuits.

These are huge victories for working families and compare favorably to the United States, where there is much hunger, vast numbers of people without effective access to health care, housing is tenuous as shown by the mortgage crisis, and work is a disappearing luxury as the government's computers die under the onslaught of requests for unemployment insurance aid.

One can look at the Cuban experiment to see the flowering of the Socialist project in our hemisphere. While blockaded by the US, Cuba has continue to flourish and provide a good life to that nation's population. The US media forgets the blockade, which has been attempting to strangle Cuba. Capitalist and bourgeois media presents the problem of new cars in Cuba as if it were not due to the US embargo that prevents the cars from being imported but were somehow a result of the weakness of the socialism system. Capitalist media never mentions the thousands of doctors that Cuba has sent around the world to help the poor and those in need for free.

When viewed with an objective and partisan eye, the Socialist countries were and are able to provide a much healthier and more stable life for their working class populations.

Section A concludes that:

The gains that were undoubtedly achieved in the socialist states, in comparison to their starting point as well as in comparison to the living standard of working people in the capitalist world, prove that socialism holds intrinsic potential for dramatic and continual improvement in the lives of humankind and the development of the human personality.

The level of development of socialism in each revolutionary worker’s state was not the same and to a large extent was dependent on the level of capitalist development that existed when power was seized - an issue that must be taken under consideration when assessments and comparisons are made.

The most significant fact, however, is that the historic leap that was attempted and accomplished with the October Revolution in Russia as the starting point, gave an important momentum to the development of man, as the main productive force, in his scientific and technological achievements, in the advancement of his living standards, educational and cultural level.

What was historically new, was that this development concerned the masses as a whole, in contrast to capitalist development which is intertwined with exploitation and social injustice, with great devastation such as that, which occurred with the native populations in the American continent, in Australia, with the massive slavery system in the USA in the previous centuries, with colonial exploitation, with the anarchy of production and the ensuing destruction of the great economic crises, with imperialist wars, child labour and so much more.

The contribution and the superiority of socialist construction in the USSR should be judged in correlation with the imperialist strategy of encirclement that caused great destruction, continuous obstacles and threats. The imperialist strategy took various forms during different periods of revolutionary workers’ power (direct imperialist attack in 1918 and 1941, declaration of the Cold War in 1946, differentiated political diplomatic relations in relation to other states of Central and Eastern Europe).

This fact does not annul the need to focus our attention to internal conditions, to the economic-political relations, with the decisive role of the subjective factor in the dominance, development and supremacy of the new social relations.

There can be much discussion on these Theses. Certainly the assertion of the "decisive role of the subjective factor in the dominance, development and supremacy of the new social relations" deserves further exploration and discussion. The implication is that the ideological struggle is now on the forefront of the struggle for Socialism, a struggle that many see as decisive in regards to humanity's survival due to the prediliction for war and for destroying the environment that capitalism exhibits. Were subjective factors the primary reason for the victory for counter-revolution in the Soviet Union? Did the second economy that developed there play a decisive role as well? Did other issues? What was the relationship between the subjective and the objective/materialist contradictions that resulted in the set back to the workers of the Soviet Union that resulted in the loss of Socialism in that nation?

Regardless of the conclusions drawn the times have presented working people with fundamental questions to resolve:

How should our financial system be structured?

Why are we at war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly elsewhere

What is globalization and how can working people unite to turn the positive aspects of globalization to our benefit and end the negative aspects that result in a race to the bottom of the wage scale, unemployment, and other social problems.

How can we fix the environment in a society whose financial system structurally demands the rape and pillage of every natural resource?

How can we develop a positive set of relations with our neighbors, tolerant of differences, and expressing strong internationalist solidarity with the working families, the working class, in every area.

How can we win peace in a capitalist system the demands resources and disrespects people? What are the contradictions in the social system that tend toward war?

How can the systemic and demonstrable impacts of racism be eradicated, such as the health differentials between Black and white people in the United States.

How can we create a society able to provide health care to all?

At the end of the day, the challenges demand a structural solution. Is Socialism the answer to the question: how can man survive for the next two hundred years. I think so. What do you think?

Bank of America Posts Loss as It Gets New Aid

2009-01-16T10:02:00.006-05:00

On January 17, 2009 the New York Times reported that "Bank of America Posts Loss as It Gets New Aid" in an article by LOUISE STORY, ERIC DASH and ANDREW ROSS SORKIN.

The new bailout includes "a fresh $20 billion capital injection and absorb as much as $98.2 billion in losses on toxic assets."

"The second lifeline brings the government’s total stake in Bank of America to $45 billion and makes it the bank’s largest shareholder, with a stake of about 6 percent."

Thus one financial organization has received a commitment from the US federal government for $45 billion in direct cash and $92 billion in indirect support, or a total of $143 billion.

This represents 20% of the amount that is being proposed to help put the millions of people who are now out of work back to work. In real terms, it shows that the current capitalist system has a much greater commitment to maintaining its own structures than to addressing the needs of the people.

While many voices across the political spectrum talk about the need to help working families, they at the same time talk about being careful about debt. The sense of a total commitment to helping working families such as that expressed for protecting banking institutions is lacking.

As quoted in the article:

“The U.S. government will continue to use all of our resources to preserve the strength of our banking institutions and promote the process of repair and recovery and to manage risks,” regulators said.

With losses mounting in the financial industry, other banks may eventually feel compelled to turn to the government for assistance, and the program could to used for other big banks. Taxpayers could end up guaranteeing hundreds of billions of dollars of banks’ toxic assets.

“The financial services sector still needs more equity,” said Frederick Cannon, the managing director at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. “TARP was announced in mid-September and most of the initial decisions were based on the state of the economy then. The economy has gotten a heck of a lot worse.”

The question remains, why is this total commitment lacking when it comes to industry and to working families. This highlights a fundamental problem with the capitalist system; the prioritization of profits over people.

While we struggle as a society to find funding for the human needs of the vast majority of the people, needs like health care, housing, education, and addressing hunger, the coffers have no bottom when it comes to bailing out the rich and their institutions.

Socialism realigns the social priorities toward meeting the needs of the majority of the people and limits exploitation for private profit. Fundamental change is needed today. We in the United States can move forward together to figure out how to meet our needs and dump those who exist to exploit and legally rob off our backs.

US Rabbis Urge Obama to Push for Immediate Gaza Truce

2009-01-15T22:25:00.001-05:00

US Rabbis Urge Obama to Push for Immediate Gaza Truce

By Natasha Mozgavaya and Haaretz Staff

January 15, 2009 by Haaretz (Israel)

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1055463.html

A group of rabbis and other religious leaders bought advertising space in the New York Times this week to call for U.S. president-elect Barack Obama to push for an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip.

The ad, placed by the Network of Spiritual Progressives and claiming to represent more than 2,800 other religious, cultural and community leaders, urges Obama to convene an international Middle East peace conference to "facilitate a lasting and just settlement for all parties."

Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine, who convened the group, said the group had to buy the advertising space because the national newspapers would not make room for their perspective.

"They feel that AIPAC's choice is overwhelming, and there's no space left for empathy or objective coverage

- the media, according to the group, simply ignored the voice of the Jewish opposition to war in Gaza," Rabbi Lerner said.

Eleven prominent British Jews, including Baroness Julia Neuberger, published a letter in The Observer newspaper last weekend expressing their "horror" at the Gaza conflict and calling on Israel to stop its military campaign.

Israel has been waging an offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip since December 27. The operation, launched in order to halt cross-border rocket fire, has come under heavy criticism for the high number of civilian casualties.

AFL-CIO - Acuff Cuts Through the Spin About Employee Free Choice

2009-01-15T20:35:00.001-05:00

Our own Stewart Acuff delivered quite a shock to Fox News last week. Despite the network and corporate spin, Acuff told talk show host Neal Cavuto the Employee Free Choice Act does not eliminate or make illegal the secret ballot election when workers want to form a union. After parroting the party line for so long, that seemed to come as shock to Cavuto.

Click link below to see:

Acuff Cuts Through the Spin About Employee Free Choice

Post-Tribune Jan. 14 addition: "Environmental, citizens groups upset with Daniels"

2009-01-15T20:31:00.001-05:00

"Environmental, citizens groups upset with Daniels"
By Gitte Laasby
A coalition of environmental and citizen action groups are getting fed up with Gov. Mitch Daniels' lack of response to their public information requests.
The groups requested information two and a half months ago but have not received any documents.
http://www.post-trib.com/business/1375985,dukedoc.article

The Cuba 5 on the 50th Anniversary of the Cuban Revolution

2009-01-15T17:16:00.000-05:00

On the 50th anniversary of Cuba's socialist revolution, the CPUSA recognizes the heroism and revolutionary example of five Cuban men unjustly imprisoned in U.S. federal prisons for over ten years.

Arriving in Florida in the 1990's, Gerardo Hernández, Antonio Guerrero, Ramón Labañino, Fernando González, and René González joined private paramilitary groups in order to monitor and report on preparations for attacks against Cuba. For decades, right wing terrorists based in Florida had carried out murderous assaults which have cost the lives of many innocent people.

From the time of their arrest, the Five were subjected to cruel persecution. At their trial, which rampant with bias, the prosecution had free rein to commit egregious abuses of due process. Outrageously long sentences were handed down. UN human rights authorities and international jurists are of one voice in castigating judicial proceedings in the case of the Five.

Violation of civil rights and repudiation of judicial norms are two reasons why we joined the world solidarity movement on their behalf. The CPUSA fights for the Cuban Five also because of dedication to the Cuban Revolution. The U.S. government has cast these five revolutionaries as proxies for a government and people that resist. Our Party defends Cuba's right to protect its national sovereignty against the depredations of empire, and to continue without interference on the socialist path it has chosen.

Wholesale perversion of justice in the case of the Five serves as cover-up for hypocrisy. The U.S. government wages a so-called war on terrorism, yet has long sanctioned violent assaults on Cuba. Safe harbor provided arch terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, who lives undisturbed in Miami, is one example.

The CPUSA issues an appeal for all in solidarity with the Five to reach out to fair-minded, politically conscious people to commit themselves to the Five. Such solidarity is overwhelmingly necessary if the nefarious influence of the corporate dominated media that has suppressed news of the case is to be overcome.

The time is now for our party and other activists to intensify educational efforts on the Five directed at union locals, peace groups, and civil rights organizations as preparation for communications to the media, meetings with elected officials, and public statements.

British and other international labor unions have taken up the cause of the Five as their own; we urge US trade unionists to do so also..

We are mindful that mobilization of progressive forces to demand a presidential pardon could eventually be required to complement the appeals process.

The CPUSA is part of the campaign to force the U.S. State Department to permit Adriana Perez and Olga Salanueva to visit their imprisoned husbands, whom they have not seen for ten and almost nine years, respectively. At issue are rights of families and prisoners.

Lastly we urge that all in solidarity with the Five to correspond with the prisoners as a step toward lessening their isolation and as token of the worldwide movement on their behalf [below are the addresses].

Gerardo Hernandez
#58739-004
U.S.P. Victorville
P.O. Box 5300
Adelanto, CA 92301

Antonio Guerrero
#58741-004
U.S.P. Florence
P.O. Box 7000
Florence CO 81226

Luís Medina
#58734-004
U.S.P. McCreary
P.O. Box 3000
Pine Knot, KY 42635

(NOTE: the envelope should be addressed to "Luis Medina," but address the letter inside to Ramon Labañino)

Rubén Campa
#58733-004
FCI Terre Haute
P.O. Box 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

(NOTE: the envelope should be addressed to "Rubén Campa," but address the letter inside to Fernando González)

René González
#58738-004
FCI Marianna
P.O. Box 7007
Marianna, FL 32447-7007

William Sieghart: We must adjust our distorted image of Hamas

2009-01-15T17:05:00.002-05:00

Gaza is a secular society where people listen to pop music, watch TV and many women walk the streets unveiled

-- William Sieghart

Last week I was in Gaza. While I was there I met a group of 20 or so police officers who were undergoing a course in conflict management. They were eager to know whether foreigners felt safer since Hamas had taken over the Government? Indeed we did, we told them. Without doubt the past 18 months had seen a comparative calm on the streets of Gaza; no gunmen on the streets, no more kidnappings. They smiled with great pride and waved us goodbye.

Less than a week later all of these men were dead, killed by an Israeli rocket at a graduation ceremony. Were they “dangerous Hamas militant gunmen”? No, they were unarmed police officers, public servants killed not in a “militant training camp” but in the same police station in the middle of Gaza City that had been used by the British, the Israelis and Fatah during their periods of rule there.

This distinction is crucial because while the horrific scenes in Gaza and Israel play themselves out on our television screens, a war of words is being fought that is clouding our understanding of the realities on the ground.

Who or what is Hamas, the movement that Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, would like to wipe out as though it were a virus? Why did it win the Palestinian elections and why does it allow rockets to be fired into Israel? The story of Hamas over the past three years reveals how the Israeli, US and UK governments' misunderstanding of this Islamist movement has led us to the brutal and desperate situation that we are in now.

The story begins nearly three years ago when Change and Reform - Hamas's political party - unexpectedly won the first free and fair elections in the Arab world, on a platform of ending endemic corruption and improving the almost non-existent public services in Gaza and the West Bank. Against a divided opposition this ostensibly religious party impressed the predominantly secular community to win with 42 per cent of the vote.

Palestinians did not vote for Hamas because it was dedicated to the destruction of the state of Israel or because it had been responsible for waves of suicide bombings that had killed Israeli citizens. They voted for Hamas because they thought that Fatah, the party of the rejected Government, had failed them. Despite renouncing violence and recognising the state of Israel Fatah had not achieved a Palestinian state. It is crucial to know this to understand the supposed rejectionist position of Hamas. It won't recognise Israel or renounce the right to resist until it is sure of the world's commitment to a just solution to the Palestinian issue.

In the five years that I have been visiting Gaza and the West Bank, I have met hundreds of Hamas politicians and supporters. None of them has professed the goal of Islamising Palestinian society, Taleban-style. Hamas relies on secular voters too much to do that. People still listen to pop music, watch television and women still choose whether to wear the veil or not.

The political leadership of Hamas is probably the most highly qualified in the world. Boasting more than 500 PhDs in its ranks, the majority are middle-class professionals - doctors, dentists, scientists and engineers. Most of its leadership have been educated in our universities and harbour no ideological hatred towards the West. It is a grievance-based movement, dedicated to addressing the injustice done to its people. It has consistently offered a ten-year ceasefire to give breathing space to resolve a conflict that has continued for more than 60 years.

The Bush-Blair response to the Hamas victory in 2006 is the key to today's horror. Instead of accepting the democratically elected Government, they funded an attempt to remove it by force; training and arming groups of Fatah fighters to unseat Hamas militarily and impose a new, unelected government on the Palestinians. Further, 45 Hamas MPs are still being held in Israeli jails.

Six months ago the Israeli Government agreed to an Egyptian- brokered ceasefire with Hamas. In return for a ceasefire, Israel agreed to open the crossing points and allow a free flow of essential supplies in and out of Gaza. The rocket barrages ended but the crossings never fully opened, and the people of Gaza began to starve. This crippling embargo was no reward for peace.

When Westerners ask what is in the mind of Hamas leaders when they order or allow rockets to be fired at Israel they fail to understand the Palestinian position. Two months ago the Israeli Defence Forces broke the ceasefire by entering Gaza and beginning the cycle of killing again. In the Palestinian narrative each round of rocket attacks is a response to Israeli attacks. In the Israeli narrative it is the other way round.

But what does it mean when Mr Barak talks of destroying Hamas? Does it mean killing the 42 per cent of Palestinians who voted for it? Does it mean reoccupying the Gaza strip that Israel withdrew from so painfully three years ago? Or does it mean permanently separating the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank, politically and geographically? And for those whose mantra is Israeli security, what sort of threat do the three quarters of a million young people growing up in Gaza with an implacable hatred of those who starve and bomb them pose?

It is said that this conflict is impossible to solve. In fact, it is very simple. The top 1,000 people who run Israel - the politicians, generals and security staff - and the top Palestinian Islamists have never met. Genuine peace will require that these two groups sit down together without preconditions. But the events of the past few days seem to have made this more unlikely than ever. That is the challenge for the new administration in Washington and for its European allies.

William Sieghart is chairman of Forward Thinking, an independent conflict resolution agency

Jan. 15 Call In Day for HR 676: What Better Way to Honor Dr. King

2009-01-15T08:11:00.003-05:00

Unions for Single Payer HR676 is calling for a "Jan. 15 Call In Day for HR 676: What Better Way to Honor Dr. King".

Their statement is included below. Please consider calling in today; there are few more important actions you can take on your own behalf, for your family, and for the many millions of uninsured, underinsured, and people denied access to needed health care by a heartless and expensive bureaucracy that adds nothing to providing health care or to controlling costs.

"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking
and inhumane." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

With over 48 million people in the United States living without health insurance, the issue of providing quality affordable health care to all is high on the agenda for this nation.

"Of all forms of inequality, injustice in healthcare is the most shocking
and inhumane." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Born January 15,
1929--Assassinated April 4, 1968, while leading a strike for union and
human rights for Memphis sanitation workers.

The famous quote of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is worth keeping in mind
on Thursday, January 15, as you call your congressperson and ask him or
her to sign on as a co-sponsor of HR 676, Congressman John Conyers' (D-MI)
single payer healthcare legislation. HR 676 will shortly be reintroduced
into the 111th Congress with the same number.

Eighty-six members of the new 111th Congress were co-sponsors of HR 676 in
the last Congress. Now is the time to call them and urge them to sign on
again as co-sponsors in the 111th Congress and to ask all the others,
including the newly elected representatives, to do likewise.

A number organizations advocating HR 676 are asking supporters to call
their congressperson on Thursday, January 15th. All of us acting on the
same day will magnify the impact. Please take a moment to call the US
Capitol switchboard: (202) 224 3121. Then ask for your representative.

If you need to look up your or someone else's Congressperson, you can go
to http://votesmart.org/ and put in the zip code.

If you have two more minutes, please call one or both or your senators to
urge them to introduce in the Senate a companion bill to HR 676. You can
use the same number: (202) 224 3121.

We'd love to hear from you about the response you received. Please write
us at nursenpo@aol.com.

HR 676 would institute a single payer health care system in the U.S. by
expanding a greatly improved Medicare system to every resident.

HR 676 would cover every person in the U. S. for all necessary medical
care including prescription drugs, hospital, surgical, outpatient
services, primary and preventive care, emergency services, dental, mental
health, home health, physical therapy, rehabilitation (including for
substance abuse), vision care, chiropractic and long term care.

HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. HR 676 would save billions
annually by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private
health insurance industry and HMOs.

In the 110th Congress, HR 676 had 93 co-sponsors in addition to Conyers

HR 676 has been endorsed by 478 union organizations in 49 states including
118 Central Labor Councils and Area Labor Federations and 39 state
AFL-CIO's (KY, PA, CT, OH, DE, ND, WA, SC, WY, VT, FL, WI, WV, SD, NC, MO,
MN, ME, AR, MD-DC, TX, IA, AZ, TN, OR, GA, OK, KS, CO, IN, AL, CA, AK, MI,
MT, NE, NY, NV & MA).

For further information, a list of union endorsers, or a sample
endorsement resolution, contact:

Kay Tillow
All Unions Committee For Single Payer Health Care--HR 676
c/o Nurses Professional Organization (NPO)
1169 Eastern Parkway, Suite 2218
Louisville, KY 40217
(502) 636 1551
Email: nursenpo@aol.com
http://unionsforsinglepayerHR676.org
01/14/09

AFL-CIO - Acuff Cuts Through the Spin About Employee Free Choice

2009-01-14T21:52:00.002-05:00

Click link below to see:

Acuff Cuts Through the Spin About Employee Free Choice

MLK Weekend; Yes We Can Launch

2009-01-14T19:28:00.007-05:00

United for Peace and Justice is launching the "Beyond War, A New Economy Is Possible: Yes We Can" campaign this weekend as the nation honors the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. From January 17-19, the MLK Holiday weekend, there will be hundreds of events celebrating Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. all over the nation.

The following is the text of the leaflet for the campaign:

Our nation is on the eve of one the most important moments in our history: the inauguration of the first Black president of the U.S. There is great excitement and hope, here and around the world.

At the same time, the wars and occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan drag on: the death tolls mount and the financial costs are staggering, draining resources from our cash strapped communities and contributing to the current economic crisis. The “war on terror” has other costs, too, as our rights - especially the rights of the most vulnerable - have been systematically undermined.

We have been here before. More than forty years ago, a senseless war raged in Vietnam. The result: 58,000 young Americans and more than three million Vietnamese dead; a society broken and scarred; illegal assaults on our civil liberties, all in the name of patriotism. Today we are in the midst of an endless “war on terrorism” that has included invasions and occupations, and sweeping erosions in everyone’s basic human rights, particularly in communities of color.

In April 1967, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke at New York’s Riverside Church about what Vietnam meant for the United States. His words remind us of the choices we face in 2009, and how urgent it is that we change current U.S. policies—in Iraq, in the Middle East, around the world, and here at home.

“I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic, destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such.

“It became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the young black men who had been crippled in our society and sending them 8000 miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in Southwest Georgia and East Harlem.

“I knew I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today—my own government.

“The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality we will find ourselves ... marching and attending rallies without end unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy....

“[W]e as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. When machines and computers, profit and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

“A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies.... A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”

Forty-two years later, Dr. King’s challenge to us remains. Our country can make a change, a turn towards humanity and law and decency. Or we can continue down the road of deepening social injustice and permanent war. It’s time for our government to turn to the values of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. — take action to make that change.

The Importance Of Being Partisan for the Palestinians

2009-01-13T18:10:00.004-05:00

A Personal Opinion: It Is Vital to Be Partisan for the Palestinians

As the Israeli assault on Gaza continues for day 18 NPR radio reported that aproximately 40% of the Palestinians killed were women and children. Israel blames Hamas for this.

In the period leading up to the Israeli bombardment and subsequent brutal aggression against the people of Gaza the Israelis maintained a brutal and deadly blockade of the area, stopping medical supplies, food, and all necessities from entering. Israel blames Hamas for this.

The Israeli air force rains death from the skies on the densely populated Gaza region destroying schools, homes, families, children. Israel blames Hamas for this.

The discourse about the Palestinian struggle needs to clearly reject the ridiculous claims by Israel that they are acting to defend their civilian population from the evil of terrorist Hamas. Evidently from the brutality and breadth of their attack Hamas is everyone in Gaza and everyone in Gaza is a terrorist.

The use of the term terrorist has become a catchall for "bad people", often used as if "Muslim" equated to terrorst. The term is a convenient lie used to condemn whole peoples and their movements for self-determination and dignity.

The discourse on the Palestinian struggle seems to always start from today, with justified outrage for the Israelis civilians killed while dismissing the Palestinian civilians killed.

The US media does not report the Palestinian people's struggles in historical context. There is a tendency to minimize the Palestinian claim to nationality and statehood while cynically inflating the Israeli position for yet another time; for the Israelis Hamas is to blame for everything.

Generations of vicious US backed Israeli brutality against the Palestinians, continuing today, sets the stage for the efforts at winning independence by the Palestinians.

Who can forget the September 1982 massacres at Sabra and Shatila?

The ongoing Israeli settlement activity taking Palestinian lands that makes the drawing of state lines as defined in UN resolutions effectively impossible, the wall the spits its disrespect for the families that live in its shadow, the bodies of dead children carried by fathers and mothers to overcrowded hospitals, a people driven to desperation by despair,

There can be no just peace in the Palestinian struggle against the US supported Israeli occupation and aggression until people are willing to take a partisan stand on behalf of the Palestinians in the face of the heavily partisan US policy on behalf of the Israelis.

There is no question of the ongoing existence of the state of Israel. The question is stopping US backed Israeli slaughter of the Palestinians. That is the predicate for peace, not a halt to Hamas missiles.

In the United States the peace movement cannot get confused on the question of a balanced position. Our role here is to look at the US role in the ongoing struggle. The US funds the Israeli agression. Here is the US the role of the peace movement must be to demand that the US end all economic and military support for Israeli aggression and for the Israeli military.

Its time to address the Israeli-Palestinian struggle on the same basis as the struggle that the US anti-apartheid movement engaged in to win the battle against apartheid in South Africa.

A just peace is possible in the Palestinian struggle for nationhood and for dignity. It requires a partisan outlook on behalf of the Palestinian people, and a focus on our country's role in supporting the injustice and murder that Israel inflicts on the Palestinians.

There is no justification for the killing of civilians by anyone ever. However, the role that the US is playing in the problem is to support Israeli military activity against the Palestinians. That is what we here in the United States have the special responsibility to address, and to end.

For a just peace that brings statehood, dignity, and a time to heal to the Palestinians, and safety to both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Construction braces for slowdown in Northwest Indiana

2009-01-12T21:46:00.001-05:00

Construction braces for slowdown in Northwest Indiana
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1372558,construction.article)

January 12, 2009

By Erik Potter

Post-Tribune staff writer

Local and national experts expect the economic turmoil that first hit the residential housing market in 2007 to spread to the commercial construction market this year.

The Associated Builders and Contractors, a national trade group for construction firms, issued a report last month detailing the expected business climate in 2009.

The forecast is almost universally gloomy across all sectors of the industry: a 20 percent fall in retail and restaurant construction from 2008, a 20 percent decline in hotel construction, a 15 percent to 25 percent drop in office construction, and a 25 percent to 35 percent fall for manufacturing construction. Institutional buildings, such as schools and hospitals, will likely see a 5 percent slip from 2008. The one bright spot is power construction, especially in alternative energy, which is expected to grow.

Industry fortunes will continue to sour in 2009 and 2010, predicted Associated Builders and Contractors Chief Economist Anirban Basu in the group's annual report.

Locally, the current crop of construction projects, arranged before the credit crunch hit in the summer of 2007, are nearly all completed, and tight credit markets and a skittish business climate mean new projects aren't coming up to replace them.

"There's not an abundance of work out there to bid (on)," said Jeff Brant, vice president of Schererville-based Brant Construction. "Projects -- banks, churches -- are really down right now. Everybody is holding onto their money."

Locally, the $3.8 billion BP Whiting expansion will help mitigate the drop in construction opportunities elsewhere, but the strict qualifications for bidding on the BP project likely mean those benefits will be concentrated to a few firms, Brant said.

Statewide, construction backlogs -- the number of projects firms have on their books for the next year -- is down 5 percent to 15 percent, estimated J.R. Gaylor, president and CEO of Associated Builders and Contractors of Indiana.

"It's really the availability of credit and investment that's hurt us across the board,"?Gaylor said, adding that lines of credit and bonding is what allows developers to finance new buildings on the speculation that someone will buy or lease them.

A stimulus package focused on infrastructure in the new Congress could help the construction industry, which saw its national unemployment rate (not seasonally adjusted) jump from 9.6 percent in December 2007 to 15.9 this past December. Indiana saw 5.7 percent fewer construction jobs in November versus the previous year.

But the time involved for a Barack Obama administration to get sworn in, negotiate a stimulus bill, choose the projects to fund and get those projects under way could stretch into the latter portion of 2009.

"That's why our outlook for 2009 remains quite bleak,"?Basu said.

William Putz, president and owner of Trinity Construction Corp. in Merrillville, said he hopes to see a capital gains tax abatement as part of a stimulus package. "Business will jump on that and that will help," he said.

Looking long-term, Putz took an optimistic view. Eventually, people will have to start replacing their worn-out goods, factories will modernize and the economy will recover. "General Motors, Ford, (they) will have to redo and retool and rebuild their plants. Auto workers don't do that. Construction workers do that."

Contact Erik Potter at 648-3120 or epotter@post-trib.com.

Daniels keeps pushing his reform plan

2009-01-12T21:35:00.001-05:00

Daniels keeps pushing his reform plan
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1372572,gabyrne.article)

January 12, 2009

By John Byrne

Post-Tribune staff writer

INDIANAPOLIS

Say what you want about Mitch Daniels' politics. You have to admire the guy's moxie.

Not content merely to try to shepherd a balanced state budget through the closely divided General Assembly during one of the state's worst financial slumps in memory, the governor has also charted a course this year toward reforming local government.

He insists the time is right to press ahead with recommendations in the Kernan-Shepard Report, the 2007 study that found the state's many levels of municipal, township and county government redundant and inefficient.

Daniels has set a precedent in the past for these ambitious legislative agendas, but he may find he has reached for a bridge too far this year.

Last year, the governor pushed a wide-ranging scheme to overhaul the state's revenue system by capping property taxes and raising the state sales tax.

The herd of cats in the Statehouse more or less went along with the plan then, and in one sense, Daniels is dealing from a position of even greater power in the 2009 legislative session.

He did just beat Jill Long Thompson easily to win a second term, even as Hoosiers flocked to the polls to elect Democrat Barack Obama.

Some would call that a mandate. But a mandate only gets you in the door in the legislature. You need some kind of a cudgel to keep a majority of 150 elected representatives in line for four months until the legislative session ends.

And 2008 was an election year. Daniels had the threat of angry voters to terrify any legislator considering standing against a plan designed to lower homeowners' property taxes. And he defined the debate early by announcing a detailed plan even before most lawmakers got to the capitol.

The governor again released an in-depth proposal this year, calling for the consolidation of small school districts, the replacement of county commissioners with a single executive officer and the elimination of all township government, among other sweeping changes.

Nobody's on the ballot in 2009, however, so lawmakers aren't feeling that itch to make their constituents happy.

And "Let's eliminate school districts" isn't exactly as powerful a rallying cry as "Let's lower property taxes."

Plus, the governor finds himself fighting a rearguard action to protect the 2008 property tax package.

The governor and most Republicans believe it essential for the General Assembly to pass tax caps again this year, the next step in getting them on the ballot so Hoosiers can vote on whether to enshrine them in the state constitution.

The Democrats have staked out the position that given the economic crisis and the fact the caps can't get on the ballot until 2010 in any event, it's smarter to wait a year to see if the state's finances stabilize before the legislature considers the caps again.

And already, key GOP lawmakers have tweaked the governor's government reform plan.

Senate President David Long, R-Fort Wayne, told reporters voters should have the ability to craft local government changes through ballot referendums.

Daniels was cool to the idea.

"First I'd observe that all this system, nobody had an option when it was put in place," Daniels said. "It was put in place in a uniform fashion way back when. And I think we'd really have to think through carefully, do you really want a hodge podge of different systems in different counties."

But he knows four months is a long time, and a lot can change before the end of April.

"Sen. Long's suggestion I thought was made in a constructive way," the governor added. "He's looking for ways to get a majority together, to get a consensus together, and that's exactly what I hope the legislative leaders would all do."

Contact John Byrne at (317) 631-7400 or jbyrne@post-trib.com.

Two Environmental stories on Indiana

2009-01-11T23:00:00.002-05:00

Bill would keep pollution laws at fed levels
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1372044,envboard.article)

January 11, 2009

By Gitte Laasby

Post-Tribune staff writer

A new bill would make it nearly impossible for Indiana to implement stricter environmental laws than required by the federal government -- unless it's an emergency and business representatives approve.

Environmentalists are taken aback, saying such a law would prohibit the state from being on the forefront environmentally.

"That's exactly right," said state Rep. Phyllis Pond, R-New Haven, about the bill. "Unless there's some situation that really needs it, then we don't need to make a rule. I meant to make it very difficult to them to make rules more strict than EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.) If we really need it, EPA would have it."

States are required to adopt rules that are as strict as federal laws, but can choose to go further. Miller environmentalist Lee Botts was hoping Indiana would take stronger action on some issues where the federal government has been slow to act. That couldn't happen if the General Assembly passes the new bill, Senate Bill 79, authored by Dennis Kruse, R-Auburn.

"It's a new effort to make sure Indiana doesn't get out front," said Botts, who's a member of the Water Pollution Control Board. "They don't want Indiana to do more than they have to."

Kruse referred all questions to Pond.

The bill would establish an environmental rule review board, which would prevent existing air, water and solid waste pollution control boards from adopting state environmental regulations that are stricter than federal laws unless it's an emergency and the new board approves.

The board would consist of seven members. The three voting members would be the Indiana Department of Environmental Management commissioner or his designee and two businessmen appointed by the governor. Four legislators would be non-voting members.

"It's part of an ongoing (effort) in Indiana ... to define the interest of the state in terms of certain economic interests," Botts said. "The only purpose would be if you're seeking to put a certain perspective on the rules."

Pond said the purpose of the bill would be to protect small business people. She said IDEM wanted cabinet and furniture makers to have environmental permits because they use finishing products, such as shellac, that release volatile compounds that contribute to air pollution. She said IDEM didn't provide scientific evidence to back up its demand.

"If EPA?doesn't think it's an issue, that it's causing air pollution, we don't need the rule in Indiana," Pond said. "If they make a rule, they should have scientific data to back up the rule. They can't just make up a rule without reliable information."

She said in hard economic times, a new rule from IDEM could be the straw that breaks the camel's back for small businesses.

Asked why no citizen, municipal or environmental members would be represented on the board, Pond said she'd be willing to enlarge the board, but that larger boards have a harder time getting things done. She suggested the existing three boards be combined into one.

Kay Nelson, director of environmental affairs with the Northwest Indiana Forum, said the stringency of a state's environmental rules affects businesses' ability to compete globally.

Contact Gitte Laasby at 648-2183 or glaasby@post-trib.com.

Comment on this story at www.post-trib.com.

IDEM attorney now working in file room
(http://www.post-trib.com/news/1372043,idemkeene.article)

January 11, 2009

By Gitte Laasby

Post-Tribune staff writer

The top legal manager at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management has been moved to the agency's file room.

Robert Keene had been the assistant commissioner of the Office of Legal Counsel for a couple of years until a month ago. He is now listed on IDEM's Web site as "attorney." He works out of the file room, where he responds to public information requests.

"I made a change here at IDEM," Keene confirmed. "There is nothing else I can comment about it, really."

He referred other questions to IDEM's communications office.

Keene has been with state government roughly 10 years, IDEM spokeswoman Amy Hartsock said. She called the move "lateral."

"Bob is helping on records requests, including requests you have submitted," Hartsock said in an e-mail. "The change, which happened about one month ago, was made so that we can respond better to public records requests. The change was based on agency needs and did not involve a pay cut. We will be working to fill the assistant commissioner position."

State records show employees with Keene's classification get paid $60,000 to $109,000 a year.

Keene gained statewide media attention two weeks before his move when he refused to release calendar items to the Post-Tribune that show when top IDEM officials met with BP officials on BP's air permit.

Keene said the records are exempt from disclosure because they are attorney-client privilege or deliberative communications -- both justifications that Hoosier State Press Association attorney Stephen Key said are not legitimate. IDEM later provided another explanation for withholding the records; that calendars are exempt because they are the equivalent of a diary or journal. The Post-Tribune has still not received the records.

Contact Gitte Laasby at 648-2183 or glaasby@post-trib.com.

Comment on this story at www.post-trib.com.

Obama and Israel

2009-01-11T11:10:00.002-05:00

The discussion about what role the United States may have in helping to implement a just peace in the Israeli and Palestinian conflict is heating up due to the Israeli aggression against Gaza and the expectation by many that the Barack Obama administration may chart a new course in relating to Israel.

As Ian Williams reported on January 9, 2009 in Foreign Policy in Focus,

On January 5 John Bolton, the former unconfirmed U.S. envoy to the United Nations, advocated in The Washington Post a "three-state solution" to the Palestinian problem. This "solution" involved returning Gaza to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan because the Palestinian state has manifestly failed.

While Bolton's solution is not a good one, it reflects the sense that many have both in the Palestinian and Israeli communities and here in the United States that prior peace initiatives have not yielded much fruit. While standing completely against the Bolton proposal, it is good to see attempts at bold solutions and new paradigms being considered.

Williams's article continues

A perennial cutter of Gordian knots, Bolton usually misses the complexity of the turns — and the identity of the knot-tiers. In this case, he missed the rather obvious point that the Palestinian Authority's ailments are connected to the Israeli refusal to allow a viable and contiguous state to exist and its constant undermining of whatever party the Palestinian people elect, first Fatah and now Hamas. In fact, Bolton doesn't go far enough. Following his line of "reasoning," Israel should be returned to Britain as a mandate and then quickly turned over to the United States.

The Obama administration isn't likely to pick up Bolton's advice to dissolve the Palestinian state. In the current policy vacuum, however, Obama should be ready for a serious rethink of U.S. policy. And that rethink should begin with Israel.

Israel and the United States

Israel is far from being simply a U.S. satellite and base. In many ways, the United States orbits Israel. For domestic political reasons, the U.S. government in effect uncritically guarantees almost any act of any Israeli government. There are, of course, some limits, though not many. For example, it's clear that Israel either couldn't or wouldn't mount an attack on Iran without U.S. approval, which was likely withheld more because of its potential effect on U.S. forces in the region than any principled objection to the idea.

This U.S.-Israeli relationship gives President-elect Obama, despite his distressing silence on the Gaza conflict, a unique window of opportunity. Domestically, he garnered the votes of almost 80% of American Jews, despite a furious campaign from Republican and Likudnik die-hard organizations questioning his attachment to the Zionist project and Israel's defense.

Even after his kowtowing to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) during the primaries, Obama won even more support from American Muslims than he did from Jews.

Obama shouldn't listen to conservative Jewish organizations, who outshout the silent majority of American Jews who abide by their traditional liberal and humanitarian instincts. The overwhelming majority of American Jews voted for Obama, and the emergence of voices like J Street offers an opportunity for a new president who owes the "Israel Lobby" nothing.

Obama and Israel

If Obama wants to be a real friend to Israel, he has to let the Israeli government know its actions are not consequence-free. There is both a principled and a pragmatic constituency that he can address in Israel itself. Until now, the Israeli electorate has worked on the principle that whatever happens, the United States will provide support. If the government needs replacements for expended cluster bombs, the United States will airlift them in. If the UN, the EU, and other international actors criticize Israel's military actions, Washington will send the aid check as always. This uncritical support of Israel must change.

Obama shouldn't let the immediate crisis in Gaza deflect from the root problem. Israeli leaders have a profound ambivalence toward the peace process, to which they officially subscribe even as they continue building settlements in the West Bank. The United States must push Israel toward greater engagement with a peace settlement. Nor can the United States or the EU continue to ostracize any Palestinian (or for that matter the Lebanese) leadership demonized by Israel as terrorists.

On the carrot side, Obama should promise full security guarantees to Israel within the internationally accepted borders, based on the June 1967 lines.

Since he is being bipartisan, the new president should take up where George Bush Sr. and James Baker left off almost two decades ago. Any Israeli spending on settlement building should be condemned in the UN, and matched by equivalent reductions in U.S. aid. He should also implement actual U.S. policy by reminding Israelis that American weaponry is intended for defensive purposes and that any used in attacks beyond the borders won't be replaced.

Finally, the president-elect should speak out now about the desirability of Israel abiding by UN Security Council Resolution 1860, which calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, Israeli troop withdrawal, and sustained delivery of humanitarian assistance. A word from Obama would give Israel the excuse it desperately needs to extricate itself from the hole it dug in Gaza, while redounding to the president-elect's credit globally.

Given the cast of mind of many leading Democrats, such a rethink of U.S.-Israel relations is sure to be controversial. But early and speedy action before Obama starts campaigning for reelection should produce results. And backing a durable peace would be the best way of supporting Israel in the end.

Any move to redefine the relationship between the United States and Israel toward a more balanced foundation that acknowledges the needs of the Palestinian people and the justice of their struggle is to be celebrated. The options that Ian Williams presents above are one set of possible issues that need to be considered. The focus on governmental action could be broadened to include mass action on behalf of a just peace in the Palestinian struggle for self-determination.

The Guardian of Saturday, January 10 2009, published a report by Naomi Klein entitled Enough. It's time for a boycott taking a different approach. Naomi Klein wrote:

It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa. In July 2005 a huge coalition of Palestinian groups laid out plans to do just that. They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era". The campaign Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions was born.

Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the BDS cause - even among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a letter to foreign ambassadors in Israel. It calls for "the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a clear parallel with the anti-apartheid struggle. "The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves ... This international backing must stop."

Yet even in the face of these clear calls, many of us still can't go there. The reasons are complex, emotional and understandable. But they simply aren't good enough. Economic sanctions are the most effective tool in the non-violent arsenal: surrendering them verges on active complicity. Here are the top four objections to the BDS strategy, followed by counter-arguments.

Punitive measures will alienate rather than persuade Israelis.

The world has tried what used to be called "constructive engagement". It has failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been steadily escalating its criminality: expanding settlements, launching an outrageous war against Lebanon, and imposing collective punishment on Gaza through the brutal blockade. Despite this escalation, Israel has not faced punitive measures - quite the opposite. The weapons and $3bn in annual aid the US sends Israel are only the beginning. Throughout this key period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic improvement in its diplomatic, cultural and trade relations with a variety of other allies. For instance, in 2007 Israel became the first country outside Latin America to sign a free-trade deal with the Mercosur bloc. In the first nine months of 2008, Israeli exports to Canada went up 45%. A new deal with the EU is set to double Israel's exports of processed food. And in December European ministers "upgraded" the EU-Israel association agreement, a reward long sought by Jerusalem.

It is in this context that Israeli leaders started their latest war: confident they would face no meaningful costs. It is remarkable that over seven days of wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange's flagship index actually went up 10.7%. When carrots don't work, sticks are needed.

Israel is not South Africa.

Of course it isn't. The relevance of the South African model is that it proves BDS tactics can be effective when weaker measures (protests, petitions, backroom lobbying) fail. And there are deeply distressing echoes of apartheid in the occupied territories: the colour-coded IDs and travel permits, the bulldozed homes and forced displacement, the settler-only roads. Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, said the architecture of segregation he saw in the West Bank and Gaza was "infinitely worse than apartheid". That was in 2007, before Israel began its full-scale war against the open-air prison that is Gaza.

Why single out Israel when the US, Britain and other western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the strategy should be tried is practical: in a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work.

Boycotts sever communication; we need more dialogue, not less.

This one I'll answer with a personal story. For eight years, my books have been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I published The Shock Doctrine, I wanted to respect the boycott. On the advice of BDS activists, including the wonderful writer John Berger, I contacted a small publisher called Andalus. Andalus is an activist press, deeply involved in the anti-occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and none to me. I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not Israelis.

Our modest publishing plan required dozens of phone calls, emails and instant messages, stretching between Tel Aviv, Ramallah, Paris, Toronto and Gaza City. My point is this: as soon as you start a boycott strategy, dialogue grows dramatically. The argument that boycotts will cut us off from one another is particularly specious given the array of cheap information technologies at our fingertips. We are drowning in ways to rant at each other across national boundaries. No boycott can stop us.

Just about now, many a proud Zionist is gearing up for major point-scoring: don't I know that many of these very hi-tech toys come from Israeli research parks, world leaders in infotech? True enough, but not all of them. Several days into Israel's Gaza assault, Richard Ramsey, managing director of a British telecom specialising in voice-over-internet services, sent an email to the Israeli tech firm MobileMax: "As a result of the Israeli government action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company."

Ramsey says his decision wasn't political; he just didn't want to lose customers. "We can't afford to lose any of our clients," he explains, "so it was purely commercially defensive."

It was this kind of cold business calculation that led many companies to pull out of South Africa two decades ago. And it's precisely the kind of calculation that is our most realistic hope of bringing justice, so long denied, to Palestine.

The proposals being advanced by Ian Williams and by Naomi Klein have some contradictions but are not fundamentally at odds with each other; they can be made to be mutually supportive. Both are worth consideration and action by people's movements and by the Obama administration as we as a nation move forward to reevaluate our relationship with Israel and with the Palestinians. The most important aspect of this reevaluation is to move away from the dehumanization of Palestinians that is inherent in the uncritical support that prior administrations have given to the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, and a renewed recognition of the justice of the Palestinian struggle for self-determination and statehood.

Disaster: Unemployment at 7.2 Percent. Real Rate 13.5 Percent

2009-01-11T10:45:00.002-05:00

The extent of the human toll of the financial crisis on working families in the United States is immeasurable. While the press covers the occassional and tragic suicide of a billionaire, the day to day impact on working people of the stress of losing our homes, of losing our jobs, is less discussed.

One of the most distressing aspects of the financial crisis is the huge job losses both in the this country and world wide. Few life events are more devestating than a job loss.

As Tula Connell reported in the AFL-CIO Now Blog on January 9, 2009,

The jobless numbers out today are worse than even the most pessimistic analysts imagined: 524,000 jobs lost in December, pushing the nation’s unemployment rate to 7.2 percent. Under the Bush administration, 2008 has become the worst year for job loss since 1945, with nearly 2.6 million jobs lost last year alone. The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 11.1 million of America’s workers are unemployed.

December was the 12th straight month of job loss and included a loss of 21,400 jobs in auto and parts industries. From Bloomberg:

Manufacturing, which makes up 12 percent of the economy, shrank in December at the fastest pace in 28 years, Institute for Supply Management figures showed. Payrolls at builders dropped by 101,000 after decreasing 85,000. Financial firms reduced payrolls by 14,000, after a 28,000 loss the prior month. Service industries, which include banks, insurance companies, restaurants and retailers, subtracted 273,000 workers after a decline of 402,000.

Employment in retail trade declined by 67,000 in December and by 522,000 for all of 2008. More than half of the losses in 2008 occurred in the last four months of the year.

And it’s taking longer and longer to find a job, as National Employment Law Project Executive Director Christine Owens notes:

It is particularly telling that the number of Americans who have been looking for work for more than six months skyrocketed to a whopping 2.6 million, now accounting for nearly one in four of the unemployed.

As bad as the official 7.2 percent unemployment rate is, the situation for unemployed or underemployed is actually far worse. The official unemployment rate of 7.2 percent does not include underemployed workers and those who are discouraged, and if they were included, analysts estimate the U.S. unemployment rate would be 13.5 percent, up 6 percentage points from 2007.

(Dakine01 at Oxdown describes what it’s really like to be among the long-term jobless. Read his diary here.)

But it looks like the Bush legacy of job destruction will continue long after he’s gone. Meeting last month, the Federal Reserve predicted the U.S. economy is likely to deteriorate further this year and unemployment will rise into 2010.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney today spelled out the steps needed for long-term economic health:

Broad-based economic changes must be made to ensure sustained economic growth and broadly shared prosperity. We must restore American competitiveness to deal with our country’s unsustainable trade deficit. We must guarantee affordable, quality health care coverage for everyone. We must thoroughly reform our financial regulatory system to provide more transparency and effective government oversight and regulation. And to ensure that the middle class is rebuilt, we must pass the Employee Free Choice Act so workers can bargain collectively with their employers for better lives.

Yesterday, President-elect Barack Obama urged Congress to act quickly on an economic recovery package before it’s too late. Already, some in the Senate want to slow the process, delaying passage until mid-to-late February. As Obama puts it:

I don’t believe it’s too late to change course, but it will be if we don’t take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world.

In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse.

Many working people are holding our breath, waiting for the nightmare of the Bush administration to end, and for the new direction that the Obama administration represents to start turning our country, including our economy, around. Its just a little more than a week until inauguration day. While changing the direction of our economic devestation will take some time, after January 20th, when President-elect Obama takes office, we can look forward to efforts to help and sensitivity to the issues that are impacting so many of us as workers and members of working families.

Survey: Public Strongly Supports Employee Free Choice

2009-01-11T10:31:00.003-05:00

Seth Michaels reported on the AFL-CIO Now Blog, January 8, 2009, that

A new survey released today shows 78 percent of those polled want to see legislation that protects workers’ freedom to form unions and bargain for a better life—great news and a strong signal to Congress and President-elect Barack Obama that we need to pass the Employee Free Choice Act.

For many, the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is the most important legislative initiative of the present period. It is supported by President-elect Obama. As the President-elect said

"The majority of workers want a union. They should get a union. It is that simple."

"In this country we believe that if the majority of workers in a company want a union, they should get a union. That's not complicated. That's the right thing to do.

As Seth Michaels reported:

The survey of 1,007 adults across the country, conducted Dec. 4-10 for the AFL-CIO by Peter D. Hart Research Associates, shows a striking level of support for the provisions of the Employee Free Choice Act and the freedom to form unions. This support crosses party and state lines, with 74 percent of those who identify as moderate or liberal Republicans in favor; conservative Republicans were the only group not expressing majority support. Support remains steady, even when those surveyed heard messages from both supporters and opponents of the bill.

Here are some key findings:

75 percent of those surveyed support recognizing a union when a majority of workers have signed up in support.

64 percent support strengthening penalties against companies who illegally intimidate or fire workers who are trying to form a union.

61 percent favor binding arbitration if a company will not agree to a first contract. (This provision had the highest number of respondents who weren’t sure how they felt about it.)

These survey results are consistent with a survey done last fall by American Rights at Work showing strong support for the Employee Free Choice Act and the freedom to form unions.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said the findings send a strong message on behalf of workers’ freedom to bargain and the importance of bargaining rights to a stronger economy.

In today’s economic squeeze, workers need the freedom to bargain their way into the middle class more than ever. This new research confirms that the vast majority of Americans support workers’ freedom to form unions to improve their lives and support the Employee Free Choice Act, which is key to making our economy work for everyone.

Politicians, pundits and the press should listen up: America’s working families understand that a stronger economy and a thriving middle class depend upon restoring workers’ freedom to bargain for a better life. They’re not buying into anti-worker disinformation campaigns. It’s time to listen to that message and pass the Employee Free Choice Act.

Interest in Socialism Surging

2009-01-11T09:53:00.002-05:00

In a piece in the Socialist Alternative of January 10, 2009, Dan DiMaggio reported that:

The global crisis of capitalism has led to a surge of interest in socialist ideas all over the world.

Merriam-Webster reports that socialism was the third most searched-for term (“bailout” was #1) during 2008 in their online dictionary, which receives 125 million views per month, meaning millions of people were looking to find out what socialism means.

This surge of interest in socialism reflects the questions raised for many when confronted with the ongoing financial meltdown. The stunning breadth and depth of the meltdown, impacting on everyone from the richest to, most horribly, the poorest revealed the structural nature of the issues. It was so clearly a structural problem with capitalism itself that President Bush had to go on an offensive to defend capitalism as a system.

As reported by Dan Eggen in the Washington Post of November 14, 2008

Bush also argued that "the crisis was not a failure of the free market system" and that leaders should "not try to reinvent that system."

Sales of The Communist Manifesto have skyrocketed, with Amazon.com reporting a 700% increase since the banking collapse, according to the Times (UK) (11/9/08).

The Socialist Alternative article continued:

In Berlin, all copies of Karl Marx’s Capital reportedly sold out several months ago. According to Joern Schuetrumpf, the German publisher of Marx’s Collected Works, "Until 2004, we sold less than 100 copies of Das Kapital per year. In the ten months of 2008, we have sold more than 2,500 copies. It is clear that people are interested in learning what Marx has to say about why capitalism does not work.” (Inter Press Service, 11/7/08)

There’s even now a Japanese comic book version of Das Kapital, which sold 6,000 copies within a few days of hitting the shelves in December. Additionally, Kanikosen (“The Crab Factory Ship”), a Communist novel from 1929 about a group of workers rebelling against brutal working conditions on their ship, has experienced a resurgence, with sales of over 500,000 copies in 2008, up from an average of around 5,000 in previous years (Telegraph (UK), 11/18/08).

All this is evidence of the growing quest to understand the nature of the economic crisis. The coming years will provide ample opportunities to build the socialist movement as the failures of capitalism lead millions to search for an alternative.

There is a integral relationship between the real conditions of life for working people and our attempt to grapple with the questions that those conditions present us as to how we're going to live, raise our children, and meet our basic needs. The structural problems of capitalism present themselves at both the local and the global levels of life, most clearly in those areas where the two intersect. The global financial crisis through which we're all living now can't be written off as the result of too much greed alone. The environmental issues that impact all of humanity can't be written off as due to human nature and greed alone. The current wars can't be written off as too much greed alone. People are thirsty for better and deeper analysis of the problems in our lives, and sounds bites don't provide that analysis just as capitalism doesn't provide the jobs, health care, educational opportunities, housing, and food needed by billions of people world wide, and by many millions of people in the United States.

We are correct to ask fundamental questions and explore socialism. The current system is dysfunctional and destructive. Socialism provides the viable alternative that is required if we're to move forward together to meet the needs of the vast majority of the people, the working families in the United States and the world.

To find out more about socialism, please see other posts on this web site, Political Affairs online, and the People's Weekly World newspaper.

Report: Tar sands threaten birds

2009-01-11T09:31:00.003-05:00

A January 5, 2009 article by Gitte Laasby of the Post-Tribune reports on the local environmental impact of tar sands extraction and refining in Canada.

Up to 166 million of the birds we see in our back yards could disappear as a result of extraction and refining of oil from Canadian tar sands, according to a new report.

BP is expanding its Whiting refinery to be able to increase its use of tar sands.

Dark-eyed juncos, white-throated sparrows, horned grebes and short-billed dowitchers are just some of the birds on a long list of species that are in decline and whose summer habitat could be in danger, states the report by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Boreal Songbird Initiative and the Pembina Institute.

As global warming and other trends show, the environmental impact of human activity on other species, and ultimately on human life, is immense. The idea that we can continue to act in our economic and social decisions as if those actions have no long term consequences is increasingly threatening our own ability to meet our human needs, and is immediately devestating to species that act as a forewarning to us of the ultimate impact on our own species should we not change our ways.

"At a time when bird populations are rapidly declining, this report puts into perspective the far-reaching effects of tar sands oil development on North America's birds," said the report's lead author, Jeff Wells, a scientist with the Boreal Songbird Initiative. "The public needs to understand the real and long-term ecological costs of this development and determine if this is acceptable."

Half of America's migratory birds nest in the Boreal forest in Canada, but tar sands mining and drilling cause habitat loss. Each year, 22 million to 170 million birds breed in a 35 million-acre area that could eventually be developed for tar sands oil. Anywhere between 6 million and 166 million birds could be lost over the next 30 to 50 years, the report states.

"Some people don't think much about where their oil and gas comes from," Wells said. "You always expect there to be a junco in your back yard in the winter, but you don't think about where they're coming from. What impact it could have as they're drawing gas in. They're also drawing down the birds from that region."

Between 8,000 to 100,000 birds die every year after they land or drown in the oily water in tailing ponds, and that number could double or triple as a result of mining expansions, the report states.

Environmental protection, like so much else in our modern society, must be viewed from a global perspective. The productive forces that humanity has developed over the years are such that it is invalid to assume a localized impact of that activity. In much the same way that global capital drifts around the world seeking the highest profit no matter what the devestation in lost jobs and broken lives for the people in areas away from which capital has drifted, so the environmental impact of activity in one region has a huge impact on many other regions.

Increasing tar sands refining and pipeline infrastructure also delivers pollution to the Great Lakes.

"The resulting decrease in air and water quality affects migratory birds, which will suffer elevated mortality numbers as a result of contaminants and toxins from refining," the Natural Resources Defense Council said in a statement.

Birds are an indicator of the health of the environment for humans, too, Wells said.

Refining Canadian crude causes up to three times more greenhouse gas emissions than regular refining, and birds are also impacted by global warming, the report states.

As President-elect Barack Obama said in Portsmouth, NH on October 8, 2007:

“We cannot afford more of the same timid politics when the future of our planet is at stake. Global warming is not a someday problem, it is now. We are already breaking records with the intensity of our storms, the number of forest fires, the periods of drought. By 2050 famine could force more than 250 million from their homes . . . . The polar ice caps are now melting faster than science had ever predicted. . . . This is not the future I want for my daughters. It's not the future any of us want for our children. And if we act now and we act boldly, it doesn't have to be.”

Communist Party of Indiana CPUSA

Save Now

Labor Day Parade in Princeton, IN

Who: All Single-Payer SupportersWhat: Labor Day ParadeWhen: September 7, 2009 Labor Day 9:00 A.M. *Central Standard Time*Where: Princeton, Indiana which is 25 miles north of Evansville

Top Five Health Care Reform Lies—and How to Fight Back

Union families show anti-Obama rally 'what real Americans want'

Portuguese Trade Union Job Safety and Health Seminar Sparks Discussions and Demands

National Health in Portugal: Specialty Care

Coalition Politics Portuguese Style: A Case in Point

Portuguese Transportation Union Leader: Main challenges

Portugal Takes its Ballots and Street Heat Seriously

Portuguese Railway Workers in Major Struggles Against Privatization

The Greens and Portuguese Communist Party Combine in National Elections; A Word On Health and Labor Rights

The invisible program

AFL-CIO NOW BLOG | AFL-CIO Executive Council Calls for Round 2 of Economic Recovery

Afghanistan: Another Untold Story

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH CARE HIGH, WEEK OF JULY 16-22, 2009

CEOs Get One-Third of All Pay; Bank of America Uses Taxpayer $$ for Lobbying

Autoworkers Letter to Obama

Media on ‘card check’ Wrong or just missing the point?

International Indigenous Hip Hop Gathering - Which Side Are You On?

Employee Free Choice Stuggle for Card Check

Hard-hit Gary stops garbage pickup

Healthcare: Change the Debate Support a Real Public Option

Jobs or Income Now for Working Families In The Current Economic Crisis

Sign the Petition for a National Cesar E. Chavez Holiday!

Let Senator Bayh Know We Stand for HR676 and S. 703

The World Condemns the Coup in Honduras, Supports Zelaya's Return

Central Indiana Club Asks Indianapolis' 7th Congressional District To Support HR676

Leaflet/Petition for Single Payer Healthcare (HR676)

What is going on?

Comforting the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted

598,000 Jobs Lost as Jobless Rate Hit 7.6% in January

Obama Set to Add Republican to Cabinet

I remember Winnie

Madam C.J. Walker's fortune had its roots in hair products

Layoffs will hit Mittal workers

Aides Say Obama’s Afghan Aims Elevate War

Indiana's jobless rate is highest U.S. jump

Republican Senators Say They Will Hold Up Solis Nomination

New NLRB Chairwoman Liebman a Welcome Change

Report: Employee Free Choice Act Needed to Make Economy Work

Hatred Of Slavery Drove Darwin Ideas

White House Memo: Great Limits Come With Great Power, Ex-Candidate Finds

EPA again hits IDEM

All Out for the Employee Free Choice Act

IDEM comes under attack by Evansville officials

Krugman: Employee Free Choice Key to Economic Recovery

Obama issues appeal to Israel, Hamas

Obama Seeks Halt to Guantanamo Trials

The Inauguration!

The Cuban Revolution and the liberation of Africa

Bailout Is a Windfall to Banks, if Not to Borrowers

Cease Fire Now! End the Siege!

Obama Pledges Entitlement Reform; Moving Away from Employee Free Choice Act

Communist Party of Greece: Theses of the CC on Socialism: 1 - The Contribution of the Socialist System

Bank of America Posts Loss as It Gets New Aid

US Rabbis Urge Obama to Push for Immediate Gaza Truce

AFL-CIO - Acuff Cuts Through the Spin About Employee Free Choice

Post-Tribune Jan. 14 addition: "Environmental, citizens groups upset with Daniels"

The Cuba 5 on the 50th Anniversary of the Cuban Revolution

William Sieghart: We must adjust our distorted image of Hamas

Jan. 15 Call In Day for HR 676: What Better Way to Honor Dr. King

AFL-CIO - Acuff Cuts Through the Spin About Employee Free Choice

MLK Weekend; Yes We Can Launch

The Importance Of Being Partisan for the Palestinians

Construction braces for slowdown in Northwest Indiana

Daniels keeps pushing his reform plan

Two Environmental stories on Indiana

Obama and Israel

Disaster: Unemployment at 7.2 Percent. Real Rate 13.5 Percent

Survey: Public Strongly Supports Employee Free Choice

Interest in Socialism Surging

Report: Tar sands threaten birds

Who: All Single-Payer Supporters

What: Labor Day Parade

When: September 7, 2009 Labor Day 9:00 A.M. Central Standard Time

Where: Princeton, Indiana which is 25 miles north of Evansville