*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
FREE LYNNE STEWART NOW!
Lynne Stewart in Jail!
Protest Lynne Stewart's incarceration!
San Francisco Federal Courthouse, 7th and Mission, SF
Monday, November 23, 5:00 pm
Radical Lawyer Convicted of Aiding Terrorist Is Jailed
By COLIN MOYNIHAN
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/nyregion/20stewart.html?ref=nyregion
Defiant to the end as she embraced emotional supporters outside the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan, Lynne F. Stewart, the radical lawyer known for defending unpopular clients, surrendered on Thursday evening to begin serving her 28-month sentence for assisting terrorism.
"This is the day they executed Joe Hill, and his words were, 'Don't mourn me, organize,' " Ms. Stewart said as she walked toward the courthouse, referring to the labor organizer executed on Nov. 19, 1915, after a controversial trial. "I hope that will be the message that I send, too."
After a lengthy trial, a jury in 2005 convicted Ms. Stewart, now 70, of providing material aid to terrorism and of lying to the government while helping an imprisoned client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, communicate with his followers in Egypt.
The sheik, a blind fundamentalist cleric, was serving a life sentence after his 1995 conviction for organizing a thwarted plot to blow up landmarks in New York. Ms. Stewart assisted him by communicating a statement from him to a reporter in Cairo, which allowed his followers to learn of it.
The start of her prison term was put off while she appealed her conviction and so she could receive treatment for breast cancer. But on Tuesday, a federal appeals court panel upheld the verdict and ordered that Ms. Stewart begin serving her sentence.
The appellate judges, questioning what one called a "breathtakingly low" sentence, also sent the case back to the trial judge, John G. Koeltl of Federal District Court, to determine if Ms. Stewart deserved a longer sentence in light of the seriousness of her conduct and the possibility that she had lied during her trial.
Two co-defendants, Ahmed Abdel Sattar and Mohamed Yousry, were also convicted at the 2005 trial. Mr. Sattar is serving a 24-year sentence. Mr. Yousry, who translated Ms. Stewart's conversations with her client, was sentenced to 20 months and also surrendered.
Ms. Stewart surrendered to United States marshals at the courthouse. Prosecutors said that it had not been determined where she would be sent. In sentencing Ms. Stewart, Judge Koeltl wrote that she had engaged in "extraordinarily severe" criminal conduct. But he also acknowledged her long record of representing the disadvantaged, the destitute and the despised.
Indeed, over the years, Ms. Stewart often took on cases nobody else wanted. She won an acquittal for Larry Davis, who had been accused of wounding six police officers in a 1986 shootout in the Bronx, and represented David J. Gilbert, a member of the Weather Underground convicted in the 1981 robbery of a Brink's armored car in Rockland County. Other clients, however, were merely poor and obscure, and Ms. Stewart was a passionate advocate for them.
As she walked slowly toward the courthouse, holding the arm of her husband, Ralph Poynter, she paused to greet friends. More than 100 people chanted "Free Lynne Stewart."
Then she stood behind metal barricades and gave a farewell speech. She said she would not change much about the past if she could, and urged younger lawyers to defend clients zealously.
"They can put me in jail, but my love, my ideas, my forcefulness I hope will remain with all of you," she said. "And I will return."
Background:
Following the November 16 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit that rejected Lynne Stewart's appeal of her 1995 frame-up conviction on five counts of aiding and abetting terrorism, Lynne's legal team as well the federal district court were in a quandary as to how to proceed. [Lynne has been a leading civil and human rights attorney for 30-years. She is a member of the National Lawyers Guild and a member of the Continuations Committee of the National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and Occupations.]
The Second Circuit made what amounted to an unprecedented decision to not only affirm her conviction and reject her appeal but to order that her bail be revoked and that she be remanded to prison. But lacking clear orders as to who would carry out this decision and when it would happen, the last two days have seen Lynne appear, along with her supporters at two rallies in her defense and numerous press conferences and interviews while judges and lawyers tried to ascertain what to do. That decision has been made and Lynne will begin serving a 28-month prison term.
However, the Second Circuit's 2-1 decision also remanded the issue of the length of Lynne's sentence back to Judge John Koeltl's Federal District Court ordering Koeltl to reconsider the 28-month jail sentence that he originally imposed. Obviously furious at the relatively short duration of the sentence, the Second Circuit accepted the prosecution's assertion that Koeltl had not properly considered the question of whether or not Lynne has perjured herself during her trial. If that were to be determined, according to the Second Circuit, the length of Lynne's sentence could be extended. The single dissenting judge went further - expressing his outrage at Lynne relatively short sentence and suggesting that a qualitatively longer sentence be imposed than the majority contemplated. The government originally demanded a 30-year sentence!
Still fighting, Lynne's attorney's will ask the Second Circuit for a delay in her incarceration based on Lynne's scheduled December surgery. Here too, Lynne guesses that this will be denied, with the court holding that prison facilities are adequate for any medical needs that Lynne, a diabetic with hypertension and recovering from breast cancer surgery, may have.
Meanwhile, a new sentencing hearing before Judge Koeltl is scheduled for December 2 at the Foley Square Courthouse. Federal prosecutors are expected to ask for the maximum sentence possible. Also appearing in court will be Mohammed Yousery, Lynne's innocent co-defendant and translator. Koeltl was also ordered to reconsider Yousery's 20-month sentence. The prison term of a third defendant in Lynne's case, Ahmed Sattar, who was sentenced to 20-plus years, was not challenged.
At this point we can only speculate as to whether Judge Koeltl will stand by his original sentence or be pressured by the Second Circuit to extend Lynne and Mohammed's sentence. The judge is known to carefully consider his sentences. Close observers believe that he is unlikely to bend and impose a longer sentence.
Should Koeltl refuse to add additional years to Lynne's prison term, the government is expected to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Government prosecutors and obviously the Second Circuit are outraged that a "convicted terrorist" has been walking around the streets for the past five years, free to champion her own cause and those of all others who suffer political repression. It was clear from Judge Koeltl's short sentence and high praise of Lynne's record as an attorney and human being, a "credit to her profession," said Koeltl during the sentencing hearing, that he felt compelled to take his distance from the government's desire to put Lynne, 70, in prison for what would amount to the rest of her life.
Lynne will appeal the Second Circuit's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. She has repeatedly stated that her prosecution and persecution are consciously orchestrated by the government to chill the defense bar, that is, to instill the fear of government prosecutions into any attorney who seeks to afford alleged terrorists or others who are victims of unjust government persecution, a vigorous and dedicated defense. Lynne points to the upcoming U.S. prosecution efforts of Guantanamo prisoners as a prime example.
Again, join us on Monday, November 23 at 5:00 pm at the San Francisco Federal Courthouse, 7th and Mission.
For further information contact: Jeff Mackler, Coordinator, West Coast Lynne Stewart Defense Committee 510-268-9429 jmackler@lmi.net
Mail tax free contributions payable to National Lawyers Guild Foundation. Write in memo box: "Lynne Stewart Defense." Mail to: Lynne Stewart Defense, P.O. Box 10328, Oakland, CA 94610.
SEND RESOLUTIONS AND STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT TO DEFENSE ATTORNEY JOSHUA L. DRATEL, ESQ. FAX: (212) 571 3792 AND EMAIL: jdratel@aol.com
SEND PROTESTS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Department of Justice Main Switchboard - 202-514-2000
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov
Office of the Attorney General Public Comment Line - 202-353-1555
To send Lynne a letter, write:
Lynne Stewart
53504-054
MCC-NY
150 Park Row
New York, NY NY 10007
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Bay Area United Against War Newsletter
Table of Contents:
A. EVENTS AND ACTIONS
B. SPECIAL APPEALS, VIDEOS AND ONGOING CAMPAIGNS
C. ARTICLES IN FULL
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
A. EVENTS AND ACTIONS
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
PROTEST! When Obama Announces Afghanistan Escalation
The World Can't Wait
Stop the Crimes of Your Government
News from the San Francisco
Bay Area Chapter
Emergency Response Plan for the SF Bay Area:
World Can't Wait is joining with other anti-war forces including the local chapters of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, Code Pink and others [list in formation] to mobilize
On the SAME WEEKDAY** that Obama announces the escalation:
5:00 PM at Fifth & Market (Powell St. BART): San Francisco street protest including die-ins
In the East Bay, feeder rallies and a BART march:
3:30 PM Rally: Marines Recruiting Station, 64 Shattuck Square, Berkeley
4:00 PM Rally: downtown Berkeley BART station then march by BART to arrive 5:00 PM at Fifth & Market in SF
** NOTE: If the news breaks on a weekend, these protests will happen the following MONDAY
The day of the announcement, the World Can't Wait SF office [(415) 864-5153] will have a recorded message confirming the protest times and locations.
Send us info on other campus and community protests that we can also publicize.
PROTEST IN THE STREETS THE DAY AN ANNOUNCEMENT IS MADE TO SEND MORE TROOPS INTO AFGHANISTAN
STOP THE ESCALATION - OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW!
STOP THE CRIMES OF YOUR GOVERNMENT - THE WORLD CAN'T WAIT!
sf@worldcantwait.org
(415) 864-5153
sfbaycantwait.org
www.myspace.com/sfbaycantwait
World Can't Wait SF
2940-16th St., Rm. 200-6
San Francisco CA 94103
Bay Area United Against War endorses this emergency action.
bauaw.org
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
STRIKE @ UC BERKELEY: NO BUSINESS AS USUAL!
NOVEMBER 18, 19 AND 20
At their November 17-19 meeting, the UC Regents will be voting on an additional 32% student fee increase. These proposed fees have already been pledged as collateral for $1.35 billion worth of new construction bonds despite an "extreme fiscal emergency." The Regents will also vote to lay off nearly 2,000 more workers, continue with furlough plans, and cut classes and critical student services. The executive administration wants to convince us that their hands are tied by Sacramento, but we know the real crisis is one of priorities. During these days The University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE) will be striking, the Coalition of University Employees (CUE) will be striking and we will be converging on UCLA and at UC Berkeley to confront the Regents and fight their austerity measures.
WALKOUT on Wednesday, November 18
UPTE pickets beginning at 5am
Noon: Mass Rally on Sproul followed by a sendoff to those traveling to LA and
MARCH ending with a Strike Meeting: What's Next?
RECLAIM on Thursday, November 19
UPTE pickets beginning at 5am
Noon: Mass Rally at California Hall
4pm, Lower Sproul Second Strike Meeting: What's Next?
ESCALATE on Friday, November 20
If the Regents increase our fees, lay us off and cut our
pay, we will have no choice but to escalate our actions.
Noon: Gather at California Hall
*Tent City throughout the strike in solidarity with UCLA. Bring a pillow !*
**Schedule of Events forthcoming:Have your band play, play sports, put on a workshop, read your poetry, project a movie on the wall, do a fashion show, dj a set, whatever! **
Whose University? Our University!
Sign the call @ ucstrike.com. More info at ucsolidarity.org
The strike is endorsed and supported by UPTE Local 1, CUE Local #3, Solidarity Alliance , Graduate Student Organizing Committee, Graduate Assembly, CalSERVE, Bridges Multicultural, Student Worker Action Team (SWAT), Berkeley Law Organizing Committee, UC Berkeley General Assembly, & Oct 24th Statewide Mobilizing Conference.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
for immediate release:
Contact: Hendrik Voss
202-234-3440, media@soaw.org
Mass Mobilization to Shut Down the School of the Americas
November 20-22, 2009, Fort Benning, Georgia:
* The SOA graduate-led military coup in Honduras and the increasing U.S. military involvement in Colombia put a renewed focus on the School of the Americas (SOA/ WHINSEC) and the policies it represents.
* Thousands from across the Americas will converge on November 20-22 at Fort Benning, GA for a vigil and civil disobedience actions to speak out against the SOA/ WHINSEC and to demand a change in U.S. foreign policy.
* The vigil will commemorate the 20th anniversary of the 1989 SOA graduate-led Jesuit massacre in San Salvador, and the many other thousands of victims of SOA/ WHINSEC violence.
The military coup led by SOA graduates in Honduras has once again exposed the destabilizing and deadly effects that the School of the Americas (SOA/ WHINSEC) has on Latin America. Torture survivors and human rights activists from across the Americas, including Bertha Oliva, the founder of the Committee of the Family Members of the Disappeared (COFADEH) from Honduras and human rights defenders from Colombia will travel to Fort Benning, Georgia to participate in the mobilization.
The campaign to close the SOA/ WHINSEC is in a crucial phase right now. Despite promising comments from President Obama during his 2008 election campaign, the SOA/ WHINSEC is still in operation, the U.S. is poring millions into failing "military solutions" to combat the drug problems in Mexico and the Pentagon is moving forward with plans to use seven Colombian military bases in Colombia for offensive U.S. military operations.
"It is up to us to hold those responsible accountable and to push for to closing of the School of the Americas and a change in US foreign policy" said Father Roy Bourgeois, the founder of SOA Watch. "Too many have died and continue to suffer at the hands of graduates of this notorious institute."
In the fall of 2009, opponents of the SOA/ WHINSEC achieved a victory when a joint House and Senate conference committee agreed to include language in the FY 2010 Defense Authorization bill that requires the Pentagon to release names of the graduates of the SOA/ WHINSEC to the public. The Pentagon had classified the names after the continued involvement of SOA/ WHINSEC attendees in human rights abuses became public.
For more information about the November vigil to close the SOA/ WHINSEC, lead-up actions and a complete schedule of events, visit www.SOAW.org
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
"The End of Poverty"
Democracy Now Interview with Filmmaker Philippe Diaz
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/10/filmmaker_philippe_diaz_on_the_end
The film opens in San Francisco on December 4 at the 4-Star Theatre on Clement Street.
http://www.theendofpoverty.com/
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Four years ago activists around the world were mobilizing and organizing against the execution of Stanley Tookie Williams. We need to continue that fight today.
Fourth Annual Stanley Tookie Williams Legacy Summit
MOBILIZING THE MOVEMENT FOR JUSICE
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 13TH, 3:00-6:00 P.M.
MERRITT COLLEGE
Huey P. Newton/Bobby Seale Student Lounge
12500 Campus Drive, Oakland
For directions go to www.merritt.edu
For more information: 510-235-9780
KEVIN COOPER, TROY DAVIS, MUMIA ABU-JAMAL: THREE INNOCENT MEN ON DEATH ROW
Featuring:
Angela Davis, author and activist.
Barbara Becnel, co-author and friend of Stanley Tookie Williams
Martina Correia, sister of Troy Davis
Release of report, "What's Really Happening on California's Death Row?"
Messages from "The Three Innocent Men"
Sneak Preview, "The Justice Chronicles," dramatic presentation of prison writings
Memorial Movie, for Oscar Grant III
Sponsors:
Stanley Tookie Williams Legacy Network; Campaign to End the Death Penalty; Kevin Cooper Defense Committee, African American Studies Department, Merritt College
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
U.S. OUT OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN NOW!
FREE PALESTINE!
San Francisco March and Rally
on Saturday, March 20, 2010
11am, Civic Center Plaza
National March on Washington
on Saturday, March 20, 2010
Fri., March 19 Day of Action & Outreach in D.C.
People from all over the country are organizing to converge on Washington, D.C., to demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan and Iraq.
On Saturday, March 20, 2010, there will be a massive National March & Rally in D.C. A day of action and outreach in Washington, D.C., will take place on Friday, March 19, preceding the Saturday march.
There will be coinciding mass marches on March 20 in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
The national actions are initiated by a large number of organizations and prominent individuals. (see below)
Click here to become an endorser:
http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=5940&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_USER_REQUESTS&autologin=true&link=endorse-body-1
Click here to make a donation:
https://secure2.convio.net/pep/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID=2302&autologin=true&donate=body-1&JServSessionIdr002=2yzk5fh8x2.app13b
We will march together to say "No Colonial-type Wars and Occupations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine!" We will march together to say "No War Against Iran!" We will march together to say "No War for Empire Anywhere!"
Instead of war, we will demand funds so that every person can have a job, free and universal health care, decent schools, and affordable housing.
March 20 is the seventh anniversary of the criminal war of aggression launched by Bush and Cheney against Iraq. One million or more Iraqis have died. Tens of thousands of U.S. troops have lost their lives or been maimed, and continue to suffer a whole host of enduring problems from this terrible war.
This is the time for united action. The slogans on banners may differ, but all those who carry them should be marching shoulder to shoulder.
Killing and dying to avoid the perception of defeat
Bush is gone, but the war and occupation in Iraq still go on. The Pentagon is demanding a widening of the war in Afghanistan. They project an endless war with shifting battlefields. And a "single-payer" war budget that only grows larger and larger each year. We must act.
Both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were predicated on the imperial fantasy that the U.S. could create stable, proxy colonial-type governments in both countries. They were to serve as an extension of "American" power in these strategic and resource-rich regions.
That fantasy has been destroyed. Now U.S. troops are being sent to kill or be killed so that the politicians in uniform ("the generals and admirals") and those in three-piece suits ("our elected officials") can avoid taking responsibility for a military setback in wars that should have never been started. Their military ambitions are now reduced to avoiding the appearance of defeat.
That is exactly what happened in Vietnam! Avoiding defeat, or the perception of defeat, was the goal Nixon and Kissinger set for themselves when they took office in 1969. For this noble cause, another 30,000 young GIs perished before the inevitable troop pullout from Vietnam in 1973. The number of Vietnamese killed between 1969 and 1973 was greater by many hundreds of thousands.
All of us can make the difference - progress and change comes from the streets and from the grassroots.
The people went to the polls in 2008, and the enthusiasm and desire for change after eight years of the Bush regime was the dominant cause that led to election of a big Democratic Party majority in both Houses of Congress and the election of Barack Obama to the White House.
But it should now be obvious to all that waiting for politicians to bring real change - on any front - is simply a prescription for passivity by progressives and an invitation to the array of corporate interests from military contractors to the banks, to big oil, to the health insurance giants that dominate the political life of the country. These corporate interests work around the clock to frustrate efforts for real change, and they are the guiding hand behind the recent street mobilizations of the ultra-right.
It is up to us to act. If people had waited for politicians to do the right thing, there would have never been a Civil Rights Act, or unions, women's rights, an end to the Vietnam war or any of the profound social achievements and basic rights that people cherish.
It is time to be back in the streets. Organizing centers are being set up in cities and towns throughout the country.
We must raise $50,000 immediately just to get started. Please make your contribution today. We need to reserve buses, which are expensive ($1,800 from NYC, $5,000 from Chicago, etc.). We have to print 100,000 leaflets, posters and stickers. There will be other substantial expenses as March 20 draws closer.
Please become an endorser and active supporter of the March 20 National March on Washington.
Please make an urgently needed tax-deductible donation today. We can't do this without your active support.
The initiators of the March 20 National March on Washington (preceded by the March 19 Day of Action and Outreach in D.C.) include: the ANSWER Coalition; Muslim American Society Freedom; National Council of Arab Americans; Cynthia McKinney; Malik Rahim, co-founder of Common Ground Collective; Ramsey Clark; Cindy Sheehan; Medea Benjamin, co-founder of CODEPINK; Deborah Sweet, Director, World Can't Wait; Mike Ferner, President, Veterans for Peace; Al-Awda, the Palestine Right to Return Coalition; Heidi Boghosian, Executive Director, National Lawyers Guild; Ron Kovic, author of "Born on the 4th of July"; Juan Jose Gutierrez, Director, Latino Movement USA; Col. Ann Wright (ret.); March Forward!; Partnership for Civil Justice; Palestinian American Women Association; Alliance for a Just and Lasting Peace in the Philippines; Alliance for Global Justice; Claudia de la Cruz, Pastor, Iglesia San Romero de Las Americas-UCC; Phil Portluck, Social Justice Ministry, Covenant Baptist Church, D.C.; Blase & Theresa Bonpane, Office of the Americas; Coalition for Peace and Democracy in Honduras; Comite Pro-Democracia en Mexico; Frente Unido de los Pueblos Americanos; Comites de Base FMLN, Los Angeles; Free Palestine Alliance; GABRIELA Network; Justice for Filipino American Veterans; KmB Pro-People Youth; Students Fight Back; Jim Lafferty, Executive Director, National Lawyers Guild - LA Chapter; LEF Foundation; National Coalition to Free the Angola 3; Community Futures Collective; Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival; Companeros del Barrio; Barrio Unido for Full and Unconditional Amnesty, Bay Area United Against War.
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
http://www.answercoalition.org/
info@internationalanswer.org
National Office in Washington DC: 202-265-1948
New York City: 212-694-8720
Los Angeles: 213-251-1025
San Francisco: 415-821-6545
Chicago: 773-463-0311
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
B. SPECIAL APPEALS, VIDEOS AND ONGOING CAMPAIGNS
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Oakland's Judge Jacobson ruled at 4:00PM Friday, October 16 to move the trial of Johannes Mehserle, killer of unarmed Oscar Grant, OUT OF OAKLAND. The location of the trial venue has not been announced.
In the case of an innocent verdict, folks are encouraged to head to Oakland City Hall ASAP to express our outrage in a massive and peaceful way! Our power is in our numbers! Oscar Grant's family and friends need our support!
For more information:
Contact BAMN at 510-502-9072
letters@bamn.com
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
The Story of Mouseland: As told by Tommy Douglas in 1944
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqgOvzUeiAA
The Communist Manifesto illustrated by Cartoons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KUl4yfABE4
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Support mom still facing Afghanistan deployment, court martial
By Jeff Paterson, Courage to Resist. November 16, 2009
"I currently don't have a family care plan, but they told me they did not
care and for me to get ready to go to Afghanistan," explained Oakland,
California native Spc. Alexis Hutchinson, a 21-year-old soldier based at
Hunter Army Airfield outside of Savannah, Georgia.
As I spoke to Alexis on the phone, I believed if I found her a civilian
lawyer to work with the military, a reasonable resolution would be quickly
found. Unlike most service members Courage to Resist assists, Alexis was not
refusing to deploy. She was not looking to speak out against war. She was
simply asking for more time to find someone to care for her 11-month old son
Kamani. Within a few days, however, the Army had tossed Alexis in the
stockade and turned Kamani over to the Chatham County (Georgia) foster care
system.
Read more...
http://couragetoresist.org/x/content/view/792/1/
Please make a tax-deductible donation to Alexis' legal and family support
fund.
http://couragetoresist.org/alexis
Details:
Courage to Resist Urgent Action Alert
Army sends infant to protective services, mom to Afghanistan this weekend
http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/content/view/789/1/
Army has mom, Alexis Hutchinson, arrested and 11-month old son put into county foster care system. Alexis has now been ordered to deploy to Afghanistan on Sunday, November 15, where she will be court martialed.
Action Alert: Contact Congresswoman Barbara Lee to urge her to "Request that the Army not deploy Alexis Hutchinson to Afghanistan so that she can care for her son." From the 9th District (Oakland-Berkeley, CA) phone: 510-763-0370 (fax: 510-763-6538). Nationwide: 202- 225-2661 (fax: 202-225-9817).
Donate to Alexis' legal and family support fund (couragetoresist.org/alexis)
Alexis' attorney now available for media interviews.
By friends of Alexis and Courage to Resist. November 12, 2009
Specialist Alexis Hutchinson of Oakland, CA is the single mother of an 11-month old boy, Kamani. Currently she is confined to Hunter Army Airfield near Savannah, Georgia, where she has been posted since February 2008, and threatened with a court martial if she does not agree to be deployed to Afghanistan, even though she has not found anyone to take care of her child while she is away.
In anticipation of going overseas Specialist Hutchinson flew to California and left her son with her mother Angelique Hughes of Oakland, as per her Army family care plan. However, after a week of caring for the child Specialist Hutchinson's mother realized that she was unable to take care of Kamani on top of her other duties to her special-needs daughter, her ailing mother, and her ailing sister. In late October Angelique Hughes informed Hutchinson and her commander, Captain Gassant, that she was not able to care for her daughter's baby after all. The Army gave Specialist Hutchinson an extension of time to find someone else to care for her son, and in the meantime her mother brought Kamani back to Georgia. However just a few days before Specialist Hutchinson was scheduled to deploy she was told that she would not get the extended time after all and would have to deploy, even though there was no one to care for her child.
Faced with that choice Specialist Hutchinson did not show up for her plane. The military had her arrested and they put her child in the county foster care system. Currently, Specialist Hutchinson is scheduled to fly to Afghanistan for a special court martial on Sunday and is facing up to one year in jail. Her mother flew to Georgia and retrieved the baby but is overwhelmed, and does not feel able to provide long-term care for Kamani.
Specialist Hutchinson would like to have more time to find someone to care for her infant. However, she does not have a lot of family or friends who could do so. She says: "It is outrageous that they would deploy a single mother without a complete and current family care plan. I would like to find someone I trust who can take care of my son, but I cannot force my family to do this. They are dealing with their own health issues."
Also in the news:
Army Sends Infant to Protective Services, Mom to Afghanistan
by Dahr Jamail, Inter Press Service. November 13, 2009
Online version with possible updates
http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/content/view/789/1/
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
HANDS OFF JUANITA YOUNG!
Statement from the NY October 22nd Coalition to Stop Police Brutality
http://www.petitiononline.com/JYoungNY/petition.html
Soon after 6:00am on October 27th, five cops raided the house of Juanita Young, the mother of Malcolm Ferguson who was gunned down by a plainclothes cop in 2000. They threatened to break down her door, tried to climb in through her bathroom window, put a gun in Juanita's face and took away her son, Buddy. The cops justified their outrageous and illegal behavior by citing a warrant, refusing to identify who or what the warrant was for. Later it was claimed that the warrant was for Buddy failing to appear in court for a Desk Appearance Ticket on October 13th, just two weeks earlier. This made it clear that it was both an unusually quick response and out of the ordinary violence for this offense.
This is not the first time cops have run roughshod over the rights of Juanita and her family. Juanita Young has been an outspoken opponent of police brutality, fighting for justice not only for her son Malcolm, but for all victims of police brutality. This has made her a target of persistent persecution by the police:
--June 2003: During an illegal eviction carried out by the NYPD, Juanita was arrested for trespassing in her own home. She was handcuffed and aggressively pushed out of her apartment and building, falling twice and injuring her arm. In October 2007, a Bronx civil jury determined that the arresting officer used excessive force in her arrest.
--November 2005: After voicing her disapproval of a brutal arrest at a demonstration, Juanita was arrested after a commanding officer said, "Get her, too." She was refused medical attention that she needed due to an asthma attack. Young was hospitalized for three days and faced criminal charges, but before the date of her arraignment, she received notice in the mail that the charges were dropped.
--November 2006: Juanita was arrested after more than 8 cops entered her apartment during an ambulance call for her daughter. The cops jumped her, punched and kicked her. She was taken to the hospital, where she was handcuffed to the bed and tortured by police for four days, only to be handed a ticket on the last day an hour after a press conference about her attack took place. In October 2008, a Bronx jury acquitted Young of all charges.
--August 2009: During a cookout in front of Juanita's building, over a dozen cops broke down the front door, slammed her oldest son up behind the door, and beat him on the head. The cops also arrested her daughters. This was another attempt to intimidate Juanita Young - through striking out at her loved ones - in hopes of silencing this powerful voice against police brutality.
All these attacks are outrageous, illegitimate and illegal. We say: HANDS OFF JUANITA YOUNG! The NYPD must stop this intimidation and harassment of Juanita and her family. Speaking out against police brutality is no crime. But targeting someone in retaliation for speaking out is illegal.
From Juanita Young's statement to supporters:
"Not only have my rights been violated in the most blatant ways, but I feel physically and psychologically terrorized. I fear for my safety, my very life, and the lives of my children and grandchildren." (October 29, 2009)
We refuse to allow Juanita Young, this fighter against police brutality and injustice, to stand alone against this onslaught.
We demand:
1: The NYPD stop its persecution of Juanita Young!
2: Bronx DA Robert Johnson investigate the role of the 43rd Precinct in this persecution.
3: An investigation of the Warrant Squad and how they were charged, and how they went about, in serving the warrant at Juanita Young's house on October 27th.
Sign Petition Here:
http://www.petitiononline.com/JYoungNY/petition.html
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Cleve Jones Speaks At Gay Rights Rally In Washington, DC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvC3hVXZpc4
Free the SF8: Drop the Charges!
by Bill Carpenter ( wcarpent [at] ccsf.edu )
Monday Oct 12th, 2009 11:20 AM
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/10/12/18625220.php
Sony Piece of crap (Hilarious!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I-JByPDJm0
Sick For Profit
http://sickforprofit.com/videos/
Fault Lines: Despair & Revival in Detroit - 14 May 09 - Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ7VL907Qb0&feature=related
VIDEO INTERVIEW: Dan Berger on Political Prisoners in the United States
By Angola 3 News
Angola 3 News
37 years ago in Louisiana, 3 young black men were silenced for trying to expose continued segregation, systematic corruption, and horrific abuse in the biggest prison in the US, an 18,000-acre former slave plantation called Angola. In 1972 and 1973 prison officials charged Herman Wallace, Albert Woodfox, and Robert King with murders they did not commit and threw them into 6x9 ft. cells in solitary confinement, for over 36 years. Robert was freed in 2001, but Herman and Albert remain behind bars.
http://angola3news.blogspot.com/2009/09/video-dan-berger-on-political-prisoners.html
Taking Aim Radio Program with
Ralph Schoenman and Mya Shone
The Chimera of Capitalist Recovery, Parts 1 and 2
http://www.takingaimradio.com/shows/audio.html
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
JROTC MUST GO!
The San Francisco Board of Education has re-installed the Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps in San Francisco schools -- including allowing it to count for Physical Education credits.
This is a complete reversal of the 2006 decision to end JROTC altogether in San Francisco public schools. Our children need a good physical education program, not a death education program!
With the economy in crisis; jobs and higher education for youth more unattainable; the lure, lies and false promises of military recruiters is driving more and more of our children into the military trap.
This is an economic draft and the San Francisco Board of Education is helping to snare our children to provide cannon fodder for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and for over 700 U.S. military bases around the world!
We can't depend upon "friendly politicians" who, while they are campaigning for office claim they are against the wars but when they get elected vote in favor of military recruitment--the economic draft--in our schools. We can't depend upon them. That has been proven beyond doubt!
It is up to all of us to come together to stop this NOW!
GET JROTC AND ALL MILITARY RECRUITERS OUT OF OUR SCHOOLS NOW!
Write, call, pester and ORGANIZE against the re-institution of JROTC in our San Francisco public schools NOW!
In solidarity,
Bonnie Weinstein
Bay Area United Against War Newsletter
San Francisco Board of Education
555 Franklin Street, 1st Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
415/241-6427, (415) 241-6493
cascoe@sfusd.edu
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
HELP VFP PUT THIS BOOK IN YOUR HIGH SCHOOL OR PUBLIC LIBRARY
For a donation of only $18.95, we can put a copy of the book "10 Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military" into a public or high school library of your choice. [Reason number 1: You may be killed]
A letter and bookplate will let readers know that your donation helped make this possible.
Putting a book in either a public or school library ensures that students, parents, and members of the community will have this valuable information when they need it.
Don't have a library you would like us to put it in? We'll find one for you!
https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/826/t/9311/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=4906
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Showdown In Chicago
The Showdown in Chicago is underway! Thousands of Americans are in the midst of a series of demonstrations against Wall Street banks and their lobbyists to call for financial reform. Check out the latest news:
http://www.showdowninchicago.org/
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
EYE WITNESS REPORTS FROM GAZA Video Free Gaza News October 22,2009
http://www.youtube.com/gazafriends#p/a/1/nHa-CzNCF3c
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
ANSWER Statement on Proposed SF Parking Meter Hours
The ANSWER Coalition-SF Bay Area strongly opposes the proposal to extend parking meter hours in San Francisco. The SFMTA, the Metropolitan Transit Agency, is proposing to have parking meters in most of SF run until midnight Monday-Saturday, and from 11 am-6 pm on Sundays!
This is another attempt by the politicians to solve the city's budget crisis by squeezing every last dollar they can out of working people. They have outrageously jacked up MUNI fares, other city fees and parking fines. At the same time they have let the big banks, developers and other wealthy corporate interests-the ones who have created the current economic and budget crisis-off the hook.
The DPT (Department of Parking and Traffic) has already begun a policy of "enhanced enforcement," super-aggressively ticketing vehicles from 9:01 am to 5:59 pm, Monday-Saturday. Every day in every working class neighborhood of SF you can see the booted cars and trucks. On top of the $53, $63 and higher parking tickets, it costs over $200 just to get a boot removed! If your car gets towed, you have to pay $400 or more to get it back. This is causing many low-income people to lose their vehicles.
City officials are trying to mislead people by falsely claiming that the reason for extending meter hours is to collect more quarters and "open up more parking spaces." What they really want is to hit us with thousands more high-priced tickets, and then collect the ransom for booted and towed cars.
This is a class issue. The rich and the well-to-do don't have to worry about where to park in this small and crowded city. They have garages or can afford to pay for parking. It is overwhelmingly working class people who are being hit and who will be hit much, much harder if the new policy goes into effect. Many residents in neighborhoods with meters have no choice but to park at meters after 6 pm and move their vehicles before 9 am the next morning. There just aren't enough spaces otherwise.
As Cristina Gutierrez of Barrio Unido, an immigrant rights group opposed to the plan, asked: "What are we supposed to do, run out of our homes every hour at night to feed the meter?"
But the MTA board and some misguided individuals are trying to pose the issue as MUNI riders vs. car drivers. Some have even ignorantly asserted that if you own a car, you can't possibly be poor. Really? Tell that to the growing number of people forced to LIVE in their cars due to the depression!
The reality is that many people in SF both ride MUNI and own cars (some ride bikes, too). For a lot of people getting to work, shopping, medical appointments, etc. requires a car. That's especially true for families and for people whose jobs are outside SF or not easily accessible by mass transit. Posing the issue as bus riders vs. car riders is false and reactionary.
Does MUNI need more funding? Of course. Should MUNI fares be cut and service increased? No question about it. The issue is: Who should pay?
While taxes, fees, fines, fares, etc., etc, have been constantly increased for us, the taxes on corporate profits have been going down. Many big banks and corporations have been able to avoid paying income tax altogether. While we're told that there's no money for people's needs, $500,000,000 is spent every day on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Trillions of dollars have been handed over to the biggest banks in just the last year.
It's time to say: Enough is Enough! It's time for the politicians to stop trying to make working people pay for the economic crisis that the rich created. It's time to make those who can afford it-big business-pay for the services that the people of the city, state and country need.
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
Act Now to Stop War & End Racism
http://www.ANSWERcoalition.org http://www.answersf.org
answer@answersf.org
2489 Mission St. Rm. 24
San Francisco: 415-821-6545
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
This is a must-see video about the life of Oscar Grant, a young man who loved his family and was loved by his family. It's important to watch to understand the tremendous loss felt by his whole family as a result of his cold-blooded murder by BART police officers--Johannes Mehserle being the shooter while the others held Oscar down and handcuffed him to aid Mehserle in the murder of Oscar Grant January 1, 2009.
The family wants to share this video here with you who support justice for Oscar Grant.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/07/21/18611878.php
WE DEMAND JUSTICE FOR OSCAR GRANT!
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Urgent: Ahmad Sa'adat transferred to isolation in Ramon prison!
http://www.freeahmadsaadat.org/
Imprisoned Palestinian national leader Ahmad Sa'adat, the General Secretary of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, was transferred on August 11, 2009 to Ramon prison in the Naqab desert from Asqelan prison, where he had been held for a number of months. He remains in isolation; prior to his transfer from Asqelan, he had been held since August 1 in a tiny isolation cell of 140 cm x 240 cm after being penalized for communicating with another prisoner in the isolation unit.
Attorney Buthaina Duqmaq, president of the Mandela Association for prisoners' and detainees' rights, reported that this transfer is yet another continuation of the policy of repression and isolation directed at Sa'adat by the Israeli prison administration, aimed at undermining his steadfastness and weakening his health and his leadership in the prisoners' movement. Sa'adat has been moved repeatedly from prison to prison and subject to fines, harsh conditions, isolation and solitary confinement, and medical neglect. Further reports have indicated that he is being denied attorney visits upon his transfer to Ramon.
Ahmad Sa'adat undertook a nine-day hunger strike in June in order to protest the increasing use of isolation against Palestinian prisoners and the denial of prisoners' rights, won through long and hard struggle. The isolation unit at Ramon prison is reported to be one of the worst isolation units in terms of conditions and repeated violations of prisoners' rights in the Israeli prison system.
Sa'adat is serving a 30 year sentence in Israeli military prisons. He was sentenced on December 25, 2008 after a long and illegitimate military trial on political charges, which he boycotted. He was kidnapped by force in a military siege on the Palestinian Authority prison in Jericho, where he had been held since 2002 under U.S., British and PA guard.
Sa'adat is suffering from back injuries that require medical assistance and treatment. Instead of receiving the medical care he needs, the Israeli prison officials are refusing him access to specialists and engaging in medical neglect and maltreatment.
The Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat demands an end to this isolation and calls upon all to protest at local Israeli embassies and consulates (the list is available at: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/ About+the+Ministry/Diplomatic+mission/Web+Sites+of+Israeli+ Missions+Abroad.htm) and to write to the International Committee of the Red Cross and other human rights organizations to exercise their responsibilities and act swiftly to demand that the Israelis ensure that Ahmad Sa'adat and all Palestinian prisoners receive needed medical care and that this punitive isolation be ended. Email the ICRC, whose humanitarian mission includes monitoring the conditions of prisoners, at jerusalem..jer@icrc.org, and inform them about the urgent situation of Ahmad Sa'adat!
Ahmad Sa'adat has been repeatedly moved in an attempt to punish him for his steadfastness and leadership and to undermine his leadership in the prisoners' movement. Of course, these tactics have done nothing of the sort. The Palestinian prisoners are daily on the front lines, confronting Israeli oppression and crimes. Today, it is urgent that we stand with Ahmad Sa'adat and all Palestinian prisoners against these abuses, and for freedom for all Palestinian prisoners and for all of Palestine!
The Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat
http://www.freeahmadsaadat.org
info@freeahmadsaadat.org
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Troy Anthony Davis is an African American man who has spent the last 18 years on death row for a murder he did not commit. There is no physical evidence tying him to the crime and seven out of nine witnesses have recanted. New evidence and new testimony have been presented to the Georgia courts, but the justice system refuses to consider this evidence, which would prove Troy Davis' innocence once and for all.
Sign the petition and join the NAACP, Amnesty International USA, and other partners in demanding justice for Troy Davis!
http://www.iamtroy.com/
For Now, High Court Punts on Troy Davis, on Death Row for 18 Years
By Ashby Jones
Wall Street Journal Law Blog
June 30, 2009
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/06/30/for-now-high-court-punts-on-troy-davis-on-death-row-for-18-years/
Take action now:
http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&b=2590179&aid=12361&ICID=A0906A01&tr=y&auid=5030305
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Committee To Save Mumia Abu-Jamal
P.O. Box 2012
New York, NY 10159-2012
New videos from April 24 Oakland Mumia event
http://abu-jamal-news.com/article?name=jlboak
Donations for Mumia's Legal Defense in the U.S. Our legal effort is the front line of the battle for Mumia's freedom and life. His legal defense needs help. The costs are substantial for our litigation in the U.S. Supreme Court and at the state level. To help, please make your checks payable to the National Lawyers Guild Foundation (indicate "Mumia" on the bottom left). All donations are tax deductible under the Internal Revenue Code, section 501(c)(3), and should be mailed to:
It is outrageous and a violation of human rights that Mumia remains in prison and on death row. His life hangs in the balance. My career has been marked by successfully representing people facing death in murder cases. I will not rest until we win Mumia's case. Justice requires no less.
With best wishes,
Robert R. Bryan
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
Short Video About Al-Awda's Work
The following link is to a short video which provides an overview of Al-Awda's work since the founding of our organization in 2000. This video was first shown on Saturday May 23, 2009 at the fundraising banquet of the 7th Annual Int'l Al-Awda Convention in Anaheim California. It was produced from footage collected over the past nine years.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTiAkbB5uC0&eurl
Support Al-Awda, a Great Organization and Cause!
Al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, depends on your financial support to carry out its work.
To submit your tax-deductible donation to support our work, go to
http://www.al-awda.org/donate.html and follow the simple instructions.
Thank you for your generosity!
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
KEVIN COOPER IS INNOCENT!
FLASHPOINTS Interview with Innocent San Quentin Death Row Inmate
Kevin Cooper -- Aired Monday, May 18,2009
http://www.flashpoints.net/#GOOGLE_SEARCH_ENGINE
To learn more about Kevin Cooper go to:
savekevincooper.org
LINKS
San Francisco Chronicle article on the recent ruling:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/13/BAM517J8T3.DTL
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling and dissent:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/05/11/05-99004o.pdf
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
COURAGE TO RESIST!
Support the troops who refuse to fight!
http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/
Donate:
http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/content/view/21/57/
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
C. ARTICLES IN FULL
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
1) Confronting Human Rights Abuses in U.S. Prisons
By Angola 3 News
November 15, 2009
http://angola3news.blogspot.com/2009/11/confronting-human-rights-abuses-in-us_9321.html
2) Money Trickles North as Mexicans Help Relatives
By MARC LACEY
November 16, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/world/americas/16mexico.html?ref=world
3) U.S. Readies New Facility for Afghan Detainees
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
November 16, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/world/asia/16bagram.html?ref=world
4) Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health Care Reform
[And the banks are raising their interest rates befor the
"reforms" take effect. So what else is new?...bw]
By DUFF WILSON
November 16, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/business/16drugprices.html?ref=us
5) What Real Health Reform Looks Like
We Need Health Care, Not Insurance
By CAROL MILLER
November 16, 2009
http://www.counterpunch.com/miller11162009.html
6) Trumka: Jobs Crisis-Fix It Now
By Seth Michaels
November 17, 2009
In Economy
http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/11/17/trumka-jobs-crisisfix-it-now/
7) Hunger in U.S. at a 14-Year High
"One figure that drew officials' attention was the number of households, 506,000, in which children faced "very low food security": up from 323,000 the previous year."
By JASON DePARLE
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/us/17hunger.html?ref=us
8) U.S. Attorney Nominee Criticized Over Raids
"Eleventh-hour criticism is arising over President Obama's nomination for United States attorney in northern Iowa of a prosecutor who had a leading role in the criminal cases against hundreds of illegal immigrants arrested in a May 2008 raid at a meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa."
By JULIA PRESTON
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/us/17attorney.html?ref=us
9) Continuing Unemployment Is Predicted by Fed Chief
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/business/economy/17fed.html?ref=us
10) Mother Refuses Deployment
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/us/17soldier.html?ref=us
11) Army Addresses Soldiers' Suicide Rate
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
National Briefing | Washington
November 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/us/18brfs-ARMYADDRESSE_BRF.html?ref=us
12) Conviction of Sheik's Lawyer for Assisting Terrorism Is Upheld
By BENJAMIN WEISER and JOHN ELIGON
November 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/nyregion/18stewart.html?ref=nyregion
13) Playing the Health Care Lottery
By THERESA BROWN, R.N.
November 18, 2009, 10:40 am
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/health/index.html
14) Paid Leave Key to Slowing Spread of H1N1
by Mike Hall
November 17, 2009
http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/11/17/paid-leave-key-to-slowing-spread-of-h1n1/
15) Labor Fight Ends in Win for Students
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
November 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/business/18labor.html
16) Mr. Obama's Task
NYT Editorial
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/opinion/19thu1.html?hp
17) Ruling on Katrina Flooding Favors Homeowners
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/us/19orleans.html?ref=us
18) California: University System Moves to Raise Fees
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
National Briefing | West
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/education/19brfs-UNIVERSITYSY_BRF.html?ref=education
19) U.S. Mortgage Delinquencies Reach a Record High
By DAVID STREITFELD
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/business/20mortgage.html?ref=business
20) Senate Says Health Plan Will Cover Another 31 Million
By ROBERT PEAR and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/health/policy/19health.html?ref=health
21) Free Lynne Stewart
"We are in here for you. You are out there for us! Free All Political Prisoners"
[Illustration shows Mumia Abu-Jamal and Lynne Stewart]
Here a Terrorist, There a Terrorist, Everywhere a Terrorist
See the article below and illustration by Christopher Hutchinson, General Strike at this site:
http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/
22) Civil Rights Attorney Lynne Stewart Speaks Out
Democracy Now Interview By Amy Goodman
November 18, 2009
http://i1.democracynow.org/2009/11/18/exclusive_civil_rights_attorney_lynne_stewart
23) Regents Raise Tuition in California by 32 Percent
By TAMAR LEWIN
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/education/20tuition.html?hp
24) A Gift to Credit Card Companies
NYT Editorial
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/opinion/20fri3.html
25) Russia: Moratorium on Executions
By MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ
World Briefing | Europe
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/world/europe/20briefs-ExecutionBrf.html?ref=world
26) Watchdog Urges Caution on Claims of 640,000 Stimulus Jobs
By MICHAEL COOPER
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/us/politics/20stimulus.html?ref=us
27) Jobless Rate Got No Help From Hiring for Holidays
By PATRICK McGEEHAN
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/nyregion/20jobs.html?ref=nyregion
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
1) Confronting Human Rights Abuses in U.S. Prisons
By Angola 3 News
November 15, 2009
http://angola3news.blogspot.com/2009/11/confronting-human-rights-abuses-in-us_9321.html
Bret Grote is an investigator and organizer with Human Rights Coalition/Fed Up! (HRC/Fed Up!), a prisoner rights/prison abolitionist organization based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Grote first became involved with the group after returning from the mobilization in Jena, Louisiana in Fall 2007. HRC sister chapters are in Philadelphia and Chester, PA. While covering a range of topics in this interview, Grote details how HRC/Fed Up! is documenting human rights abuses in Pennsylvania prisons, and using this documentation to fight back.
The website for the founding chapter of Human Rights Coalition in Philadelphia says that HRC "was founded in 2001 based on the radical notion that there was a vital segment of the population missing from the organizing work against prisons: the families and loved ones of the over two million prisoners in this country. Not just as spokespeople or tokens, but in decision-making positions, deciding what campaigns to do and what issues to address. Incarcerated brothers took this idea, and asked their family members as well as some supporters to take the lead in building such an organization, and the HRC was born...There are many fronts to fight the prison system on, so many issues to address, but the voices of those most affected: prisoners' families, ex-prisoners and the prisoners themselves, have to be at the forefront of any movement to change and, sometime in the future, to abolish the prison system entirely, because we are the ones who know the intimate pain this system causes."
Angola 3 News: Can you please explain the history of the Human Rights Coalition/Fed Up! chapter?
Bret Grote: Our chapter of the Human Rights Coalition (HRC) was formed in late 2004-early 2005 and was originally known as Fed Up! The group began as collaboration between Etta, an anti-prison activist who lives in Pittsburgh, and Kevin Johnson, a prisoner confined in Red Onion State Prison, a Supermax facility situated in southwestern Virginia adjacent to the Tennessee border. The two were collaborating on an arts-based educational project.
Given the inherent brutality in Supermax facilities, the diametrically opposed racial demographics between prison personnel and prisoners, and the prevailing culture of violent dehumanization within the U.S. prison system at every level, it is no surprise that reports of severe human rights violations began emerging from Red Onion and its twin institution Wallens Ridge State Prison, which sits 30 miles down the road atop a decapitated mountain, immediately after each opened in 1998 and 1999 respectively.
Fed Up! was formed in an effort to expose conditions of confinement in Virginia's high-security prisons and mobilize prisoners' family members and support people against the racism, brutality, deprivation, medical neglect and abuse, and psychological torture that define these facilities.
Over the next couple of years Fed Up! built a contact list of hundreds of prisoners in Red Onion and Wallens Ridge, documented dozens of reports of human rights violations, informed various governmental representatives and agencies-including the governor of Virginia-of these conditions, and mobilized allies for letter and phone campaigns in an effort to penetrate the silence that enables the worst of the abuse, and thereby having a chilling effect on the most grievous brutality.
Sometime prior to or during 2007, Fed Up! became an official chapter of the Human Rights Coalition, a prisoner rights/prison abolitionist organization whose founding chapter was and still remains active in Philadelphia. HRC was the brainchild of prisoners as well. Around the fall of 2007 and early 2008 HRC/Fed Up!-as we were then known-began to focus more exclusively on Pennsylvania (PA) prisons for reasons of capacity and strategy, because, obviously, we have more potential and actual power in this state since we are based here.
During these last two years we have documented hundreds upon hundreds of human rights violations (to view a small portion visit our website) from over 20 prisons in the state system (PA has 27 state prisons). These reports have been collated from thousands upon thousands of pages of prisoner letters and reports, criminal complaints, affidavits and declarations, civil litigation documents, prison records, along with countless hours of interviews and dialogue with current and former prisoners and their family and support people.
What our investigations demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt is that the state of Pennsylvania is operating a sophisticated program of torture under an utterly baseless pretext of "security," wherein close to 3,000 people are held in conditions of solitary/control unit confinement each day.
Every single prison in the state has a control unit, and most of these consist of barren and often filthy cells that not only are the size of a bathroom, but are in fact bathrooms. Prisoners are confined for 23-24 hours per day in their cells. Reading materials are heavily restricted and censored. All incoming mail is subject to being read, except legal mail, although this policy is often violated while outgoing mail is subject to various forms of surveillance, tampering, and destruction. Restrictions on visitations are extreme and all visits with those in control units are conducted through thick glass with prisoners who are handcuffed throughout. Exercise "privileges" are granted 5-days per week when prisoners are taken to little cubicles of space enclosed by chain-link fencing and resembling dog kennels, presuming that the guards are willing to follow policy that day and that the prisoner in question feels secure being led from their cell to the "yard" by often flagrantly racist and sadistic guards.
While this capsule description of solitary confinement may appear inhumane and degrading enough to constitute torture-and it is-the concise litany of conditions above more or less corresponds to the aspects of solitary confinement that are mandated by policy, with the exception of some forms of mail tampering. The fact of the matter is that these control units are never operated in accordance with policy and instead serve as quite deliberate repositories for excessive and arbitrary violence, starvation and deprivation of water, psychological torment, etc.
Prisoners targeted most heavily by the regime of control unit torture are those who attempt to exercise constitutional rights to file grievances and lawsuits and expose conditions to the public. The other dominant filters that dictate an enhanced probability for placement in solitary confinement are race and mental health, as prisoners of color and those in need of psychological and psychiatric care constitute a higher concentration of prisoners in solitary than in the general prison population, which of course already has higher concentrations of both populations than the general population.
This focus on investigating, exposing, and fighting against state torture has emerged from a twinned set of obligations that need to accompany not only abolitionist movements, but struggles for social justice in general: the need to take immediate action in partnership and solidarity with those most heavily targeted by systems of oppression while simultaneously building a sustainable movement with a visionary, liberatory objective.
During the last year we have engaged in a number of other projects and community outreach and coalition-building efforts as well. Some of the more promising ones in terms of their necessity and importance for sustainable organizing are the recently launched project focusing on women's incarceration, our Innocence Division which aims to support the wrongfully convicted, and perhaps most crucial, the recent formation along with a number of other local groups of the Human Rights Alliance Pittsburgh, which works to generate an integrated, multi-front human rights movement by means of organizing local communities to struggle for their rights and build political power.
Angola 3 News: What role do prisoners and the families of prisoners have in HRC's Fed Up! today?
Bret Grote: Prisoners and their family members have provided the inspiration, dedication, strategy, and educational perspective from the beginning of HRC's work. Understanding the importance of documentation and securing affidavits, educating us on key aspects of the law and how to file criminal complaints, networking and bringing us into contact with other prisoners and activists: all of this has come from those on the inside.
Even more to the point, the resistance, humor, persistence, dignity, and unbreakable humanity of those subjected to conditions designed to humiliate, degrade, terrorize, break, and otherwise kill the human spirit is a constant wellspring of motivation that fortifies our collective commitment at HRC/Fed Up!
Family members' involvement is central, as our planning meetings and letter-writing nights frequently, though not always, feature the participation of those with loved ones inside. We routinely ask people to step up and respond to our action alerts in defense of those being starved, beaten, denied medical care or otherwise targeted, and it has been the responses of family members that have led to our ability to amplify our voices and have some degree of a chilling effect in certain situations.
Still, we need to make a more dedicated effort in my view to community organizing, since most people in Pittsburgh do not know we exist, and those who do are not always able to make meetings for a variety of reasons, which primarily has to do with attending to familial and work responsibilities. We need to broaden our avenues for participation and create a diverse and steady stream of public forums in which the voices of current and former prisoners and their loved ones will be central and guiding. We need to consciously step up our efforts to build more leadership within targeted communities.
Angola 3 News: Can you please tell us about HRC/Fed Up!'s ongoing investigations into State Correctional Institution (SCI), Dallas?
Bret Grote: In early June of this year we sent a letter to more than 20 current and former prisoners at the State Correctional Institution (SCI) at Dallas, PA, soliciting reports of human rights violations. Since then we have received thousands of pages in reports from dozens of prisoners detailing a wide range of gross and deliberate human rights violations.
The highest concentration of reports come from the Restricted Housing Unit (RHU), which is PA's own acronym for the solitary/control units, and these conform to the broad characteristics outlined above regarding solitary confinement, although certain depredations have been more prevalent at SCI Dallas. These include high incidence of sexual harassment by RHU staff and even reports of guards encouraging prisoners to sexually assault and rape other prisoners; frequent incitement to suicide, which was fatally successful in a case I'll discuss below; guards arriving to work drunk-we have had a shocking number of reports regarding this, particularly concerning Correctional Officer Jimmy Wilkes; no effective ventilation, which was exacerbated by the plastic "spit shields" placed on prisoners' doors in the RHU and a source of extreme misery in the stifling heat of summer; brown drinking and washing water from excessive amounts of iron, which was confirmed in a letter from the Department of Environmental Protection to a prisoner in the RHU that HRC/Fed Up! has obtained.
The assaults, racism, denial of adequate or even any medical care in solitary or general population, especially mental health treatment, denial of due process in internal grievance and misconduct procedures, obstruction of access to the courts via the destruction of legal documents and arbitrary restrictions on usage of the law library are commonplace at SCI Dallas as they are throughout the control units of PA with varying degrees of intensity.
During the course of our still ongoing investigation, on August 24, 2009, a prisoner in the RHU named Matthew Bullock committed suicide. The PA Department Of Corrections (DOC) issued a press release, as is their legal obligation, on August 25, 2009 announcing his death. Only two days later we received the first report that guards were involved in encouraging and enabling Mr. Bullock's death. Since then we have learned through more than half-a-dozen eyewitness reports, several of which were submitted as affidavits, that Mr. Bullock was extremely mentally ill and according to his family had attempted suicide on at least six separate occasions while confined in the PA DOC. Guards repeatedly kicked on the door of his cell and taunted him, telling him to kill himself, and calling him a child molester and rapist, despite his having no record of any such crimes. Mr. Bullock told guards he was going to kill himself on the morning of August 24. Guards encouraged him to do so and subsequently moved him from cell number 50, which was/is a psychiatric observation cell with a camera, to cell number 48, which had no camera. Guards on the afternoon shift then reportedly failed to make rounds. Mr. Bullock was found hanging in his cell at 6:15 P.M.
Because our investigations involve advocacy and are pursued with the explicit aim of abolishing control unit torture and other human rights violations in the prison system, we have earned the trust of many prisoners, and this is the reason that so many have come forward with reports of torture and human rights violations in SCI Dallas and elsewhere. As a result of their courage in speaking out we were able to break the story of the Bullock suicide in the local newspaper, the Wilkes Barre Times Leader. Mr. Bullock's trial lawyer read the story and contacted our office. We have provided a lot of documentation and witness statements to them, and they have recently opened an estate on Mr. Bullock's behalf, which is the first step in an eventual lawsuit.
Despite the negative publicity and small measure of exposure, conditions have not improved in the slightest, and acts of retaliation have in fact escalated recently. Reports of assault and instances of days long starvation continue to come into our offices multiple times each week.
HRC/Fed Up! has compiled the evidence we have accumulated and periodically notified those in positions of power with attendant requests for transparent investigations so as to ensure accountability and enforce the rule of law in the administration of the criminal legal system. In early July, over 70 state representatives and senators were put on notice of our preliminary findings, along with the PA DOC, the PA Attorney General and Governor Rendell (who it must be noted has a sordid history of criminal conspiracy and human rights violations himself, stemming from his role as the District Attorney of Philadelphia during the city's war against the MOVE organization and the frame-up of Mumia Abu-Jamal). Further notices were sent in September, with even more copious documentation. To date no action has been taken by the PA DOC, the Attorney General of PA, or the Governor. Nor has the District Attorney of Luzerne County-notorious site of the kids-for-cash judicial scandal-taken any action regarding criminal complaints regarding the Bullock incident or the acts of assault and starvation and intimidation against Andre Jacobs, a brilliant 27 year-old jailhouse lawyer who was recently awarded $115,000 in a case against the PA DOC.
Our strategy has been to grant PA state authorities the opportunity to do the right thing while simultaneously preparing for the predictable reality that they will not. Our next steps are the filing of formal criminal complaints with the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department and the issuing of a major human rights report detailing our findings regarding SCI Dallas. The basic idea is to methodically link state authorities at every jurisdictional level into a chain of notice and liability and to reflect the failure of the government to enforce the rule of law and uphold basic human rights onto the public consciousness in order to create the degree of exposure necessary for enabling mass movements and coherent, collective action against the injustices of the police-security state.
In the process we seek to bring methodically incremental increases in the forms and effects of pressure so as to provide improvements in immediate conditions. Or, in other words, we seek to win small battles as a method for building power and strength for the larger ones. Success often appears distant.
I just saw on the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader website that another prisoner died at SCI Dallas on Saturday morning. Autopsy results have not been determined and/or released, and the name has not been made public either. The article says the individual fell ill early Saturday morning and died at the hospital. My question is why is this one being reported? Deaths from "natural causes," i.e. medical conditions, are not required to be made public. Others have died at Dallas recently, or we've been informed, and the newspapers did not make mention of this. I've checked a half-dozen of our closer contacts and their names are still listed in the inmate locator. Nevertheless, I am concerned.
Angola 3 News: Does HRC see solitary confinement as a form of torture? Why do you think prison authorities use solitary confinement?
Bret Grote: What HRC or any members involve consider torture might be an interesting question, but it is of limited utility for effective political organizing. How do international law and the U.S. government define torture? The UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment defines torture as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incident to lawful sanctions." Sounds clear enough.
How does U.S. statutory code define torture? Section 2340 of Title 18 of the federal criminal code defines torture as "an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control."
Do the conditions of control unit confinement meet this standard? There is not space here to go over the evidence, which could fill several hundred pages on the basis of our two-year investigations in prisons in PA alone, but those familiar with the subject have an unequivocal grasp of the reality that solitary confinement deliberately inflicts "severe pain and suffering," especially psychological, and cannot be justified on legitimate, i.e. "lawful," grounds. The reasons for these conclusions are several but I will simply touch on two matters here: the psychological impact of solitary confinement and its failure to meet stated policy objectives.
The scientific consensus deduced from copious research on the psychological impact of solitary confinement is that the experience generates considerable and sometimes permanent mental suffering. One of the foremost experts on the subject, Dr. Stuart Grassian, reveals that "even a few days of solitary confinement will predictably shift the electroencephalogram (EEG) pattern toward an abnormal pattern characteristic of stupor and delirium," and outlines the following seven symptoms as being characteristic of an "organic brain delirium" associated with solitary confinement: a) hyperresponsivity to external stimuli; b) perceptual distortions, illusions, hallucinations; c) panic attacks; d) difficulties with thinking, concentration, and memory; e) intrusive obsessional thoughts: emergence of primitive aggressive ruminations; f) overt paranoia; g) problems with impulse control.
Questionnaires submitted by HRC/Fed Up! to over 75 prisoners in SCI Dallas and throughout the state confirm the presence of these same symptomatic patterns amongst a disturbingly large number of the solitary confinement population. Incidents of self-harm, including suicide attempts, occur regularly and are certainly under-reported. At SCI Fayette, between the months of July and September, HRC received reports from Restricted Housing Unit (RHU) [RHU's are prisons within prisons] that two men set their cells on fire, one of those same men cut himself and swallowed a razor, another man tried to hang himself, and another two cut their wrists and arms. These examples can be multiplied throughout the PA DOC and the entire country.
As for the pretext that solitary confinement reduces violence in prisons and ensures secure facilities, this is supported by literally zero credible evidence to my knowledge. All available testimony and reports would seem to indicate that solitary units create a psychological condition of such absolute repression that instances of violence and brutality proliferate. Not to mention the obvious fact that a stay in the hole exacerbates mental illness, rage, frustration, and other characteristics of anti-social behavioral traits.
Countless prisoners report being forced to max out their sentences because of alleged disciplinary infractions that land them in solitary. The conditions of confinement in the PA DOC are a major contributing factor to recidivism rates that hover around 50 percent in the first three years after release, helping to feed a chronic crisis of overcrowding. This refutes the notion that the PA DOC has any legitimate security, penological, correctional or other rationale behind the program.
In other words, there is nothing lawful in the sanctioning of one to solitary confinement, as it clearly contributes to social destabilization by engendering even more criminality on the part of prison personnel and prisoners in an endless cycle that diverts funding from desperately needed social programs in order to disappear and warehouse members of the underclass. These conditions are a flagrant violation of article six of the U.S. Constitution as well, which affirms that treaty law (i.e. international law) is the "supreme law of the land." Thus, article 10 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that "The penitentiary system shall comprise treatment of prisoners the essential aim of which shall be their reformation and social rehabilitation."
Angola 3 News: What role does solitary confinement have in the overall prison system? Since 1970, the prison population has increased from 300,000 to over 2.3 million today. The U.S. now has more total prisoners and the highest incarceration rate than any other country in the world. What do you attribute this increase to?
Bret Grote: I'll be concise here. Solitary confinement is the innermost core of the U.S.-led imperial architecture of terror. A succinct overview of this architecture can be formulated as follows:
1) The solitary confinement population is used to terrorize the prisoner population;
2) The prison population is used to terrorize poor communities in general and communities of color in particular;
3) Social and economic conditions in these communities are used to terrorize the middle classes;
4) The middle classes are used to carry out the social, economic, and political agenda of the ruling/owning class;
5) The ruling class uses this domestic base of power to organize empire abroad;
6) Empire generates a trajectory of apocalypse;
7) We have to stop this.
This sketch can be developed with varying degrees of nuance, focus, and elaboration, but seems durable enough for me.
In this respect the proliferation of solitary confinement/supermax conditions in the U.S. has corresponded closely with the rise of policies of mass incarceration and the global regime of neoliberal capitalism and its economic ideology of corporate supremacy, which I won't describe here except to say that the deindustrialization of U.S. society has generated an ever-escalating number of people who are useless to the accumulation of wealth. When these populations become fodder for the prison industry they obtain economic capital while the systematic removal of massive numbers of poor people, especially people of color, from anything but marginal or token participation in the economic, social, and political domains serves the political function of neutralizing potential bases for movements against the unjust status quo.
Angola 3 News: Concerning strategies of resistance, how do you think human rights and international law framework can be applied to prison conditions as a method/strategy/philosophy for investigations, exposure, and organizing? How does this relate to other struggles against the Prison Industrial Complex (PIC) and for human rights generally?
Bret Grote: Human rights, which are rooted in international law and designed to ensure the self-determination of peoples and thus a humane, sustainable, and legitimate social order, have a number of immediate advantages as framing instruments for the widest array of political struggle possible.
First of all, this frame turns reality right side up and exposes with grim clarity the criminality of the corporate-state. No matter the severity of crimes committed by those languishing anywhere in the U.S. prison system-and nobody disputes that some of those in prison are dangerous, violent, and pathologically anti-social-these crimes pale in comparison to wars of aggression, radical and ceaseless violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention against Torture, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Genocide Convention, etc. ad nauseam.
In fact, the systemic criminality of the political-economic order generates the oppressive power relations and attendant conditions of poverty, addiction, illicit economic activity, and normalized violence-especially against women and children-that fosters officially defined and punished crime. For those who are serious about ending violence and poverty in our collective communities it is imperative that a core objective of such a project is to mobilize a coherent mass movement from below to put constraints on and eventually eliminate altogether the ability of those in positions of power to engage in serial violations of the rights of others.
This framework has everything to do with accountability and necessitates that we work tirelessly to generate understanding and action around the reality that those who design and operate systems of power in this society are guilty of perpetrating crimes against humanity and must be stopped.
Specifically, in the context of day to day organizing around the prison system, it means that individuals and organizations concerned with the rights and lives of prisoners need to familiarize themselves with the basic principles of international human rights law as it pertains to the criminal legal system (I refuse to call it a justice system) and collect evidence regarding the state's failure to implement basic human rights and constitutional safeguards for prisoners. The UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, amongst other human rights documents, are appropriate for orienting a host of campaigns toward dismantling the worst practices of the present system while simultaneously implementing alternative structures and practices.
Widespread dissemination of human rights documents and literature and the creation of community and movement curriculums toward this end are other means to build, and in part reconstruct, a rights-based culture of political dissent. Rights-based cultures naturally create movements that make demands and mobilize to enforce those demands, without asking for permission from repressive authorities or the ideal historical circumstances for organizing from below. A rights-based culture is a culture of struggle, cooperation, collective accountability, historical consciousness, and dedicated to creating a better world for those generations that will follow. Rights-based cultures are constituted by unbreakable bonds of solidarity, trust, and responsibility.
As anybody familiar with even a fraction of the history of popular struggles for social justice knows, these movements-while they rise and fall, wax and wane-never disappear so long as injustice exists; they are built to last. In fact, the human rights framework corresponds to the liberation movements of the 60 and 70s embodied in the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement amongst others.
Ultimately, human rights discourse and organizing revolves around the question of power: what forces in society hold power, how is it defined, who makes decisions and who suffers the consequences. For this end it is essential that we work to proliferate human rights alliances so as to build the necessary capacity and solidarity to confront the question of power. That is why the Human Rights Alliance of Pittsburgh, young as it is, strikes me as one of our most promising projects.
More practically, a method of documentation, intervention, and movement-building is effective for 1) tracking and exposing human rights violations in prisons, and other areas of society as well; 2) accumulating evidence to strengthen arguments in support of mass action for social reconstruction; 3) building trust with prisoners and their families by taking advocacy actions to the greatest degree possible; 4) building an organizational network with communication infrastructure that will serve to inform, foster dialogue, and mobilize increasing numbers of prisoners and their families and communities.
Angola 3 News: What link can we make between the work of HRC/Fed-Up! and the movement to free the Angola Three and all political prisoners?
Bret Grote: The relationship between the work of HRC/Fed Up! and the struggles of the Angola 3 are inseparable. Solitary confinement and the prison system as a whole have the primary function of silencing and/or liquidating precisely those radical movements embodied in the case and lives of Robert King, Herman Wallace, and Albert Woodfox [The Angola 3]1.
Solitary confinement is a mechanism to isolate and neutralize leadership elements, people with the ability to articulate a common vision, support their principles with action, and build trust, solidarity, self-empowerment, and unbreakable determination within oppressed populations inside the prison and out. As Angola's Warden Burl Cain clarified the matter, albeit while speaking against the release of Albert Woodfox, "He wants to demonstrate. He wants to organize. He wants to be defiant. ...A hunger strike is really, really bad, because you could see he admitted that he was organizing a peaceful demonstration. There is no such thing as a peaceful demonstration in prison." Any act of dissent or protest is unacceptable to the totalitarian mindset.
As Cain further stated about Woodfox, "I still know he has a propensity for violence...he is still trying to practice Black Pantherism, and I still would not want him walking around my prison because he would organize the young new inmates." For those familiar with the actual program and ideology of the Black Panther Party, Cain's statement contains a key insight: the struggle for human rights amongst oppressed peoples is an unacceptable threat to a system built and sustained upon the denial of those rights.
Our task in this context is clear: to carry forward in our work with renewed intensity and dedication, honoring those who struggled before us, acting on our responsibilities toward those who will follow, and building the movements of today that will confront and ultimately defeat this unspeakably cruel and inhuman system.
Angola 3 News: How can readers best support HRC/Fed Up! with its work?
Bret Grote: We have no staff and even less money, so financial contributions are extremely helpful. We have a lot of printing and mailing needs, as we send dozens of letters to prisoners each month, not to mention criminal complaints, letters to state officials and legislators, and other operational costs, including transportation costs for a possible speaking tour and visits to prisons. Checks can be made to HRC/Fed Up! and sent to us at 5125 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15224.
Most importantly, however, get in contact with us so we can learn from each other's work and practice mutual aid and solidarity in whatever ways appropriate and possible.2
And finally, please do send an email and join our Emergency Response Network (ERN) to help us spread information and take collective action in urgent situations involving starvation, assaults, medical neglect, and other human rights violations in PA prisons. Set up your own ERN for your city, state, and/or region, and lets network to help shatter the silence that enables the torture to continue.
Angola 3 News is a new project of the International Coalition to Free the Angola 3. Our website is www.angola3news.com where we provide the latest news about the Angola 3. Like this interview with Bret Grote, we are also creating our own media projects, which spotlight the issues central to the story of the Angola 3, like racism, repression, prisons, human rights, solitary confinement as torture, and more. Our online video series has now released interviews with Black Panther artist Emory Douglas titled "The Black Panther Party and Revolutionary Art," author J. Patrick O'Connor titled "Kevin Cooper: Will California Execute An Innocent Man," author Dan Berger titled "Political Prisoners in the United States," and Colonel Nyati Bolt titled "The Assassination of George Jackson."
-angola3news.blogspot.com, November 15, 2009
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
2) Money Trickles North as Mexicans Help Relatives
By MARC LACEY
November 16, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/world/americas/16mexico.html?ref=world
MIAHUATLÁN, Mexico - During the best of the times, Miguel Salcedo's son, an illegal immigrant in San Diego, would be sending home hundreds of dollars a month to support his struggling family in Mexico. But at times like these, with the American economy out of whack and his son out of work, Mr. Salcedo finds himself doing what he never imagined he would have to do: wiring pesos north.
Unemployment has hit migrant communities in the United States so hard that a startling new phenomenon has been detected: instead of receiving remittances from relatives in the richest country on earth, some down-and-out Mexican families are scraping together what they can to support their unemployed loved ones in the United States.
"We send something whenever we have a little extra, at least enough so he can eat," said Mr. Salcedo, who is from a small village here in the rural state of Oaxaca and works odd jobs to support his wife, his two younger sons and, now, his jobless eldest boy in California.
He is not alone. Leonardo Herrera, a rancher from outside Tuxtla Gutiérrez in the southern state of Chiapas, said he recently sold a cow to help raise $1,000 to send to his struggling nephew in northern California.
Also in Chiapas, a poor state that sends many migrants to the United States, María del Carmen Montufar has pooled money with her husband and other family members to wire financial assistance to her daughter Candelaria in North Carolina. In the last year, the family has sent money - small amounts ranging from $40 to $80 - eight times to help Candelaria and her husband, who are both without steady work and recently had a child.
"When she's working she sends money to us," the mother said. "But now, because there's no work, we send money to her."
Statistics measuring the extent of what experts are calling reverse remittances are hard to come by. But interviews in Mexico with government officials, money-transfer operators, immigration experts and relatives of out-of-work migrants show that a transaction that was rarely noticed before appears to be on the rise.
"It's something that's surprising, a symptom of the economic crisis," said Martín Zuvire Lucas, who heads a network of community banks that operate in poor communities in Oaxaca and other underserved Mexican states. "We haven't been able to measure it but we hear of more cases where money is going north."
At one small bank in Chiapas that used to see money flowing in from the United States, more money is going out than coming in.
"I'd say every month 50,000 pesos are sent from here to there," said Edith Ramírez Gonzalez, a sales executive at Banco Azteca in San Cristóbal de las Casas. "And from there, we'd receive about 30,000 pesos." Fifty thousand pesos is $3,840.
With nearly half its population living in poverty, Mexico is not well placed to prop up struggling citizens abroad. Mexico could lose as many as 735,000 jobs this year and its economy may decline 7.5 percent, government economists predict, making the country one of the worst affected by the global recession.
Still, poverty is a relative concept. It is easier to get by on little in Mexico, especially in rural areas, allowing the poor to help the even more precarious.
In Miahuatlán, Sirenia Avendano and her husband may be more down and out than their two sons, both in their 20s, who wait tables at a Mexican restaurant in central Florida and have seen their hours reduced and their tips drop precipitously. But they live in their own home, on land they use to grow corn and other crops.
"We're poor, but nobody can throw us out of this house," Ms. Avendano said, wiping away tears at her kitchen table as she spoke of her sons' economic travails. "They worry about that. What happens if they can't pay the rent?" To help make ends meet, she sells chiles rellenos, a popular delicacy, around the neighborhood.
"We have an obligation to help them," said her husband, Javier. "They're our sons. It doesn't matter if they are here or there."
In other cases, the migrants are returning home, as the many passengers who hop off the bus that runs regularly from northern California to a gas station in Miahuatlán make clear. "There's nothing up there," said a young man with an overflowing suitcase who returned one recent night.
Still, although a study by the Pew Hispanic Center from July showed a sharp decrease in the number of Mexicans heading north, there has been no sign of a mass exodus of migrants back to Mexico. Immigrants' families say it took great effort to scrape together the thousands of dollars needed to send relatives to the United States, a sum that includes the fees charged by the people who help them sneak in.
"It's expensive to cross, and it was a great sacrifice for us," said Mr. Salcedo, 43, who has sent about five wire transfers to his son Alfonso, 18, who this year lost his job as a cafeteria dishwasher.
As expected during an economic slowdown, the money sent home by immigrants has fallen. The Bank of Mexico reported recently that remittances during the first nine months of this year dropped to $16.4 billion, a 13.4 percent decline compared with the same period in 2008.
The flow of money out of Mexico is believed to be a tiny fraction of the remittances still arriving. "The evidence in this regard so far is anecdotal," said Juan Luis Ordaz, senior economist at the Spanish bank BBVA Bancomer, who has begun investigating the reverse money flow.
Families of migrants speak proudly of their successful relatives in the United States and use the remittances they receive to do anything from buying livestock to replacing dirt floors with concrete. The importance of such money, which is among Mexico's top sources of foreign currency, cannot be overstated. An estimated 5.9 percent of Mexican households, about 1.8 million families, receive economic support from abroad, studies show. For them, the money represents roughly 19 percent of total income for urban households and 27 percent for rural ones, according to government data analyzed by BBVA Bancomer.
For the Salcedos, the economic woes are intense on both sides of the border. The ones still here had moved to the outskirts of Mexico City seeking opportunity, but now they are on the verge of returning to Oaxaca because the owner of the land they are squatting on ordered them out.
For Alfonso, the situation has been just as difficult. He crossed into the United States in December with about $500 that his father gave him, supplemented with money he earned doing odd jobs in Tijuana. He found a job in San Diego paying enough for him to send home $170 the first month and $120 the next. The third month, he told his family he could afford to send only $40.
Then, like so many others, he lost the job and stopped sending anything.
Now his father has begun sending money the other way, usually about $60, less transfer fees. "We've decided to tighten our belt until we're all working again," Mr. Salcedo said.
Antonio Betancourt contributed reporting from Mexico City, and Dominique Jarry-Shore from San Cristóbal de las Casas, Mexico.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
3) U.S. Readies New Facility for Afghan Detainees
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
November 16, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/world/asia/16bagram.html?ref=world
BAGRAM AIR BASE, Afghanistan - The Obama administration's effort to remake the notorious American detention system in Afghanistan will take a critical step forward at the end of the month, when detainees move into a new facility on the edge of Bagram Air Base.
The complex, which eventually will be handed over to the Afghan government, is designed to accommodate new review boards, giving detainees a chance to challenge their internment and present evidence of their innocence. Reporters and Afghan and international human rights officials were allowed to tour it on Sunday - an unprecedented level of access since they were not allowed to enter the old prison, which has been in use since shortly after the American invasion in 2001.
The new complex is part of a broader effort to alter America's detention image, which has been badly tarnished by reports of abusive interrogation techniques, indefinite detentions without trial and inadequate conditions. The revamping is also expected to ease criticism of President Hamid Karzai for allowing the problems to persist.
Afghan and international human rights advocates are watching closely to see if the new review boards can remedy the current system's shortcomings.
"What is important to us is not the facility itself; our main focus is on the detainees themselves, how they are treated, and their rights," said Ahmad Nader Naderi, the deputy head of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, which has responsibility under Afghan law to monitor detention throughout the country.
"We have asked for a transparent process that allows people like us to monitor the review boards; only then can we have confidence that detainees are able to challenge the evidence being used to hold them," he said.
Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top American and allied commander in Afghanistan, has also criticized the system for being an incubator for the insurgency because radical Taliban and other insurgents can mix with more moderate detainees and recruit them to their cause.
Under the revamped process, there will be more transparency and less risk of the facility being used to incubate radicals, said Brig. Gen. Mark Martins, a senior United States Army lawyer who led a study of the Afghan and American detention systems in Afghanistan earlier this year. "We're linking up detention practices with longer-term strategic objectives, so it's not just international law, it's not just human rights, it's strategy and counterinsurgency in the context of Afghanistan," he said.
To many Afghan and international human rights advocates, the central problem is that the Americans are detaining Afghan citizens but depriving them of the right to have their cases processed under Afghan law.
"The U.S. needs to establish a very clear legal basis for why they are holding Afghan citizens on Afghan soil, and right now there is no clear agreement between the two countries that gives the U.S. that right," said Sahr Muhammed Ally, a lawyer with Human Rights First, a New York-based group, who has studied detention arrangements in Afghanistan and at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
General Martins acknowledged that as soon as possible most detainees should go into the Afghan criminal justice system, where they would be charged and tried or released for lack of evidence, but he said that in a continuing armed conflict it is not always possible to try people.
"There is a category of cases," he said, "where you don't have evidence to convict someone in court, but you do have intelligence that if you brought into open court it could hurt you in the armed conflict. Those are the hard cases."
In the meantime, the goal is for the detainee review boards, which are made up of three American officers advised by a military lawyer, to improve the administrative review process for detainees. In the past, boards sometimes saw the detainees only once and renewed their detention repeatedly based on a paper record.
In Iraq, by comparison, when detainee review boards were put in place in 2007, release rates rose drastically, according to Maj. Gen. Douglas Stone, who ran the detention system at the time.
The system at the new Afghan detention center has some elements that were not present in Iraq, including assigning each detainee a personal representative who will advocate on his behalf. The representatives are not lawyers - a point of contention for human rights groups - but they will explain the administrative review process to detainees and are supposed to help gather any "reasonably available" evidence that detainees wish to use to challenge their detention.
Several human rights advocates said they anticipated an array of practical problems with the system that could leave detainees with little more recourse than they have now.
"It will be these real on-the-ground issues, the nuts and bolts of how it works, that will make or break the policy," said Jonathan Horowitz, a human rights advocate working with the Open Society Institute.
If, for example, someone were detained mistakenly in a small village, would the detainee's personal representative have the time or ability to get a military unit to the village, find village elders and persuade them to testify on his behalf? In a largely illiterate community that has little trust of Americans, it could be difficult, human rights advocates said.
While the new complex is in part a recognition of the political problems facing Mr. Karzai, American officials have made clear they want the Afghan leader to be more accountable. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday that the administration wants a tribunal to prosecute major corruption crimes and a new anticorruption commission.
"I have made it clear that we're not going to be providing any civilian aid to Afghanistan unless we have a certification that if it goes into the Afghan government in any form, that we're going to have ministries that we can hold accountable," Mrs. Clinton said.
At Bagram, the new facility includes classrooms, vocational-technical training areas and fully equipped medical facilities. The current detention population is about 600 men, of whom about 30 are non-Afghans, most of whom were captured, according to the American military, while they were aiding Al Qaeda or the Taliban. The center has room for 1,140 detainees, but the military said it did not foresee increasing the detention population. There are about 15,000 detainees in the Afghan system.
The new complex will be called "the detention facility in Parwan," the province where it is. The is within the perimeter of the Bagram base, but on the northeastern edge, so that when it is handed to the Afghan government it can be run independently even if Americans are still using the air base.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
4) Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health Care Reform
[And the banks are raising their interest rates befor the
"reforms" take effect. So what else is new?...bw]
By DUFF WILSON
November 16, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/business/16drugprices.html?ref=us
Even as drug makers promise to support Washington's health care overhaul by shaving $8 billion a year off the nation's drug costs after the legislation takes effect, the industry has been raising its prices at the fastest rate in years.
In the last year, the industry has raised the wholesale prices of brand-name prescription drugs by about 9 percent, according to industry analysts. That will add more than $10 billion to the nation's drug bill, which is on track to exceed $300 billion this year. By at least one analysis, it is the highest annual rate of inflation for drug prices since 1992.
The drug trend is distinctly at odds with the direction of the Consumer Price Index, which has fallen by 1.3 percent in the last year.
Drug makers say they have valid business reasons for the price increases. Critics say the industry is trying to establish a higher price base before Congress passes legislation that tries to curb drug spending in coming years.
"When we have major legislation anticipated, we see a run-up in price increases," says Stephen W. Schondelmeyer, a professor of pharmaceutical economics at the University of Minnesota. He has analyzed drug pricing for AARP, the advocacy group for seniors that supports the House health care legislation that the drug industry opposes.
A Harvard health economist, Joseph P. Newhouse, said he found a similar pattern of unusual price increases after Congress added drug benefits to Medicare a few years ago, giving tens of millions of older Americans federally subsidized drug insurance. Just as the program was taking effect in 2006, the drug industry raised prices by the widest margin in a half-dozen years.
"They try to maximize their profits," Mr. Newhouse said.
But drug companies say they are having to raise prices to maintain the profits necessary to invest in research and development of new drugs as the patents on many of their most popular drugs are set to expire over the next few years.
"Price adjustments for our products have no connection to health care reform," said Ron Rogers, a spokesman for Merck, which raised its prices about 8.9 percent in the last year, according to a stock analyst's report.
This year's increases mean the average annual cost for a brand-name prescription drug that is taken daily would be more than $2,000 - $200 higher than last year, Professor Schondelmeyer said.
And this means that the cost of many popular drugs has risen even faster. Merck, for example, now sells daily 10-milligram pills of Singulair, the blockbuster asthma drug, at a wholesale price of $1,330 a year - $147 more than last year. Singulair is now selling at retail, on drugstore.com, for nearly $1,478 a year.
The drug companies "can charge what they want - it's not fair," Eric White, the 42-year-old owner of a small jewelry store in Queens, said as he left a pharmacy recently.
Despite having drug insurance, Mr. White says he now pays $110 a month out of pocket for two brand-name allergy medicines, even as he has cut prices in his jewelry store by at least 40 percent to keep customers coming through the door.
He shook his head. "What can I do?" he said. "I need my medicines."
The drug industry has actively opposed some of the cost-cutting provisions in the House legislation, which passed Nov. 7 and aims to cut drug spending by about $14 billion a year over a decade.
But the drug makers have been proudly citing the agreement they reached with the White House and the Senate Finance Committee chairman to trim $8 billion a year - $80 billion over 10 years - from the nation's drug bill by giving rebates to older Americans and the government. That provision is likely to be part of the legislation that will reach the Senate floor in coming weeks.
But this year's price increases would effectively cancel out the savings from at least the first year of the Senate Finance agreement. And some critics say the surge in drug prices could change the dynamics of the entire 10-year deal.
"It makes it much easier for the drug companies to pony up the $80 billion because they'll be making more money," said Steven D. Findlay, senior health care analyst with the advocacy group Consumers Union.
Name-brand prices have risen even as prices of widely used generic drugs have fallen by about 9 percent in the last year, Professor Schondelmeyer said. But name brands account for 78 percent of total prescription drug spending in this country. And as long as a name-brand drug still has patent protection it faces no price competition from generics.
Ken Johnson, senior vice president of the industry association - the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America - criticized the analysis Professor Schondelmeyer had conducted for AARP, saying it was politically motivated.
"In AARP's skewed view of the world, medicines are always looked at as a cost and never seen as a savings - even though medicines often reduce unnecessary hospitalization, help avoid costly medical procedures and increase productivity through better prevention and management of chronic diseases," he said.
But Professor Schondelmeyer's analysis - which found prices for the name-brand drugs most widely used by the Medicare population rising by 9.3 percent in the last year, the fastest rate since 1992 - is in line with the findings of a leading Wall Street analyst, too.
Catherine J. Arnold, a drug industry analyst at Credit Suisse, said her latest study of the nation's eight biggest pharmaceutical companies showed markedly similar results: list prices rising an average of 8.7 percent in the 12 months ending Sept. 30 - the highest rate of growth since at least 2004.
As does Professor Schondelmeyer, Ms. Arnold based her price calculations on reported wholesale prices and a formula that puts more emphasis on each company's best-selling drugs.
Ms. Arnold said the prospect of cost containment under health care reform, as well as the tougher business environment, entered into the decisions of manufacturers to raise prices this year.
The industry stands to gain about 30 million customers with drug insurance from the legislation pending in Congress. But the industry also faces the prospect of tougher negotiations from both public and private buyers as the government tries to squeeze savings out of the health system.
"If you're going to take price increases," Ms. Arnold said, "here and now might be the place to do that, because the next year and the year after that might be tough."
Mr. Johnson did not dispute the Credit Suisse study or deny Ms. Arnold's finding that American drug makers have raised prices at the fastest rate in five years.
He said both studies were incomplete by failing to include rebates that drug makers give distributors. But Ms. Arnold, Professor Schondelmeyer and a 2007 Congressional study of Medicare said the rebates often accrue to the middlemen, not consumers, and higher manufacturer prices lead to higher retail prices.
And the drug industry's own major consulting firm, IMS Health, has also reported a significant run-up in prices. Back in April, IMS predicted that United States drug sales might actually decline this year.
Billy Tauzin, president of the industry's trade association, highlighted the gloomy prediction in a June 1 letter to President Obama shortly before striking the deal to cut drug costs by $80 billion. In negotiating the deal, the drug makers argued that they could not afford to give up more than that.
But in October, IMS made an unusual change in the middle of its forecasting cycle, saying it now believed United States sales would grow at least 4.5 percent in 2009 - or $21 billion more than expected six months earlier.
A major reason, IMS said, was higher-than-expected price increases for drugs in the United States.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
5) What Real Health Reform Looks Like
We Need Health Care, Not Insurance
By CAROL MILLER
November 16, 2009
http://www.counterpunch.com/miller11162009.html
A very complex, mandatory private insurance scheme recently passed the U.S. House. The public is being overwhelmed by sound bites on one hand about how great it is, on the other, how terrible. We are hearing few of the details that are actually in the bill. Having read the bill, it is clear now that what started as health reform has emerged from the political process as health "deform," building on the worst, not the best of the current system.
It is still a toss-up as to whether the Senate will pass any bill this year. However, due to intense political pressure, the Senate is likely to pass a bill that will make some House provisions better and others worse. What actually comes out in the final conference-committee bill is anyone's guess at this point - so little time, so many deals still to be made, so many political funders to be appeased.
A careful analysis of the bill shows that it is designed more for political goals than to eliminate financial barriers to health care. For example, the actual coverage doesn't even begin until 2013, opportunistically after the next presidential election, in 2012. Run on having accomplished "historic reform" but before anyone actually experiences how bad it is? How cynical is that?
Yes, there are some good provisions. The best relate to improving existing programs like the Indian Health Service, community health centers, and health professionals education and training; all are important for New Mexico.
But there bad provisions, which comprise most of the 1,990 pages of the bill. Five key reasons this legislation must be stopped:
• If passed, this law will move the U.S. farther from universal health care, making it harder than ever to accomplish health care justice in the future. If Congress does not have the courage to stand up to the private insurance industry now, it will be even more difficult in the future, especially after giving the industry trillions of new dollars through this terrible legislation. Let's call this what it is: another corporate bailout on the backs of working people.
Pay attention to your federal representatives as they carefully talk about "health insurance reform." They aren't talking about health reform any more. Congress could have defended and built up a system based on popular, high-quality government-run health programs like the military and veterans fully socialized health systems or Medicare, a single-payer program. Instead, the president and Congress let the corporations and government-haters take control of the agenda.
• The legislation institutionalizes permanent inequality in health care. Unlike Medicare where all beneficiaries have a single plan, this bill further divides the U.S. system into tiers based on ability to pay. It creates basic, enhanced, premium and premium-plus plans. A basic plan will provide only 70 percent of the coverage of a "reference benefit package," one that includes even fewer services than most insured people have today. The bill doesn't even mention coverage for essential services like vision and adult dental care except in the most costly premium-plus plan.
• Out-of-pocket costs remain sky high. Everyone will be required to pay monthly insurance premiums. Some low-wage workers will receive taxpayer subsidies on a sliding scale. The lowest income people will have full subsidies. But remember, this is not money for care, it is support only to buy insurance.
Almost everyone will have to meet a deductible, capped in the bill at $1,500 a year, higher than most insurance-plan deductibles today. On top of this, insurance companies can charge even more under various "cost sharing" schemes for items like co-pays and co-insurance.
The bill puts a cap on cost sharing, but the total amount is obscene. The cap for an individual is $5,000 a year and for a family it is $10,000 before the plan must cover everything. Well, not exactly everything. Even after paying this huge amount of money, the legislation still allows the corporations to make us pay, billing for non-network providers and, since it is not a comprehensive benefit package, we are still on our own to pay for health care that the plans refuse to cover.
The legislation creates a law to let these corporations increase what they charge people as they get older. In fact, they can be charged up to twice as much as younger people for identical coverage.
• The legislation makes it illegal to not buy health insurance. The penalties are described in a section of the legislation called "Shared Responsibility." This will let the IRS impose a tax of up to 2.5 percent of modified adjusted gross income for not having health insurance. People on the financial edge, people fighting foreclosure to stay in their homes or people who are unemployed all or part of a year will not be able to afford the insurance premiums or the penalties for not having insurance.
• We will all be drowning in paperwork, which will continue to drive up administrative costs. Right now, insurance administrative waste is about 30 percent of every health care dollar- or about $1 billion a day. Adding more people to an insurance-based system will result in even more money going into this bottomless pit.
As if this isn't bad enough, the government will be setting up many new agencies to oversee the whole process including, at the top, the Orwellian Health Choices Administration, headed by the Health Choices Commissioner. This is not an agency to help us make health care choices, but to choose a health insurance company. The IRS will play a very large role in everything from certifying our income for subsidies to monitoring and taxing people who don't buy insurance.
Health Insurance Exchanges will be created across the country with at least one in every state offering both Web sites and telephone assistance. This is where we will go every year to pick our insurance plan in an open enrollment period of at least 30 days between September and November. We can add this unpleasant task to all of our other fall chores.
It is hard to imagine the chaos and wasted resources with the entire country picking insurance plans at the same time, attended by marketing, billboards, advertising and misinformation. We will gamble as we choose a plan, decide which corporation will be the best for us, hoping we pick one that is not dominated by corporate bureaucrats focused on rationing care to maximize their profits. It is not an easy task and if a wrong plan is selected, we are stuck for a year, until the next national open enrollment cycle.
The United States can do better. We can build on a strengthened and well-funded Medicare program. In Medicare, when a person reached the age of eligibility or is determined to qualify because they have a permanent disability, they are in, and there is no re-enrollment.
Imagine real reform, as simple as adding people ages 55 to 65 years old to Medicare in 2010, 35-55 in 2011, and so on until everyone is included by 2013. The bills that promote this kind of reform are under 200 pages, they are simple to implement, cost effective and equitable. Choose a doctor, choose a hospital when needed and let the government pay the bills. Everyone in one system.
That is what real health reform would look like.
Carol Miller is a long-time public health professional and health care advocate. She lives in Ojo Sarco.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
6) Trumka: Jobs Crisis-Fix It Now
By Seth Michaels
November 17, 2009
In Economy
http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/11/17/trumka-jobs-crisisfix-it-now/
Today at the Economic Policy Institute ([1] EPI), AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and other leaders joined together to [2] call for urgent action to create jobs and rebuild the economy.
In a live webcast panel discussion, the consensus was clear: Without quick action, an entire generation could be mired in economic turmoil. The nation can, and must, put people back to work-while addressing critical needs for the future of our communities.
The scale of the jobs crisis is obvious: Since the beginning of the recession, more than 8 million jobs have been lost. The official unemployment rate is at 10.2 percent, with more than 26 million unemployed or underemployed. These figures are even more severe among African American and Latino communities. Young people are at risk of permanently stunted opportunity, and the jobs crisis is rebounding throughout the country with increased hunger and poverty, massive numbers of home foreclosures and diminished access to health care.
In addition to Trumka, participants in today's discussion included [3] NAACP President Benjamin Jealous; National Council of La Raza ([4] NCLR) President Janet Murguia; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights President ([5] LCCR) Wade Henderson; and Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the [6] Center for Community Change. EPI President Larry Mishel moderated the conversation, which Jealous called the beginning of a national human rights movement for economic opportunity.
Henderson said the nation's jobs crisis requires urgent attention-because it's not just an economic imperative to put people to work, it's a moral responsibility:
Make no mistake, for us this is the civil rights issue of the moment. Unless we resolve the national job crisis, it will make it hard to address all of our other priorities.
Trumka laid out five critical points that must underlie a new jobs agenda:
1. Extend the lifeline for jobless workers.
2. Rebuild America's schools, roads and energy systems.
3. Increase aid to state and local governments to maintain vital services.
4. Fund jobs in our communities.
5. Put TARP funds to work for Main Street.
Trumka said that the coalition will push the White House and Congress to act on these recommendations immediately, starting at President Barack Obama's Dec. 3 Jobs Summit.
We can not afford to do nothing, Trumka said, and we can't afford to go back to an economy built on stagnant wages, inequality and consumer debt. We need to create good jobs that support families and communities.
Murguia added that we need specific programs to make sure all communities, especially those that have been disadvantaged, get the opportunities, training and assistance they need.
There are people who need work in our communities and there is work to be done rebuilding the country, Bhargava said. By investing now, we can make real, needed improvements and we can give people the jobs they need. But to do that, Bhargava said, we need to break through the "shell of complacency" around too many legislators in Washington. We need to organize communities around an economic agenda that really helps them.
All of the leaders present affirmed their commitment to building grassroots pressure on Congress to act now on job creation. Families across the country know we need solutions that are at the scale of the serious problems we're facing and, Trumka said, they will be looking to see whether lawmakers are listening to them or just acting on behalf of Wall Street. Trumka criticized the fact that small minorities in the Senate can hold America hostage by blocking much-needed change and promised that union members and [7] Working America members would fight hard against elected officials who are obstructing progress.
The way things are is not the way they have to be, Trumka said. We need action now to create jobs, and we have the resources to do it.
Article printed from AFL-CIO NOW BLOG: http://blog.aflcio.org
URL to article: http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/11/17/trumka-jobs-crisisfix-it-now/
URLs in this post:
[1] EPI: http://epi.org/
[2] call for urgent action: http://www.epi.org/analysis_and_opinion/entry/an_urgent_call_for_action_to_stem_the_u.s._jobs_crisis
/
[3] NAACP: http://www.naacp.org/home/index.htm
[4] NCLR: http://nclr.org/
[5] LCCR: http://civilrights.org/
[6] Center for Community Change: http://www.communitychange.org/
[7] Working America: http://workingamerica.org/
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
7) Hunger in U.S. at a 14-Year High
"One figure that drew officials' attention was the number of households, 506,000, in which children faced "very low food security": up from 323,000 the previous year."
By JASON DePARLE
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/us/17hunger.html?ref=us
WASHINGTON - The number of Americans who lived in households that lacked consistent access to adequate food soared last year, to 49 million, the highest since the government began tracking what it calls "food insecurity" 14 years ago, the Department of Agriculture reported Monday.
The increase, of 13 million Americans, was much larger than even the most pessimistic observers of hunger trends had expected and cast an alarming light on the daily hardships caused by the recession's punishing effect on jobs and wages.
About a third of these struggling households had what the researchers called "very low food security," meaning lack of money forced members to skip meals, cut portions or otherwise forgo food at some point in the year.
The other two-thirds typically had enough to eat, but only by eating cheaper or less varied foods, relying on government aid like food stamps, or visiting food pantries and soup kitchens.
"These numbers are a wake-up call for the country," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.
One figure that drew officials' attention was the number of households, 506,000, in which children faced "very low food security": up from 323,000 the previous year. President Obama, who has pledged to end childhood hunger by 2015, released a statement while traveling in Asia that called the finding "particularly troubling."
The ungainly phrase "food insecurity" stems from years of political and academic wrangling over how to measure adequate access to food. In the 1980s, when officials of the Reagan administration denied there was hunger in the United States, the Food Research and Action Center, a Washington advocacy group, began a survey that concluded otherwise. Over time, Congress had the Agriculture Department oversee a similar survey, which the Census Bureau administers.
Though researchers at the Agriculture Department do not use the word "hunger," Mr. Obama did. "Hunger rose significantly last year," he said.
Analysts said the main reason for the growth was the rise in the unemployment rate, to 7.2 percent at the end of 2008 from 4.9 percent a year earlier. And since it now stands at 10.2 percent, the survey might in fact understate the number of Americans struggling to get adequate food.
Rising food prices, too, might have played a role.
The food stamp rolls have expanded to record levels, with 36 million Americans now collecting aid, an increase of nearly 40 percent from two years ago. And the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed last winter, raised the average monthly food stamp benefit per person by about 17 percent, to $133. Many states have made it easier for those eligible to apply, but rising applications and staffing cuts have also brought long delays.
Problems gaining access to food were highest in households with children headed by single mothers. About 37 percent of them reported some form of food insecurity compared with 14 percent of married households with children. About 29 percent of Hispanic households reported food insecurity, compared with 27 percent of black households and 12 percent of white households. Serious problems were most prevalent in the South, followed equally by the West and Midwest.
Some conservatives have attacked the survey's methodology, saying it is hard to define what it measures. The 18-item questionnaire asks about skipped meals and hunger pangs, but also whether people had worries about getting food. It ranks the severity of their condition by the number of answers that indicate a problem.
"Very few of these people are hungry," said Robert Rector, an analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "When they lose jobs, they constrain the kind of food they buy. That is regrettable, but it's a far cry from a hunger crisis."
The report measures the number of households that experienced problems at any point in the year. Only a "small fraction" were facing the problem at a given moment. Among those with "very low food security," for instance, most experienced the condition for several days in each of seven or eight months.
James Weill, the director of the food center that pioneered the report, called it a careful look at an underappreciated condition.
"Many people are outright hungry, skipping meals," he said. "Others say they have enough to eat but only because they're going to food pantries or using food stamps. We describe it as 'households struggling with hunger.' "
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
8) U.S. Attorney Nominee Criticized Over Raids
"Eleventh-hour criticism is arising over President Obama's nomination for United States attorney in northern Iowa of a prosecutor who had a leading role in the criminal cases against hundreds of illegal immigrants arrested in a May 2008 raid at a meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa."
By JULIA PRESTON
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/us/17attorney.html?ref=us
Eleventh-hour criticism is arising over President Obama's nomination for United States attorney in northern Iowa of a prosecutor who had a leading role in the criminal cases against hundreds of illegal immigrants arrested in a May 2008 raid at a meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa.
Those cases, the broadest use to date of tough criminal charges against immigrants caught working without authorization, were emblems of a crackdown on illegal immigration by the Bush administration.
In supporting the prosecutor, Stephanie Rose, Mr. Obama is following the recommendation of Senator Tom Harkin, the Democrat from Iowa who is an important ally - especially in the health care debate because he is chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.
Ms. Rose, a senior assistant United States attorney in the office she has been chosen to run, has also garnered support from criminal defense lawyers in Iowa, including at least 11 lawyers who defended immigrants from Postville. In those proceedings, "she exhibited a level of competence and ability that would be hard to overstate," the lawyers wrote in a letter in April.
But some defense and immigration lawyers have said that felony identity-theft charges against the immigrants were excessively harsh, that immigration lawyers were not given adequate access to their clients, and that improper contact took place between prosecutors and one judge. They contend that possible civil rights and ethical violations by prosecutors should have been investigated.
"Does she stand by those tactics?" asked David Leopold, the president-elect of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the national immigration bar. "Would she engage again in this type of prosecution of scores of undocumented workers guilty of nothing more than civil immigration violations?"
The immigration lawyers' association has not taken an official position on the nomination.
In May, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the identity-theft law could not be applied to prosecute immigrants only because they used false Social Security or visa numbers, as it was in many Postville cases.
Ms. Rose's nomination was unanimously approved by the Judiciary Committee on Nov. 5 and is awaiting a vote by the full Senate.
Ms. Rose declined through a spokesman to comment at this point in the nomination process.
Katherine Bedingfield, a spokeswoman for the White House, said: "As U.S. attorney, Stephanie Rose will be a great advocate for the people of Iowa. The president strongly supports her nomination."
During 12 years in the northern district, Ms. Rose was the lead prosecutor in more than 200 criminal cases and argued 34 appeals, according to a fact sheet provided by Mr. Harkin.
After the raid at the Agriprocessors kosher meatpacking plant in Postville, 270 immigrants entered guilty pleas and were sentenced in four days of fast-track hearings, in temporary courtrooms in a cattle fairground. According to lawyers who participated, Ms. Rose distributed prepackaged plea agreements and was the principal case manager for the prosecutors.
In an interview, Mr. Harkin vigorously defended Ms. Rose, saying she is "extremely bright and well versed with the law, has a lot of self assurance and a good demeanor for a U.S. attorney."
In the Postville cases, Mr. Harkin said, officials in Washington made the strategic decisions about what charges to bring and what pleas to offer. "Within the powers she had, she bent over backwards to make sure justice was done," he said.
But at a hearing before the House Judiciary immigration subcommittee in July 2008, Deborah J. Rhodes, then senior associate deputy attorney general, testified that "all of the charging decisions were made by career prosecutors in the local office."
James Benzoni, an immigration lawyer in Des Moines whose office has secured visas for two dozen Postville immigrants as victims of exploitation, said, "There was a general failure of due process and common decency."
"You can't go forward, you have to clean it up, and she's not going to do that," Mr. Benzoni said.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
9) Continuing Unemployment Is Predicted by Fed Chief
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/business/economy/17fed.html?ref=us
WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben S. Bernanke, warned on Monday that high unemployment and a continued reluctance by banks to make loans were likely to slow the economic recovery for the next year.
And in a departure from the usual practice of Fed chairmen, Mr. Bernanke tried to reassure global investors about the recent fall in the value of the dollar by saying that the central bank was "attentive to the implications of changes" and would "continue to monitor these developments closely."
It is rare for Fed officials to comment on exchange rates, which for decades have been the responsibility of the Treasury Department. Mr. Bernanke's message seemed to be that the Fed saw no cause for alarm in the dollar's weakness and that it would not need to bolster the dollar by raising interest rates sooner than it would otherwise.
Taken together, the Fed chairman's comments highlighted the conflicting goals that Fed officials may have to balance. To nurture the slow recovery and bolster employment, the central bank has vowed to keep interest rates low for "an extended period," but to prevent a precipitous drop in the value of the dollar, which could stoke inflation, the Fed would have to raise interest rates.
In an otherwise gloomy speech to the Economic Club of New York, a group packed with financial executives, Mr. Bernanke played down fears that the recent jump in economic growth - to 3.5 percent in the third quarter after four quarters of contraction - would be likely to sputter out as stimulus measures wind down.
"My own view is that the recent pickup reflects more than purely temporary factors and that continued growth is likely," he told the business group.
But he also made it clear that worries about high unemployment still trump concerns about future inflation. Unemployment, now 10.2 percent, is likely to remain "quite high" for the next year and will tamp down both growth and inflation.
Private forecasters have echoed the Fed's somber outlook. Economists responding to the Philadelphia Fed's quarterly survey, released on Monday, predicted that unemployment would average about 10 percent through the end of 2010 - slightly more pessimistic than their outlook three months ago.
Mr. Bernanke warned that banks are still very reluctant to lend money, especially to small businesses that normally generate most of the nation's new jobs.
"Small businesses have seen their bank credit lines reduced or eliminated, or they have been able to obtain credit only on significantly more restrictive terms," Mr. Bernanke said. "The fraction of small businesses reporting difficulty in obtaining credit is near a record high, and many of these businesses expect credit conditions to tighten further."
"The best thing we can say about the labor market right now is that it may be getting worse more slowly," he said.
One standard indicator of job trends - new claims for unemployment benefits - has still not fallen enough to signal a start toward net increases in monthly employment.
Mr. Bernanke said that unemployment has climbed twice as rapidly for men as for women, and that the jobless rates for young workers has soared even higher. For workers ages 16 to 24, unemployment is 19 percent. For young African-Americans, unemployment is 30 percent.
The Fed chairman said this recovery, like the previous two, was likely to seem like a recovery with no new job growth, in part because companies have become more reluctant to rebuild their work forces and have found new ways to increase the productivity of existing workers.
In a clear retort to more hawkish Fed policy makers who have worried that inflationary pressures might be nearer than they seem, Mr. Bernanke declared the high unemployment and unused factory capacity - economic "slack," in Fed jargon - was still too high, meaning that the economy does not face inflationary pressures yet.
"Although resource slack cannot be measured precisely," he said, "it certainly is high, and it is showing through to underlying wage and price trends. Inflation expectations, which are measured through surveys and through the premiums that investors pay for inflation-protected Treasury bonds, remain "stable," he added.
Perhaps the biggest surprise of Mr. Bernanke's speech was his comment about exchange rates - a topic that the Federal Reserve normally avoids, because of an agreement dating back to 1951 that the Treasury had responsibility for managing the value of the dollar.
But amid growing anxiety in many parts of the world about the falling value of the dollar in recent months, Mr. Bernanke not only talked about the exchange rate but added that the Fed would monitor the dollar's value closely.
At first glance, his comments suggested that he might be warning about the need to shore up the dollar by raising interest rates. But Mr. Bernanke described the dollar's recent drop as a natural development that did not necessarily require Fed action.
Mr. Bernanke said the dollar initially climbed sharply when the financial crisis was at its most acute in late 2008 and early 2009, because investors had sought safety in Treasuries. But those "safe haven flows" have since abated, he said, and the dollar had "accordingly retraced its gains."
"We are attentive to the implications of changes in the value of the dollar and will continue to formulate policy to guard against risks to our dual mandate to foster both maximum employment and price stability," Mr. Bernanke said. "The Federal Reserve will continue to monitor these developments closely."
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
10) Mother Refuses Deployment
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 17, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/us/17soldier.html?ref=us
SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) - An Army cook and single mother is under investigation and confined to her post after skipping her deployment flight to Afghanistan because, she said, no one was available to care for her son while she was overseas.
The woman, Specialist Alexis Hutchinson, 21, said she had no choice but to refuse deployment orders because the only relative who could care for her 10-month-old son, her mother, was overwhelmed by the task and already caring for three other relatives with health problems.
Her civilian lawyer, Rai Sue Sussman, said one of Specialist Hutchinson's superiors told her she would have to go anyway and put the child in foster care.
"For her it was like, 'I couldn't abandon my child,' " Ms. Sussman said. "She was really afraid of what would happen, that if she showed up they would send her to Afghanistan anyway and put her son with child protective services."
Specialist Hutchinson, of Oakland, Calif., remained confined to Hunter Army Airfield in Savannah on Monday, 10 days after military police arrested her for skipping her unit's flight. A spokesman for the Army post said commanders were investigating.
Kevin Larson, a spokesman for Hunter Army Airfield, said that he did not know what Specialist Hutchinson was told by her commanders but that the Army would not deploy a single parent who had nobody to care for a child.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
11) Army Addresses Soldiers' Suicide Rate
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
National Briefing | Washington
November 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/us/18brfs-ARMYADDRESSE_BRF.html?ref=us
The Army said there were almost certainly to be more suicides of soldiers this year than last. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the Army vice chief of staff, said that as of Nov. 16, the Army had reported 140 suicides of active duty soldiers this year, the same number as in all of 2008. Despite the overall statistics, General Chiarelli said he believed the Army was making progress because in recent months the rate of suicide was down.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
12) Conviction of Sheik's Lawyer for Assisting Terrorism Is Upheld
By BENJAMIN WEISER and JOHN ELIGON
November 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/nyregion/18stewart.html?ref=nyregion
A federal appeals court panel in Manhattan on Tuesday upheld the conviction of Lynne F. Stewart, the outspoken defense lawyer who was found guilty in 2005 of assisting terrorism by smuggling information from an imprisoned client to his violent followers in Egypt.
The three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit also ordered the trial judge to revoke Ms. Stewart's bond, and said that she must begin serving her 28-month sentence.
The panel also sent the case back to the trial judge, John G. Koeltl of Federal District Court, to determine whether she deserved a longer sentence in light of the seriousness of her conduct and the possibility she had lied at trial. Prosecutors had sought a term of 30 years.
"I'm too old to cry, but it hurts too much not to," Ms. Stewart said at a late-afternoon news conference where she appeared with her books and medication, saying that she still hoped to be able to go home that evening. Ms. Stewart, 70, was being treated for breast cancer at the time of her sentencing in 2006.
Judge Koeltl issued an order late in the day saying that Ms. Stewart and a co-defendant whose bond was also ordered revoked should prepare to surrender whenever he had the authority to revoke the bond.
It was not immediately clear when Ms. Stewart would have to surrender.
Judge Robert D. Sack, who wrote the 125-page appellate ruling, said that the panel had rejected Ms. Stewart's claim that she was acting only as a "zealous advocate" for her imprisoned client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, when she passed messages for him. She has denied seeking to incite violence among his militant followers.
"A genuinely held intent to represent a client 'zealously' is not necessarily inconsistent with criminal intent," Judge Sack wrote.
At the news conference, Ms. Stewart sharply criticized the decision, and said its timing, "coming as it does on the eve of the arrival of the tortured men from offshore prison in Guantánamo," carried a message for any lawyers who might be appointed to represent them.
The detainees are being moved to New York for civilian trials for what the government says was their roles in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"If you're going to lawyer for these people, you'd better toe very close to the line that the government has set out," Ms. Stewart said, adding that the ruling made clear that the government would "be watching you every inch of the way."
Lawyers who did not, she said, "will end up like Lynne Stewart."
"This is a case that is bigger than just me personally," Ms. Stewart said, adding that she would "go on fighting."
Her lawyer, Joshua L. Dratel, said that the case would be pursued "as far and as long as we can," including seeking possible Supreme Court review. A spokeswoman for the United States attorney's office had no comment.
Prosecutors had charged that Ms. Stewart conspired with two others to break strict rules that barred Mr. Abdel Rahman, who is serving a life sentence for plotting to blow up New York City landmarks, from communicating with outsiders.
Ms. Stewart, with the help of a translator, Mohamed Yousry, and a third man, Ahmed Abdel Sattar, an Egyptian-born postal worker from Staten Island, helped the sheik pass messages to the Islamic Group, a terrorist organization he once led in Egypt, prosecutors charged.
The ruling upholding Ms. Stewart's conviction, as well as that of Mr. Sattar and Mr. Yousry, was joined by Judges John M. Walker Jr. and Guido Calabresi.
Mr. Yousry, who was sentenced to 20 months for providing support for terrorism and whose bail was also ordered revoked, said by phone that he still felt he did nothing wrong or illegal. "It is unfair and unjust, but it is what it is," he said. "I'll face it head on."
Mr. Sattar, who received a 24-year term for conspiring to kill in a foreign country, is serving his sentence; his lawyer had no comment.
In addressing whether Ms. Stewart's sentence was too lenient, Judge Sack wrote that Judge Koeltl had cited her "extraordinary" personal characteristics, and had described her as "a dedicated public servant who had, throughout her career, 'represented the poor, the disadvantaged and the unpopular.' "
But Judge Koeltl had declined to determine whether Ms. Stewart had lied at trial, a factor he should have considered in weighing her sentence, Judge Sack wrote. "We think that whether Stewart lied under oath at her trial is directly relevant to whether her sentence was appropriate," Judge Sack wrote.
He added that if Judge Koeltl finds that Ms. Stewart lied, he should resentence her "so as to reflect that finding."
Judge Walker issued a partial dissent on the sentence, which he called "breathtakingly low." He said he would have gone further than the majority, and found additional errors in how Judge Koeltl arrived at his sentence. The majority, he wrote, "trivializes Stewart's extremely serious conduct with a 'slap on the wrist.' "
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
13) Playing the Health Care Lottery
By THERESA BROWN, R.N.
November 18, 2009, 10:40 am
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/health/index.html
In the short story "The Lottery," the author Shirley Jackson describes a small farming community in 1940s America, as picturesque a scene as anything you'd find in Norman Rockwell. It's "Lottery Day," and families gather in the June sun, the adults chatting while their children play, gathering up small piles of stones.
Mr. Summers, who runs the lottery, eventually shows up with a wooden box full of paper chits. As he checks a list, Tessie Hutchinson arrives late, exclaiming, "Wouldn't have me leave m'dishes in the sink, now would you?"
The townspeople laugh, but the merriment is soon replaced by an anxious waiting as one by one the townspeople draw a folded slip of paper from the wooden box. Mrs. Hutchinson ends up with the single chit marked with a large black dot.
It turns out this lottery is a long-standing tradition, an annual ritual whereby the town selects a sacrifice to ensure a good harvest. As Old Man Warner, who has survived 77 lotteries, explains, "Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon." The reason for the piles of stones the children have been gathering soon becomes shockingly clear as the rest of the townspeople, grabbing rocks of their own, circle around Tessie and begin to stone her to death.
Anyone reading the story recognizes right away that the town's "lottery" is barbaric, the rationale justifying it ridiculous.
But as a nurse, I see the American health care system as a similar lottery, a market-based system that is sustained only by the sacrifice of certain patients. Many of us who benefit from the current system accept these casualties as legitimate and sadly unavoidable.
One of those lottery players was a man who had endured chemotherapy and a stem cell transplant, but his cancer had now returned and nothing more could be done. He was walking and talking and didn't feel too bad a lot of the time, but along with the cancer he had a bacterial infection in his lungs. We planned to send him home on intravenous antibiotics to keep the infection at bay so he could feel well for as long as possible.
Every time I went into his room, his wife questioned the need for the drugs. Finally, she stepped out of the room and told me the reason for her concern. They were a very poor family, and her husband's health insurance wouldn't cover the extra cost of intravenous antibiotics.
I stood there dumbfounded. Her husband was dying, and she had to come to me privately, and apologetically, to reveal that the treatment he needed to stay feeling well for as long as possible had been put beyond her reach.
Many people, including many nurses, see situations like my patient's and feel outraged, but in the end we shrug our shoulders, thinking, "Well, that's the way it is with insurance companies."
We accept these injustices, large and small, as the inevitable byproduct of a market-based, profit-driven health care system. It's the only system available to most of us, so we grit our teeth and hope for the best, learning only when it's too late that the vagaries of our particular health insurance policy mean we can't afford the care we need, that we have drawn the black chit in our own grim health care lottery.
In the story told by Ms. Jackson, Old Man Warner admits that some towns have given up having a lottery to boost the harvest. "Pack of crazy fools," he declaims. The system has kept him alive, and he's a true believer - just like many of those now attacking plans for health reform.
But what about Mrs. Hutchinson, dying a painful and terrifying death, killed by her own neighbors and friends? What about my patient's wife, resigned to stopping the drugs her husband needed to keep him alive?
A public insurance plan offers a real alternative to the morally bankrupt idea that health care can and should be big business. Unless health insurance companies are in some way compelled to change their definition of success, we will all be at the mercy of policies that put profits before a patient's life-and-death needs.
In my patient's case, luck prevailed. A hospital social worker got involved, and we were able to send the man home with the care he needed through a charity-based program. But it was only luck that helped this patient. Most of the time, charity care isn't available. I've seen patients leave the hospital knowing they will not get the drugs they need to stay alive.
That's the problem with playing the health care lottery. You're a winner and the system keeps you safe and whole - until it doesn't. And when that moment comes, when you draw the chit that says "claim denied" or "medication not on the approved list" or "treatment no longer covered," well, as the story tells us, "'It isn't fair, it isn't right,' Mrs. Hutchinson screamed, and then they were upon her."
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
14) Paid Leave Key to Slowing Spread of H1N1
by Mike Hall
November 17, 2009
http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/11/17/paid-leave-key-to-slowing-spread-of-h1n1/
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that one worker sick with the H1N1 (swine flu) virus will infect one in 10 co-workers if he or she goes to work while infected with the virus. Even more frightening, another recent study predicted that 63 percent of Americans will be infected with the virus by the end of December.
Today, family advocates and heath care professionals told the House Education and Labor Committee that along with vaccinations, and good hygiene practices, the best way to protect workers and slow the spread of the H1N1 virus is through guaranteed paid sick leave legislation, such as the Healthy Families Act.
The CDC's guidelines to employers and workers to slow the spread of the virus says workers who suspect they have the swine flu or another influenza-like illness should stay home and employers should allow workers to stay home "without fear of reprisals or...losing their jobs."
But nearly half of all private-sector workers-and 76 percent of low-income workers-have no paid sick leave. That leaves sick workers facing the dilemma of staying home and losing several days of pay or likely spreading the disease to fellow workers and the public. Many low-wage workers have jobs that have direct contact with the public, such as the food-service and hospitality industry, schools and health care.
Says Debra Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families:
Congress should waste no time in passing paid sick days legislation so that working people can earn paid time off and help prevent the spread of illnesses, without jeopardizing their economic security.
Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, says paid sick leave benefits both employers, workers and their families along with customers and the general public. For employers, Benjamin says:
Sick workers are not productive ones and by spreading disease in the workplace risk the overall productivity of the business. By providing paid leave for sick workers, worker safety and business productivity can both be enhanced-a win-win for employers.
While we want to encourage workers to make healthy and rational decisions, when they are faced with the choice of staying home sick without pay or going into work sick so they can put food on the table and pay their mortgage, many workers choose to go to work and "tough it out," putting their co-workers and their customers at risk.
Committee chairman George Miller (D-Calif.) says that Congress has been "pushing for universal paid leave policies for workers of all income levels."
Let's face some simple facts: When you're struggling to make ends meet, you're going to do everything possible to not miss a day's pay. The lack of paid sick leave encourages workers who may have H1N1 to hide their symptoms and come to work sick-spreading infection to co-workers, customers and the public. This isn't good for our nation's public health or for businesses.
Earlier this year, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) introduced the Healthy Families Act (H.R. 2460 and S. 1152), which would require businesses with more than 15 employees to provide workers with up to seven paid sick days a year to care for themselves or a sick child or spouse.
At a Senate hearing on H1N1 earlier this month, Deputy Secretary of Labor Seth Harris announced the Obama administration's support for the Healthy Families Act.
The Healthy Families Act offers an important opportunity to provide workers with economic security by assuring that they have the ability to stay home if they are sick without fear of losing their jobs or being forced to go to work sick because they cannot afford to stay home. We support this bill and look forward to working with you on it as it moves through the legislative process.
For more on today's House hearing-including an archived webcast-click here:
http://edlabor.house.gov/hearings/2009/11/protecting-employees-employers.shtml
For testimony and a video of the earlier Senate hearing, click here:
http://help.senate.gov/Hearings/2009_11_10/2009_11_10.html
Don't forget to check out the AFL-CIO's pandemic flu site:
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/safety/pandemic_influenza.cfm
which includes vital resources for health care workers, firefighters, educators and more. Also check out www.flu.gov.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
15) Labor Fight Ends in Win for Students
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
November 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/business/18labor.html
The anti-sweatshop movement at dozens of American universities, from Georgetown to U.C.L.A., has had plenty of idealism and energy, but not many victories.
Until now.
The often raucous student movement announced on Tuesday that it had achieved its biggest victory by far. Its pressure tactics persuaded one of the nation's leading sportswear companies, Russell Athletic, to agree to rehire 1,200 workers in Honduras who lost their jobs when Russell closed their factory soon after the workers had unionized.
From the time Russell shut the factory last January, the anti-sweatshop coalition orchestrated a nationwide campaign against the company. Most important, the coalition, United Students Against Sweatshops, persuaded the administrations of Boston College, Columbia, Harvard, New York University, Stanford, Michigan, North Carolina and 89 other colleges and universities to sever or suspend their licensing agreements with Russell. The agreements - some yielding more than $1 million in sales - allowed Russell to put university logos on T-shirts, sweatshirts and fleeces.
Going beyond their campuses, student activists picketed the N.B.A. finals in Orlando and Los Angeles this year to protest the league's licensing agreement with Russell. They distributed fliers inside Sports Authority sporting goods stores and sent Twitter messages to customers of Dick's Sporting Goods to urge them to boycott Russell products.
The students even sent activists to knock on Warren Buffett's door in Omaha because his company, Berkshire Hathaway, owns Fruit of the Loom, Russell's parent company.
"It's a very important breakthrough," said Mel Tenen, who oversees licensing agreements for the University of Miami, the first school to sever ties with Russell. "It's not often that a major licensee will take such a necessary and drastic step to correct the injustices that affected its workers. This paves the way for us to seriously consider reopening our agreement with Russell."
Other colleges are expected to do the same. Analysts say the college market occupies a significant part of Russell's business. Because Fruit of the Loom does not detail Russell's sales, it is not known how large a part.
In its agreement, not only did Russell agree to reinstate the dismissed workers and open a new plant in Honduras as a unionized factory, it also pledged not to fight unionization at its seven existing factories there.
Mike Powers, a Cornell official who is on the board of the Worker Rights Consortium, said Cornell had canceled its licensing agreement because it viewed Russell's closing of the Honduras factory as a flagrant violation of the university's code of conduct, which calls for honoring workers' freedom of association. He applauded Russell's agreement, which was reached with the consortium and union leaders in Honduras over the weekend.
"This is a landmark event in the history of workers' rights and the codes of conduct that we expect our licensees to follow," Mr. Powers said. "My hat is off to Russell."
John Shivel, a spokesman for Russell and Fruit of the Loom, said, "We are very pleased with the agreement between Russell Athletic and the Workers Rights Consortium, and look forward to its implementation."
He declined to discuss why Russell had adopted a friendlier attitude toward unionization after years of aggressively fighting unions.
In a statement Russell released jointly with the apparel workers' union in Honduras, the company said the agreement was "intended to foster workers' rights in Honduras and establish a harmonious" relationship.
"This agreement represents a significant achievement in the history of the apparel sector in Honduras and Central America," the joint statement said.
In the past, the Honduran workers condemned Russell's behavior, saying that it had fired 145 workers in 2007 for supporting a union. The union's vice president, Norma Mejia, said at a Berkshire Hathaway shareholders' meeting last May that she had received death threats for helping lead the union. Russell denied the assertion.
Union leaders in Honduras hailed the agreement, which would put hundreds of laid-off employees back to work in a country whose economy has been hit by a political crisis over who will lead it.
"For us, it was very important to receive the support of the universities," Moises Alvarado, president of the union at the closed plant in Choloma, said by telephone on Tuesday. "We are impressed by the social conscience of the students in the United States."
This was in no way an overnight victory - it came after 10 years of building a movement that persuaded scores of universities to adopt detailed codes of conduct for the factories used by licensees like Russell. In addition, the students, sometimes through lengthy sit-ins, pressured their officials to create and finance an independent monitoring group, the Worker Rights Consortium, that inspected factories to make sure they complied with the universities' codes.
When the consortium issued a detailed report accusing Russell of violating workers' rights, United Students Against Sweatshops began its nationwide campaign.
Scott Nova, executive director of the Worker Rights Consortium, which has more than 170 universities as members, said: "This represents the maturation of the universities' codes of conduct. There's a recognition by the universities of their ability to influence the actions of important brands and change outcomes for the better."
He said the agreement was "unprecedented" in terms of scope and size and in "the transformative impact it can have in one of the hardest regions of the world to win respect for workers' rights."
Mr. Nova also praised Russell for changing course. "I think the executives at Russell recognized it was time for a new approach," he said. "They decided it was important for the success of their company."
As part of its campaign, United Students Against Sweatshops contacted students at more than 100 campuses where it did not have chapters, getting them involved, including at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, where Fruit of the Loom has its headquarters. The group helped arrange a letter signed by 65 members of Congress, who voiced "grave concern about reports of severe violations" of labor rights at Russell.
This time around, the students did not feel the need to resort to sit-ins to persuade university administrators.
"The schools remember our sit-ins of the past," said Dida El-Sourady, a senior at the University of North Carolina. "There's an institutional memory that students will escalate their tactics, and this could become a very big deal, a lot bigger than people holding signs."
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
16) Mr. Obama's Task
NYT Editorial
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/opinion/19thu1.html?hp
There is no doubt that the prospects for success in Afghanistan are so bleak right now because former President George W. Bush failed for seven long years to invest the necessary troops, resources or attention to the war. But it is now President Obama's war, and the American people are waiting for him to explain his goals and his strategy.
Mr. Obama was right to conduct a sober, systematic review of his options. We all know what happens when a president sends tens of thousands of Americans to war based on flawed information, gut reactions and gauzy notions of success. But the political reality is that the longer Mr. Obama waits, the more indecisive he seems and the more constrained his options appear.
It has been more than eight months since Mr. Obama first announced his strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, warning Americans that, for them, the border between the two - where Taliban and Qaeda forces have found safe haven - is "the most dangerous place in the world." And it has been more than a month since his top general in Afghanistan asked for 40,000 more troops, warning that "failure to gain the initiative" over the next year could make it impossible to defeat the Taliban.
Americans are deeply anxious about the war. As the debate among his advisers has dragged on, and became increasingly public, many are asking whether the conflict is necessary or already a lost cause. Democratic leaders are among the loudest questioners.
It has become a cliché in Washington that there are only bad choices in Afghanistan. But it seems clear that this is not the time for a precipitous withdrawal, nor can the United States cling to the status quo while the Taliban gains ever more territory and more power. To move forward, Mr. Obama needs to explain the stakes for this country, the extent of the military commitment, the likely cost in lives and treasure and his definition of success. Mr. Bush failed to do all of that in Afghanistan and Iraq.
America's allies, many of whom are looking for a way out, also need to hear why their troops should continue to risk their lives. There is no chance in Afghanistan unless President Hamid Karzai separates himself from his corrupt associates and Pakistan's leaders step up their fight against the Taliban and other extremists.
Mr. Obama said on Wednesday that he would soon provide "a lot of clarity" on his Afghanistan strategy. These are some of the things the world needs to hear.
WHAT ARE THE STAKES? We agreed with the president in August when he described Afghanistan as a war of necessity. In a speech, he warned that if the Taliban insurgency were left unchecked it "will mean an even larger safe haven from which Al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is fundamental to the defense of our people."
Since then, some of his top advisers have raised doubts about the urgency and even the necessity of the war. The national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, said in October that there were "less than 100" Qaeda members operating in Afghanistan without bases or the "ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies." He said he didn't "foresee the return of the Taliban" and that the "next step in this is the sanctuaries" in Pakistan.
Vice President Joseph Biden has been even more insistent that the real front is across the border and that attacking extremists on both sides could be better accomplished with a lighter footprint in Afghanistan and Predator strikes and special operations raids. Other officials argue that the Taliban may have learned a lesson and might be open to a deal that barred Al Qaeda from its territory.
Mr. Obama needs to address these arguments - to say whether he still considers fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan to be central to American security and why. Does he still believe a Taliban victory in Afghanistan would mean a "larger safe haven" for Al Qaeda? And how does he see the relationship between the war in Afghanistan and efforts to hold off extremists in a nuclear-armed Pakistan? If the Taliban were to win in Afghanistan, would they be less or more likely to threaten Pakistan?
In March, Mr. Obama warned that, for Afghans, a "return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance, international isolation, a paralyzed economy and the denial of basic human rights," especially to women and girls. We need to hear whether he still believes Americans have a duty to stop that.
WHAT IS THE AIM OF THE WAR? In March, President Obama said his goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future." He also argued that bullets and bombs would not be enough to drive the Taliban back. In Afghanistan, American forces and a surge of civilian advisers must "advance security, opportunity and justice" for the Afghan people, "not just in Kabul, but from the bottom up in the provinces."
Given that, no one in the White House should have been surprised when Mr. Obama's chosen commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, came back with an ambitious counterinsurgency plan, although his request for 40,000 more troops was clearly higher than Mr. Obama and his aides had wanted to hear.
If Mr. Obama no longer believes that a counterinsurgency is necessary or feasible, or if he wants to set less-ambitious goals (there has been talk of securing a smaller number of cities while speeding up training of the Afghan Army), then the American people need to hear why he changed his mind and how he intends to move forward.
Mr. Obama will also have to address his vice president's proposal. We share Mr. Biden's anxiety that a larger American military presence might alienate more Afghans than it wins over. But we are also skeptical that a war against Al Qaeda can be fought from a distance. Drones and commandos still need bases, and Pakistan is not likely to provide them. They need "actionable" intelligence, which could dry up with fewer American troops on the Afghan side of the border.
ARE THERE CREDIBLE PARTNERS? There is almost no chance of holding off the Taliban (or plotting an eventual American withdrawal) without a minimally credible Afghan government and security forces.
The Taliban's medieval ideas and brutality are anathema to most Afghans. We see that in the courage of the Afghan families who defy the Taliban by sending their daughters to school. But the corruption of the Karzai government, and its failure to provide the most basic services and security, have caused many of its citizens to decide that they have no choice but to submit to the Taliban.
Even after his supporters were caught trying to steal the election, Mr. Karzai remains shamelessly, insultingly undaunted. Mr. Obama must make clear to both Mr. Karzai and the American people the sweeping changes required to build a credible Afghan government. If there are other, better partners, competent cabinet members or provincial officials, then Americans need to hear how Mr. Obama plans to empower them.
Mr. Obama should be candid about his administration's halting progress. In March, he pledged to send "agricultural specialists and educators, engineers and lawyers" across Afghanistan to relieve the burden on American troops and help the government "serve its people." There are disturbing reports that the situation on the ground is so dangerous that many of these advisers cannot leave Kabul. It was chilling to read in The Times last week that when the ambassador in Kabul asked for additional civilian staff, the State Department turned down some of his requests because of budget constraints and a decision to cap the number at 1,000.
There will never be enough American troops on the ground to defeat the Taliban or provide security for Afghans. Mr. Obama must explain his plans for building a minimally functional Afghan Army and police force. More trainers are needed, but as The Times reported earlier this month, even that is no guarantee of success. According to reviews by American officials, the effort has been hobbled by a high dropout rate for recruits, "a lack of competent and professional" Afghan leadership "at all levels," widespread illiteracy and corruption.
WHAT WILL IT COST? Mr. Bush cynically tried to cover up the heavy costs of the Iraq and Afghan wars and cooked the financial books with repeated "supplemental" financing requests. Mr. Obama has done far better and needs to continue to tell the truth.
The human cost will continue to rise if the number of forces rises. Mr. Obama should also acknowledge the cost in military readiness and the stress of repeated deployments on troops and their families. On the financial side, the Pentagon has already spent more than $150 billion on the war. While estimates are difficult, analysts say that for every 10,000 additional troops deployed, the annual cost will rise by at least another $10 billion. Americans need to hear how those costs will be met, even though the choices - raising taxes, cutting spending or more borrowing - are unappealing in a time of recession and high deficits.
IS THERE A WAY OUT? Finally, Mr. Obama promised on Wednesday to outline an "endgame." Given Afghanistan's desperate state, we are skeptical that he can lay out a firm timetable for withdrawal. But there are certainly benchmarks that he can offer. (Mr. Obama promised that in March, but the nation has yet to hear an accounting.)
There must be a way to measure progress or failure. Americans need to know the war will not go on forever.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
17) Ruling on Katrina Flooding Favors Homeowners
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/us/19orleans.html?ref=us
NEW ORLEANS - A federal judge found Wednesday evening that poor maintenance of a major navigation channel by the Army Corps of Engineers led to some of the worst flooding after Hurricane Katrina. The ruling was a major victory for homeowners who suffered damage in the aftermath of the storm.
It was the first time that the government has been held liable for any of the flooding that inundated the New Orleans area after Aug. 29, 2005, vindicating the long-held contention of many in the region that the flooding was far more than an act of God.
If upheld, the ruling could force the federal government to pay tens of millions of dollars, if not more, to homeowners whose property was lost or damaged by water from the navigation canal, the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet, known as MR-GO (pronounced Mister Go).
"It is the court's opinion that the negligence of the corps, in this instance by failing to maintain the MR-GO properly, was not policy, but insouciance, myopia and shortsightedness," wrote Judge Stanwood R. Duval Jr. of Federal District Court.
In many ways, the ruling still fell short of what many residents of the area had hoped.
The judge had earlier ruled he would not consider that the construction of the canal led to widespread flooding. As a result, Wednesday's decision was limited to the maintenance of the canal, and the liability applies only to damage around the Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans and St. Bernard Parish, east of the city.
But lawyers for the plaintiffs in the case said that 80,000 people lived in the area for which the corps was held liable. Though the judge granted six of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit a total of less than $750,000, tens of thousands of other property owners could now try to join class-action lawsuits against the government under the same legal reasoning.
"The implications are billions of dollars of liability for the government," said Pierce O'Donnell, the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs.
The government is expected to appeal the ruling.
"All of these claims are currently the subject of litigation before the Federal District Court in New Orleans," Ken Holder, a spokesman for the Corps, said in a statement. "Until such time as the litigation is completed, including the appellate process up to and through the U.S. Supreme Court, no activity is expected to be taken on any of these claims."
Nearly half a million Katrina-related claims have been filed against the government. And according to a 2008 Army fiscal report, they could result in damages of as much as $500 billion.
The plaintiffs in this case came from two areas that were ravaged by the floods. Some were from the neighborhood of New Orleans East, which is northeast of the city, and others from an area including the Lower Ninth Ward and St. Bernard Parish, to the southeast of the city, both places that were devastated.
The judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs from St. Bernard and the Lower Ninth Ward, but in favor of the government in regards to New Orleans East.
Many homeowners in the region, some of whom blame the corps for causing or contributing to the flooding that inundated New Orleans after Katrina, had hoped that a forceful verdict against the corps could have paved the way for the other claims against the government.
But Judge Duval's more limited verdict seems unlikely to have that reach.
The 76-mile channel at the center of the case was dug as a shortcut to New Orleans harbor from the Gulf of Mexico in 1965. The channel was permanently closed to ship traffic earlier this year.
The plaintiffs had to make a complicated argument. The Flood Control Act of 1928 protects the government from lawsuits over failures in flood control projects. But the judge allowed the suit to proceed in March of this year, ruling that it is a navigation channel, not a flood control project.
The plaintiffs' lawyers argued that the Army Corps had not exercised "due care" in its maintenance of the channel, and that the maintenance that was done, like dredging, only made things worse. The corps' actions, they said, brought salt water into the New Orleans area, killing off marshes; eroded the banks on which levees sat; and more than doubled the channel in width, giving water driven by hurricanes an unobstructed path to the city.
In his decision, Judge Duval largely agreed with this argument, at least as it pertained to St. Bernard and the Lower Ninth Ward. He was highly critical of the government, which had argued that the hurricane and its massive storm surge was simply more than the system had been designed to handle, and said the corps had manipulated facts.
"The corps had an opportunity to take a myriad of actions to alleviate this deterioration or rehabilitate this deterioration and failed to do so," he wrote. "Clearly the expression 'talk is cheap' applies here."
Given the new potential for an enormous amount of liability on the part of the government, the lawyers for the plaintiffs urged the government to consider making a settlement with everyone who was affected by the floods in the greater New Orleans area - even residents of zones where Judge Duval has already ruled the corps is not liable.
"The government should come to us in good faith and find a settlement for the people of New Orleans," Mr. O'Donnell said.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
18) California: University System Moves to Raise Fees
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
National Briefing | West
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/education/19brfs-UNIVERSITYSY_BRF.html?ref=education
The University of California system moved to raise student fees by $2,500 over two years as students demonstrated against the higher costs. Fourteen protesters were arrested at a University of California, Los Angeles, meeting where a Board of Regents committee endorsed a plan that will raise undergraduate fees, the equivalent of tuition, by 32 percent in two stages by next fall. The full board is expected to approve the increases Thursday. At the University of California, Berkeley, more than 1,000 demonstrators condemned the fee increase. The system's president, Mark Yudof, has said the 10-campus system needs a $913 million increase in state financing next year, in addition to higher student fees.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
19) U.S. Mortgage Delinquencies Reach a Record High
By DAVID STREITFELD
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/business/20mortgage.html?ref=business
The number of people at least one month behind on their house payments rose to a record in the third quarter, the Mortgage Bankers Association said Thursday.
Nearly 10 in 100 homeowners are delinquent, according to the association's data, up from about seven out of 100 in the third quarter of 2008.
These numbers do not include those who are actually in foreclosure, a figure that also rose sharply. The combined percentage of those in foreclosure as well as delinquent is 14.41 percent, or about one in seven of mortgage holders.
"Despite the recession ending in mid-summer, the decline in mortgage performance continues. Job losses continue to increase and drive up delinquencies and foreclosures because mortgages are paid with paychecks, not percentage point increases in G.D.P.," Jay Brinkmann, the association's chief economist, said in a statement.
The data indicates that borrowers in trouble are no longer just those who took out subprime loans. High-quality prime fixed-rate mortgages now represent the largest share of new foreclosures.
The survey is based on a sample of more than 44 million mortgage loans serviced by mortgage companies, commercial banks, thrifts, credit unions and others. The association's records date back to 1972.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
20) Senate Says Health Plan Will Cover Another 31 Million
By ROBERT PEAR and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
November 19, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/health/policy/19health.html?ref=health
WASHINGTON - Democratic leaders in the Senate on Wednesday unveiled their proposal for overhauling the health care system, outlining legislation that they said would cover most of the uninsured while reducing the federal budget deficit.
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said at an evening news conference that the legislation, embodying President Obama's signature domestic initiative, would impose new regulations on insurers, extend coverage to 31 million people who currently do not have any and add new benefits to Medicare.
Mr. Reid said the bill, despite a price tag of $848 billion over 10 years, would reduce projected budget deficits by $130 billion over a decade because the costs would be more than offset by new taxes and fees and by reductions in the growth of Medicare.
Democrats expressed confidence that they would have the votes needed to move forward when the legislation hits its first test in the Senate, probably later this week. To get past that first procedural hurdle, Mr. Reid will need the votes of all 58 Democratic senators and the two independents aligned with them.
That vote would clear the way for what is sure to be an unpredictable roller-coaster ride of a debate on the Senate floor through much of December. Earlier this month the House passed its version of the health care legislation.
Republicans have vowed to fight the legislation at every turn, saying it represents a dangerous expansion in the role of government that would increase taxes and insurance costs for millions of people. "It's going to be a holy war," said Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah.
Under Mr. Reid's bill, the government would establish a new public insurance plan, which would compete with private insurers. States could opt out of the public plan by passing legislation.
In one last touch on Wednesday, Mr. Reid and his aides finally named the bill that he wrote over the last few weeks, selecting parts of bills previously adopted by two Senate committees. It is called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. "This legislation is a tremendous step forward," Mr. Reid said. "It saves lives, saves money and will make Medicare stronger."
Though broadly similar to the House bill, Mr. Reid's proposal differs in important ways. It would, for example, increase the Medicare payroll tax on high-income people and impose a new excise tax on high-cost "Cadillac health plans" offered by employers to their employees.
Mr. Reid's bill would not go as far as the House bill in limiting access to abortion. And while he would require most Americans to obtain health insurance, he would impose less stringent penalties on people who did not comply.
Many provisions of Mr. Reid's bill, including the creation of insurance markets, or exchanges, would take effect in 2014, a year later than similar provisions of the House bill. The delay is intended primarily to reduce the cost of the legislation.
Both bills would create a voluntary federal program to provide long-term care insurance and cash benefits to people with severe disabilities.
Desperately seeking money to pay for the legislation, Mr. Reid came up with a new source of financing: a 5 percent tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures. The tax would be paid by patients, but collected by doctors and clinics and forwarded to the government.
The tax would be calculated as 5 percent of the amount paid for an elective cosmetic procedure, whether by the patient, insurance or other sources. The tax would not apply to cosmetic surgery for people with congenital abnormalities, disfiguring diseases or traumatic injuries.
The official cost analysis released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office shortly after 11 p.m. showed that Mr. Reid's bill came in under the $900 billion goal suggested by Mr. Obama. But 24 million people would still be uninsured in 2019, the budget office said. About one-third of them would be illegal immigrants.
The Congressional Budget Office has said the House bill would reduce deficits by $109 billion over 10 years and cover 36 million people, but still leave 18 million uninsured in 2019.
Republicans and some independent budget analysts said, however, that the savings might not be fully achieved because they were based on unrealistic assumptions about a sustained increase in the productivity of health care providers and much slower growth in Medicare spending.
Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff said Mr. Reid's bill was impressive. It "meets the president's objectives, provides protection from insurance companies, contains true cost controls and extends coverage to working families," Mr. Emanuel said.
Senate Democratic leaders were still trying frantically on Wednesday to nail down a few of the 60 votes needed to begin debate on the legislation.
Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, both former senators, were on Capitol Hill, trying to help Mr. Reid round up votes.
The proposed tax on "Cadillac health plans" is among the most contentious provisions of the bill.
Under the Finance Committee bill, the government would have levied a 40 percent tax on the value of insurance exceeding $8,000 for individual coverage and $21,000 for family coverage, with some exceptions.
Under Mr. Reid's bill, the tax would kick in at higher thresholds, $8,500 for individuals and $23,000 for families.
Some economists say the tax could slow the growth of health spending by encouraging employers to pare back health benefits. Many labor unions oppose the tax, saying it would hit many middle-income workers who have sacrificed wage increases to secure or retain health benefits.
The proposed increase in the Medicare payroll tax is another major new feature of Mr. Reid's bill. Under current law, employers and employees each pay a tax equal to 1.45 percent of wages. Mr. Reid would increase the rate to 1.95 percent for individuals with annual incomes over $200,000 and couples over $250,000. The tax on employers would be unchanged.
Senate Democratic aides said the payroll tax increase would raise $54 billion over 10 years.
By contrast, the main source of new revenue in the House bill is a surtax on high-income people. The tax would be 5.4 percent of adjusted gross income exceeding $1 million for couples and $500,000 for individuals.
Mr. Reid's bill would also raise revenue by levying annual fees on health insurance companies and pharmaceutical manufacturers. The Finance Committee would have imposed fees of $4 billion a year on manufacturers of medical devices, but Mr. Reid decided to cut those fees by half.
Under the bill, most people would be required to carry insurance. A person without insurance could be required to pay a financial penalty, starting at $95 in 2014 and rising to $750 in 2016, with a maximum of $2,250 for a family.
The Senate bill would not explicitly require employers to offer health insurance coverage. But if an employer with more than 50 employees does not offer coverage and if any worker qualifies for a federal subsidy, the employer would have to pay a penalty, typically $750 for each of its employees.
Carl Hulse contributed reporting.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
21) Free Lynne Stewart
"We are in here for you. You are out there for us! Free All Political Prisoners"
[Illustration shows Mumia Abu-Jamal and Lynne Stewart]
Here a Terrorist, There a Terrorist, Everywhere a Terrorist
See the article below and illustration by Christopher Hutchinson, General Strike at this site:
http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/
Following the November 16 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit that rejected Lynne Stewart's appeal of her 1995 frame-up conviction on five counts of aiding and abetting terrorism, Lynne's legal team as well the federal district court were in a quandary as to how to proceed. [Lynne has been a leading civil and human rights attorney for 30-years. She is a member of the National Lawyers Guild and a member of the Continuations Committee of the National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and Occupations.]
The Second Circuit made what amounted to an unprecedented decision to not only affirm her conviction and reject her appeal but to order that her bail be revoked and that she be remanded to prison. But lacking clear orders as to who would carry out this decision and when it would happen, the last two days have seen Lynne appear, along with her supporters at two rallies in her defense and numerous press conferences and interviews while judges and lawyers tried to ascertain what to do. That decision has been made and Lynne will begin serving a 28-month prison term.
However, the Second Circuit's 2-1 decision also remanded the issue of the length of Lynne's sentence back to Judge John Koeltl's Federal District Court ordering Koeltl to reconsider the 28-month jail sentence that he originally imposed. Obviously furious at the relatively short duration of the sentence, the Second Circuit accepted the prosecution's assertion that Koeltl had not properly considered the question of whether or not Lynne has perjured herself during her trial. If that were to be determined, according to the Second Circuit, the length of Lynne's sentence could be extended. The single dissenting judge went further - expressing his outrage at Lynne relatively short sentence and suggesting that a qualitatively longer sentence be imposed than the majority contemplated. The government originally demanded a 30-year sentence!
Still fighting, Lynne's attorney's will ask the Second Circuit for a delay in her incarceration based on Lynne's scheduled December surgery. Here too, Lynne guesses that this will be denied, with the court holding that prison facilities are adequate for any medical needs that Lynne, a diabetic with hypertension and recovering from breast cancer surgery, may have.
Meanwhile, a new sentencing hearing before Judge Koeltl is scheduled for December 2 at the Foley Square Courthouse. Federal prosecutors are expected to ask for the maximum sentence possible. Also appearing in court will be Mohammed Yousery, Lynne's innocent co-defendant and translator. Koeltl was also ordered to reconsider Yousery's 20-month sentence. The prison term of a third defendant in Lynne's case, Ahmed Sattar, who was sentenced to 20-plus years, was not challenged.
At this point we can only speculate as to whether Judge Koeltl will stand by his original sentence or be pressured by the Second Circuit to extend Lynne and Mohammed's sentence. The judge is known to carefully consider his sentences. Close observers believe that he is unlikely to bend and impose a longer sentence.
Should Koeltl refuse to add additional years to Lynne's prison term, the government is expected to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Government prosecutors and obviously the Second Circuit are outraged that a "convicted terrorist" has been walking around the streets for the past five years, free to champion her own cause and those of all others who suffer political repression. It was clear from Judge Koeltl's short sentence and high praise of Lynne's record as an attorney and human being, a "credit to her profession," said Koeltl during the sentencing hearing, that he felt compelled to take his distance from the government's desire to put Lynne, 70, in prison for what would amount to the rest of her life.
Lynne will appeal the Second Circuit's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. She has repeatedly stated that her prosecution and persecution are consciously orchestrated by the government to chill the defense bar, that is, to instill the fear of government prosecutions into any attorney who seeks to afford alleged terrorists or others who are victims of unjust government persecution, a vigorous and dedicated defense. Lynne points to the upcoming U.S. prosecution efforts of Guantanamo prisoners as a prime example.
Again, join us on Monday, November 23 at 5:00 pm at the San Francisco Federal Courthouse, 7th and Mission.
For further information contact: Jeff Mackler, Coordinator, West Coast Lynne Stewart Defense Committee 510-268-9429 jmackler@lmi.net
Mail tax free contributions payable to National Lawyers Guild Foundation. Write in memo box: "Lynne Stewart Defense." Mail to: Lynne Stewart Defense, P.O. Box 10328, Oakland, CA 94610.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
22) Civil Rights Attorney Lynne Stewart Speaks Out
Democracy Now Interview By Amy Goodman
November 18, 2009
http://i1.democracynow.org/2009/11/18/exclusive_civil_rights_attorney_lynne_stewart
AMY GOODMAN: Civil rights attorney Lynne Stewart has been ordered to prison to begin serving a two-and-a-half-year sentence after a federal appeals court upheld her conviction on Tuesday.
Lynne Stewart was found guilty in 2005 of distributing press releases on behalf of her jailed client, Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, also known as the "Blind Sheikh," who's serving a life sentence on terror-related charges. Prosecutors had sought a thirty-year sentence, but Stewart was sentenced to two-and-a-half years after the judge rejected the prosecutors' argument that she threatened national security and ruled there was no evidence her actions caused any harm.
On Tuesday, a three-judge appeals court panel ordered the trial judge to revoke Stewart's bond and said she must begin serving her twenty-eight-month sentence. The panel rejected Stewart's claim she was acting only as a "zealous advocate" for her imprisoned client when she passed messages for him. The appellate ruling said, quote, "a genuinely held intent to represent a client 'zealously' is not necessarily inconsistent with criminal intent."
The panel also described Stewart's twenty-eight-month sentence as, quote, "strikingly low" and sent the case back to the trial judge to determine whether she deserved a longer prison term. The ruling said Stewart, who's seventy years old, was to surrender to US marshals immediately, but her lawyers won her an extension until at least 5:00 p.m. today.
Well, Lynne Stewart has come to our studios here in New York. And we welcome you, Lynne, to Democracy Now! Can you describe your reaction to the ruling?
LYNNE STEWART: Well, in its sweeping and negative tone, I must say I was first a little bit shocked, because we had expected, or had hoped, at least, that some of these important constitutional issues would be decided, and then very disappointed, on my own behalf, certainly-personally, you can't discount-but actually, for all of us, Amy, because these important constitutional issues-the right to speak to your lawyer privately without the government listening in, the right to be safe from having a search conducted of your lawyer's office-all these things are now swept under the rug and available to the government.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you, for people who haven't followed your case, explain exactly what happened, why you were charged?
LYNNE STEWART: I represented Sheikh Omar at trial-that was in 1995-along with Ramsey Clark and Abdeen Jabara. I was lead trial counsel. He was convicted in September of '95, sentenced to a life prison plus a hundred years, or some sort-one of the usual outlandish sentences. We continued, all three of us, to visit him while he was in jail-he was a political client; that means that he is targeted by the government-and because it is so important to prisoners to be able to have access to their lawyers.
Sometime in 1998, I think maybe it was, they imposed severe restrictions on him. That is, his ability to communicate with the outside world, to have interviews, to be able to even call his family, was limited by something called special administrative measures. The lawyers were asked to sign on for these special administrative measures and warned that if these measures were not adhered to, they could indeed lose contact with their client-in other words, be removed from his case.
In 2000, I visited the sheikh, and he asked me to make a press release. This press release had to do with the current status of an organization that at that point was basically defunct, the Gama'a al-Islamiyya. And I agreed to do that. In May of-maybe it was later than that. Sometime in 2000, I made the press release.
Interestingly enough, we found out later that the Clinton administration, under Janet Reno, had the option to prosecute me, and they declined to do so, based on the notion that without lawyers like me or the late Bill Kunstler or many that I could name, the cause of justice is not well served. They need the gadflies.
So, at any rate, they made me sign onto the agreement again not to do this. They did not stop me from representing him. I continued to represent him.
And it was only after 9/11, in April of 2002, that John Ashcroft came to New York, announced the indictment of me, my paralegal and the interpreter for the case, on grounds of materially aiding a terrorist organization. One of the footnotes to the case, of course, is that Ashcroft also appeared on nationwide television with Letterman that night ballyhooing the great work of Bush's Justice Department in indicting and making the world safe from terrorism.
The course of the case followed. We tried the case in 2005 to a jury, of course sitting not ten blocks from the World Trade Center, and an anonymous jury, I might add, which I think went a long way to contribute to our convictions. And all three of us were convicted. Since that time, the appeals process has followed. The appeal was argued almost two years ago, and the opinion just came like a-actually like a thunderclap yesterday. And to just put it in perspective, I think, it comes hard on the heels of Holder's announcement that they are bringing the men from Guantanamo to New York to be tried. That-I'll expand on that, if you wish, but that basically is where we're at. It's said that I should be immediately remanded, my bail revoked.
AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Lynne Stewart. She could be going to prison at any point. Lynne, I wanted to read to you from the Times, their description, saying, "In addressing whether [Ms.] Stewart's sentence was too lenient, Judge Sack wrote that Judge Koeltl had cited her 'extraordinary' personal characteristics, and had described her as 'a dedicated public servant who had, throughout her career, "represented the poor, the disadvantaged and the unpopular."'
"But Judge Koeltl had declined to determine whether Ms. Stewart had lied at trial, a factor he should have considered in weighing her sentence, Judge Sack wrote. 'We think that whether Stewart lied under oath at her trial is directly relevant to whether her sentence was appropriate.'"
What they talking about? What is their accusation about you lying at trial?
LYNNE STEWART: Well, of course, I'm not rendering a legal opinion here, Amy, because I'm officially disbarred. But I will say that my understanding of the law is that the judge may consider whether or not a client or a person who testified in their own defense lied or even shaded the truth to their own benefit. And my sense of reading-and I haven't read them over recently, but my sense of the sentencing was that the judge did consider it, at least in a manner. He basically said he did not think it was relevant, and the court of appeals argued with this.
I, of course, committed no perjury. I spoke on my own behalf. I described what I did. I'm not sure that the court of appeals may have liked what I said, but that is, you know, because the US attorney went into my politics at great length, as if to say, "See, she has radical politics, so we know she would have done something radical." I've always said my politics are very, very different from the sheikh's politics, and that was an unfair cut. But notwithstanding that, they do have the right to consider it. It can be something, if the judge believed you lied, that can increase your sentence.
I have every reason to believe that Judge Koeltl, who is a most careful judge, a most-a judge described, in the opinion by Judge Calabresi, as being someone who makes very wise decisions, considered it-considered it, rejected it, and went ahead. This was the number-the sentence he arrived at, twenty-eight months, and we hope that he will retain the courage that he had in making that sentence, to stick with it now that the government, through the Second Circuit, has challenged it.
AMY GOODMAN: Lynne Stewart, as you were being sentenced in 2006, you had breast cancer. How are you today? How's your health?
LYNNE STEWART: The breast cancer is good; I have no recurrence. I just had a mammogram, even though I'm seventy. I don't know how that falls into the new warnings. But at any rate, I'm cancer-free. I have some other aging problems, woman plumbing stuff, which I actually am scheduled for surgery on December 7th. My lawyers are hoping to be able to go to the Second Circuit and ask them to extend the period of time that I would have to surrender, in order that this surgery may be accomplished right here in New York at Lenox Hill Hospital. We're not sure of that. It does seem that they're-
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain how this happens today, because at this point you have an extension until 5:00 p.m. today-
LYNNE STEWART: Yes.
AMY GOODMAN: -before going to prison? What will happen today?
LYNNE STEWART: Well, the judge has asked the lawyers to research whether he has the power at this point-I mean, this is like ancient English Magna Carta law. You know, the case has been appealed. It's in the Second Circuit. In order for him to order me to prison, it has to be before him. In other words, the papers, I guess, have to be carried from the upper floor to the lower floor to the district court. He wanted them to research whether or not he can do anything before he has that mandate. He, of course, can decide that I'm turning myself in tomorrow. He can also decide that he doesn't have it until-usually the mandate takes a week to ten days to come down. So we're sort of on the edge. It will not preclude my lawyers from going to the circuit directly and asking them to stay their order of my immediate remand and revocation of bail. So we're sort of on the edge. We're-
AMY GOODMAN: Do you know where you will be imprisoned?
LYNNE STEWART: Say that again?
AMY GOODMAN: Do you know where you will be imprisoned?
LYNNE STEWART: No. See, that's one of the other reasons. It's not only my surgery. It also is the fact that I've never been designated and also the fact that the pre-sentence report on which they usually base these designations is three years old at this point. It doesn't take into account anything that has happened since then.
So we think there are some grounds for extending the time, but I think it's fair to say that at this point I have brought my books and my medicines with me to go to court this afternoon, and I expect-I expect the worst, being Irish, but hope for the best, because I'm a leftist and always optimistic.
AMY GOODMAN: What books have you brought with you?
LYNNE STEWART: I have Snow by-I never pronounce his name right-Orhan Pamuk. I have The Field of Poppies; I can't remember the author, terrible, given to me by a dear comrade, Ralph Schoenman. And I have a couple of mysteries, because I'm an addict of mysteries, and it passes the time quickly for me.
AMY GOODMAN: Lynne, would you do anything differently today, or would you do anything differently back then, if you knew what you knew today?
LYNNE STEWART: I think I should have been a little more savvy that the government would come after me. But do anything differently? I don't-I'd like to think I would not do anything differently, Amy. I made these decisions based on my understanding of what the client needed, what a lawyer was expected to do. They say that you can't distinguish zeal from criminal intent sometimes. I had no criminal intent whatsoever. This was a considered decision based on the need of the client. And although some people have said press releases aren't client needs, I think keeping a person alive when they are in prison, held under the conditions which we now know to be torture, totally incognito-not incognito, but totally held without any contact with the outside world except a phone call once a month to his family and to his lawyers, I think it was necessary. I would do it again. I might handle it a little differently, but I would do it again.
AMY GOODMAN: Lynne Stewart, I want to thank you for being with us. I hope we can talk to you in prison. Lynne Stewart has been sentenced to two-and-a-half years in jail, to be served beginning today, unless a judge is able to intervene. Thanks so much for being with us.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
23) Regents Raise Tuition in California by 32 Percent
By TAMAR LEWIN
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/education/20tuition.html?hp
The University of California Board of Regents approved a plan on Thursday to raise undergraduate fees - the equivalent of tuition - 32 percent by next fall, to help make up for steep cuts in state funding.
The state allocation for the 10-campus system, one of the leading public university systems in the nation, was cut $813 million, or 20 percent, this year, leading to a hiring freeze, furloughs and layoffs.
The impact on the University of California campuses has been dramatic: faculty hiring is not keeping up with enrollment demand, and many course sections have been eliminated. Instructional budgets are being reduced by $139 million, with 1,900 employees laid off, 3,800 positions eliminated and hiring deferred for nearly 1,600 positions, most of them faculty.
Several campuses are planning to admit more out-of-state students, who pay higher tuition, to help close the budget gap. And there is a growing worry that senior faculty may begin to defect to other institutions.
Since the school year began, thousands of students have protested both the budget cuts and the proposal for higher fees, which would bring in-state tuition to more than $10,000 a year. On Wednesday 14 protesters, including 12 students, were arrested at U.C.L.A., for disrupting the meeting of the Regents Finance Committee, which was eventually closed to visitors.
On Thursday, as the Regents met at U.C.L.A.'s Covel Commons, hundreds of demonstrators from campuses across the state gathered outside to protest the fee increases. Some carried signs that said, "Freeze the Fees," "No to the Cuts" and "R.I.P. Higher Education."
Some students set up a tent city on campus overnight, and others occupied Campbell Hall, where they remained during the Regents meeting.
There were also large protests on the Berkeley campus by union workers, students and faculty.
Mark Yudof, president of the system, said the University of California now received only half as much support from the state, per student, as it did in 1990. Even with the higher student fees, the system needs a $913 million increase in state financing next year to avoid further cuts. If that extra money is not provided, next year's freshman enrollment will most likely be cut.
"When it comes to the university's core support, we have only two main sources - taxpayer dollars from the state and student fees," Mr. Yudof said. "Even with deep administrative cuts, when one goes down, the other almost inevitably must go up."
To help students who cannot afford the increasing fees, the Regents were also expected to approve the expansion of the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan, for undergraduates whose family income is below $70,000.
In the public comment period at the Regents meeting, many students spoke out against the fee increase, telling of their families' struggles to get them a college education, their difficulty affording even the current fees, and the likelihood that higher fees would make the system's campuses inaccessible to low-income students.
Rebecca Cathcart contributed reporting from Los Angeles.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
24) A Gift to Credit Card Companies
NYT Editorial
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/opinion/20fri3.html
Congress left consumers extremely vulnerable when it gave the credit card industry as long as 15 months to end the deceptive predatory practices outlawed in the spring in the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act. The credit card industry, which clearly wants to make a killing in the Christmas season, used this unnecessarily long grace period to intensify its predations, doubling interest rates on people who pay on time and driving up rates by an industry wide average of about 20 percent.
These ravages seemed not to have registered with Senator Thad Cochran, a Republican of Mississippi, who represents the nation's poorest and most economically vulnerable state. On Wednesday, Mr. Cochran blocked a vote on a bill introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd, a Democrat of Connecticut, that would have immediately frozen credit card interest rates and fees.
Mr. Cochran said through his office that he objected to the bill on behalf of unknown Republican colleagues who had their own objections. But it is difficult not to see his maneuver in yet another act of obeisance by Senate Republicans to the banking and credit card industries.
The same was true of Congress's decision in May to delay implementation of the original credit card reform bill. Had the act gone into effect immediately, credit card issuers would have been forced to end many of the practices that have trapped millions of Americans in debt that they had no hope of repaying.
Arbitrary increases like the ones that appear to have become even more common since the spring would have been immediately outlawed. So would the practice of penalizing customers who are late paying an unrelated bill - known as universal default - and the rip-off in which companies charge cardholders new interest on debts that they have paid a month or two earlier. And the companies would have been forced to end the outrageous practice of burdening teenagers with credit cards without first judging their ability to pay the bills or getting a signature from a responsible adult.
The Dodd bill appears to be off the table for the moment. But a stronger bill that would move up the effective date of the credit card law to Dec. 1 has already passed the House. The Senate version has been introduced by Mark Udall, a Democrat of Colorado. With December almost upon us, the measure should long since have become law.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
25) Russia: Moratorium on Executions
By MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ
World Briefing | Europe
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/world/europe/20briefs-ExecutionBrf.html?ref=world
Russia's Constitutional Court extended the country's moratorium on the death penalty on Thursday, though it stopped short of fully abolishing capital punishment. In a statement, the Constitutional Court argued that permitting capital punishment would violate Russia's commitments as a member of the Council of Europe. The moratorium on executions was imposed in 1996 and was set to expire in January.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
26) Watchdog Urges Caution on Claims of 640,000 Stimulus Jobs
By MICHAEL COOPER
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/us/politics/20stimulus.html?ref=us
WASHINGTON - The government watchdog overseeing the federal stimulus program testified Thursday that he could not vouch for the Obama administration's recent claims that the money had saved or created 640,000 jobs. He suggested that the administration should have treated the number with more skepticism.
The 640,000 figure, announced by the White House with some fanfare last month, came from reports filed by recipients of the stimulus money, many of which have been shown to be inaccurate or overstated since they were made public. But the watchdog, Earl E. Devaney, the chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, said that it was also possible that the figure understated how many jobs were affected. Up to 10 percent of the recipients had not filed the required reports showing how many jobs they had created or saved, he said.
"I have no doubt that there's a lot of jobs being created," Mr. Devaney said at a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. "I think it could be above or below 640. I think missing reports might drive the job numbers up, and I think there's enough inaccuracies in here to question if the 640 number might go down."
When the White House announced the figures three weeks ago, officials hoped to reassure people that the $787 billion stimulus program was working in the face of rising unemployment. Many economists credit the stimulus with helping the economy, but tallying the actual jobs has proved difficult. A series of embarrassing reports - of raises being counted as new jobs, of jobs claimed in Congressional districts that do not exist, of school districts claiming to have saved the jobs of more teachers than they employ - may have ended up undermining confidence in the stimulus program.
This week, Representative David Obey of Wisconsin, an influential Democrat who helped write the stimulus bill, issued a blistering statement calling the mistakes in the data "ludicrous" and "outrageous."
"Credibility counts in government, and stupid mistakes like this undermine it," he said. Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was even quizzed about the figures when he sat for an interview on "The Daily Show."
Also Thursday, a report issued by the Government Accountability Office identified "significant" problems with the jobs numbers. It found that 58,386 of the jobs were being claimed by recipients who had not reported spending any money; on the other hand, recipients who had received nearly $1 billion had claimed no jobs at all.
Administration officials have said that they believe that mistakes overcounting jobs are likely to be offset by mistakes undercounting them.
Representative Darrell E. Issa, the ranking Republican on the committee, read the Oxford English Dictionary's definition of propaganda at the hearing, and suggested that the administration was using the faulty jobs figure to promote its policies.
He read a series of statements of administration officials trumpeting the figure, and asked Mr. Devaney if it would have been better to have simply acknowledged that the data came from recipients and could not be verified.
Mr. Devaney, who has warned for months that the data was likely to contain inaccuracies, seemed to agree, saying that he liked that statement. The data is all publicly available on the government's Web site, www.recovery.gov, which he oversees.
Elizabeth A. Oxhorn, a White House spokeswoman, said that Mr. Biden had warned publicly that the data was not 100 percent accurate and would require corrections.
Mr. Devaney said that the mistakes were coming to light because of the effort toward transparency, and said, "My expectation is that any embarrassment suffered will encourage self-correcting behavior and lead to better reporting in the future."
Jackie Calmes contributed reporting.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
27) Jobless Rate Got No Help From Hiring for Holidays
By PATRICK McGEEHAN
November 20, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/nyregion/20jobs.html?ref=nyregion
The usual preholiday hiring by stores did not happen in October as New York City's unemployment rate held at 10.3 percent, its highest level in 16 years, the State Labor Department said Thursday.
The city's official unemployment rate remained slightly above the national rate, which rose to 10.2 percent last month, and well above the state's rate, which edged up to 9 percent in October, the department said.
The only fields in the city that grew significantly last month were education and health services, which added a combined total of 21,600 jobs, said James Brown, an analyst with the Labor Department. Otherwise, Mr. Brown said, "the job market showed broad weakness."
Employers traditionally add to payrolls in the fall, but they have shown a reluctance to hire this year, despite proclamations from some government officials that the recession has ended. Stores, restaurants and hotels usually start taking on workers in September and October and shed them in January and February.
But that pattern has been as weak this year as it was last year. The number of jobs in the retail trade in the city declined by 1,100 in October, Mr. Brown said.
The leisure and hospitality sector "lost jobs last holiday season and is doing slightly worse so far this year," Mr. Brown said. "Unfortunately, this latest monthly report suggests that the city's job market remains quite weak, and Christmas hiring will be both late and subdued."
Mr. Brown does not adjust the city's job figures for the usual seasonal fluctuations, but Barbara Byrne Denham, an economist who does, said that, after those adjustments, October appeared to have been the city's worst month since December.
Ms. Denham, a chief economist for Eastern Consolidated, a real estate investment company, said that the city lost 15,600 jobs in October and had now lost more than 125,000 jobs during this downturn. The biggest losses last month came in construction, securities brokerages, restaurants and retail stores, according to Ms. Denham.
The number of unemployed city residents has averaged more than 413,000 for the past three months, a level it had not reached in more than 32 years of record keeping. The city's unemployment rate - a measure of how many people are looking for jobs but are unable to find them - has also been lifted by continuing growth of the city's labor force.
The number of people working or looking for work in the city has remained above four million for almost all of 2009, up about 10 percent since the start of this decade. The labor force usually shrinks in a recession, as some people give up looking for jobs and are no longer counted. City officials point to the growing labor force as a sign of optimism about the local economy.
The city's comptroller, William C. Thompson Jr., said the latest data reinforced a report his office released this week that showed that education and health care had grown steadily through the recession and should be nurtured as critical industries. "It's time to take these sectors seriously as potential engines for our city's employment growth," he said.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
No comments:
Post a Comment