Progressive Calendar 02.22.10 | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: David Shove (shove001tc.umn.edu) | |
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:04:05 -0800 (PST) |
P R O G R E S S I V E C A L E N D A R 02.22.10 1. Peace walk 2.22 6pm RiverFalls WI 2. Community Ag 2.22 6:30pm 3. Black hist/KFAI 2.23 6am 4. MN health bill 2.23 2:45pm 5. WAMM immigration 2.23 6:30pm 6. Davidov/Masters 2.23 6:30pm 7. Plant power 2.23 7pm 8. Health systems 2.23 7pm 9. Welfare Rights - Urgent action vs foreclosures - call Sens before Wed 10. Kathleen Burge - Tracking a new kind of civil disobedience 11. Jeffrey Sachs - Climate skeptics: recycled supporters of tobacco etc 12. Moyers/Winship - What are we bid for American justice? --------1 of 12-------- From: Nancy Holden <d.n.holden [at] comcast.net> Subject: Peace walk 2.22 6pm RiverFalls WI River Falls Peace and Justice Walkers. We meet every Monday from 6-7 pm on the UWRF campus at Cascade Ave. and 2nd Street, immediately across from "Journey" House. We walk through the downtown of River Falls. Contact: d.n.holden [at] comcast.net. Douglas H Holden 1004 Morgan Road River Falls, Wisconsin 54022 --------2 of 12-------- From: Leslie Reindl <alteravista [at] usfamily.net> Subject: Community Ag 2.22 6:30pm Steps Toward an Alternative Economy through Community Owned Agriculture (COA) Monday, February 22, 6:30 - 8 pm Merriam Park Library 1831 Marshall Ave., St. Paul This workshop continues a discussion about the COA concept, building on questions and comments from previous attendees. What is actually under consideration is the beginning of a road to a 21st-century, high-tech subsistence economy, an economy that can replace jobs oriented to "the market" with work meaningful to a community. Agriculture (food security) is the foundation. (Each workshop stands alone; no previous attendance needed) Presenters: Wilhelm and Leslie Reindl Sponsored by Wilderness Connections, St. Paul FFI alteravista [at] usfamily.net, 651-633-4410 Wilhelm grew up on and ran a small dairy farm in southern Germany in the 1960s; Leslie was a board member of the Minnesota Food Association in the 1990s and has been active in agricultural issues ever since. They live in St. Paul but also own and garden on an ex- dairy farm in Wisconsin. --------3 of 12-------- From: Lydia Howell <lydiahowell [at] visi.com> Subject: Black hist/KFAI 2.23 6am BLACK HISTORY MONTH on KFAI Radio/kfai.org Live-streaming and archived for 2 weeks after broadcast on:http://www.kfai.org 90.3fm Minneapolis/106.7fm St.Paul Check back on the KFAI homepage for more additions: http://www.kfai.org Tune into KFAI all day on Tuesday February 23rd and Thur..Feb. 25 for programming devoted to celebrating Black History Month. You will hear music and discussion from 6am to 6pm produced by KFAI and members of the community. TUES. FEB. 23: *6am-9am*: Dee Henry Williams, Host of A Great Blend of Watercolors <http://agreatblendofwatercolors>, presents /The Politics, Art, and Music of Chicago/. *9am-11am*: Akhmiri Sekhr-Ra presents /Music that Mattered:/ Music from Black Culture that makes you shout, or even brings a tear eye. "Take a two hour musical journey that will lead you back to the promise land of your soul." *11am-Noon*: Conversations with Al McFarlane <http://conversationswithalmcfarlane> discussed Black History Month *Noon-1pm*: /The Communiversity/ explores culture, politics and the kinship between academia and the community in relation to Black History Month *1pm-3pm*: Janis Lane-Ewart, host of Collective Eye <http://collectiveeye> presents /Celebrating the Magic of Jazz/ *3pm-6pm*: Lady J devotes Rollin' and Tumblin <http://rollinandtumblin> goes to the intersection of music and magic with a look into the history of the blues. --- THUR. FEB. 25, 3pm to 6pm on BLUESLADY'S TIME MACHINE guest host Lydia Howell(of Catalyst:politics & culture" Fri.11am) Poetry, politics & plenty of music! From slavery to the Great Migration, 1930s Harlem Renaissance to 1960s Black Arts Movement, civil rights to Black Panthers. Martin, Malcolm and Mumia. Blues, soul, jazz and spoken word. From Bessie Smith to Nina Simone, early blues to contemporary fusion, classic soul to Minneapolis' own eg baily's new cd AMERICAN AFRIKAN and much more. --------4 of 12-------- From: Amy Lange <amyl [at] muhcc.org> Subject: MN health bill 2.23 2:45pm The Minnesota Health Plan will have a hearing in the House Health and Human Services Policy and Oversight Committee Tuesday February 23rd at 2:45 State Office Building Room 200 Chair: Rep. Paul Thissen PLEASE ATTEND AND SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE MINNESOTA HEALTH PLAN!!!! WE MUST FILL THE ROOM!! Please spread the word!! -- Amy Lange RN, MS Executive Director Minnesota Universal Health Care Coalition amyL [at] muhcc.org C: 612-281-4308 www.muhcc.org <http://www.muhcc.org> --------5 of 12-------- From: Women Against Military Madness <wamm [at] mtn.org> Subject: WAMM immigration 2.23 6:30pm Introductory Meeting: WAMM Immigration Committee Tuesday, February 23, 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. Sabathani Community Center, Third Floor, Conference Center, Room F, 310 East 38th Street, Minneapolis. Interested in the welfare of immigrants and/or humane immigration reform? Come be a part of a new committee at WAMM. Learn more about the truths of immigration and join in a nationwide effort to pass comprehensive immigration reform. FFI: Call 612-827-5364. --------6 of 12-------- From: Women Against Military Madness <wamm [at] mtn.org> Subject: Davidov/Masters 2.23 6:30pm Pax Conversational Salon: Marv Davidov and Carol Masters Reading: You Can't Do That Tuesday, February 23, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Mad Hatter's Tea House, 943 West Seventh, St. Paul. Activist Marv Davidov and his biographer Carol Masters discuss his biography, You Can't Do That: Marv Davidov, Non-Violent Revolutionary. "In this full-length biography, we follow the career of Marv Davidov from his years in the Army (he received an honorable discharge 'for the good of the army'), living among the Beats on the U of M campus, participating in the Freedom Rides that helped bring racial integration to the American South, and on to the rallies, conferences and demonstrations in Minnesota, serving to raise public awareness of locally-manufactured bombs and weapons designed to kill and maim. 'I write good letters from prison,' says Davidov, who has been arrested 50 times for acts of civil disobedience'" - book description. Biographer Carol Masters is a long time anti-war activist and writer and serves on the Board of WAMM. Endorsed by: WAMM. FFI: Call 651-227-3228. --------7 of 12-------- From: Lydia Howell <lydiahowell [at] visi.com> Subject: Plant power 2.23 7pm FEB.23:Eating the Sun: How Plants Power the Planet - 7:00pm, Tuesday, February 23, at Grumpy's Downtown (1111 Washington Ave S, Minneapolis). In February, the Big Bang Book Club will be talking sunshine. "Eating the Sun" is the story of photosynthesis - a celebration of how the smallest things, enzymes and pigments, influence the largest things, the oceans, the rainforests, and the fossil fuel economy. Oliver Morton offers a fascinating, lively, profound look at nature's greatest miracle and sounds a much-needed call to arms - illuminating a potential crisis of climatic chaos and explaining how we can change our situation, for better or for worse. The Big Bang Book Club is a monthly book club for non-scientists that relishes in folding arts and science into a heady brew. It is sponsored by Magers & Quinn Booksellers the Center for Science, Technology, and Public Policy, which works to engage the public on science or technology issues to deliver the knowledge and experience of Humphrey Institute experts Secrets of the City - the daily digest of Twin Cities culture Grumpy's Downtown For more information about this event, please contact: David Enyeart Magers & Quinn Booksellers 612/822-4611 davide [at] magersandquinn.com <mailto:davide [at] magersandquinn.com> --------8 of 12-------- From: "John Schwarz" <john [at] unitedhealthsystem.org> Subject: Health systems 2.23 7pm Health systems course Debating the Health Care System: Ethics, Access, and Politics University of MN Continuing Education Department Compleat Scholar Program View online and to register: http://www.cce.umn.edu/courses/CS-0289.html Investigate the current debate about the health care system and discuss what would make it better. Examine the ideals of a perfect system and learn about the history of health care, both in the United States and elsewhere. This course will provide you with a greater understanding of the history of health care, the current debate, and how to be an informed citizen in regards to health policy issues. 7:00 PM -9:00 PM Tuesdays, Feb 23 to March 23 5 sessions Univ. of MN St. Paul Campus This is a non-credit course. Course Overview There is almost universal agreement that the United States' health care system is flawed. Recent debates about health care reform have shown the intensity of citizen opinion on this topic. In this class you will analyze the current system and discuss what a "good" health care system would ultimately look like. You will start out by discussing the ideals of a perfect system and then compare that to what is currently in the health care system in this country and in other western nations, including a brief overview of the history of health insurance dating to the medieval era. Next, explore what is happening in the health care debate today and what issues are standing in the way of achieving the "ideal" health care system in this country. Examine factors such as the economy, ideologies, political parties, fear, and myth, and the role they play in potential health care reform. This course will leave you with a greater understanding of the history of health care, the current debate, and how to be an informed citizen about health policy issues. Instructor: John Schwarz is a member of Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace and is a single-payer/universal care advocate. I have an MA in Government from Cornell University. Throughout my 3 years of graduate work health systems were my main research focus. MY general fields were political theory and political economy, and I passed the PhD qualifying exam in the former. I'm director of United Health System, a nonprofit progressive health policy think tank. I've testified before the legislature on health care systems 14 times in the past few years and was appointed to the Minnesota legislature's single payer working group in 2007. I was the main author of the group's final report. http://www.cce.umn.edu/courses/CS-0289.html --------9 of 12-------- From: Welfare Rights Committee <welfarerightsmn [at] yahoo.com> Subject: Urgent Action--Call Senators before Wed to Stop Foreclosures and Evictions! Hello everyone. Please join us this Wednesday in the Senate Committee hearing. Before Wednesday, please make a call: Our foreclosure moratorium bill will be getting its first Senate vote on Wednesday! Please call the DFL Senators on the committee (see list below). We especially need the undeclared DFL Senators to hear from their constituents! (Doll--Burnsville; Erickson-Ropes--Winona; Lynch--Rochester; Praettner-Solon--Duluth). Please spread the word! Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:30 p.m. Room 15 Capitol S.F. 2242 Dibble Tenants mortgage foreclosure proceedings stay allowance; foreclosure moratorium and tenants rights. S.F. 2640 Marty Expungement of eviction records provisions modifications. S.F. 2595 Dibble Landlord and tenant expungement in eviction cases procedures modifications. S.F. XXXX Kelash Tenants Bill of Rights. - call these DFL Senators and urge them to "Vote yes on SF 2242, the bill that puts a moratorium on foreclosures and that also preserves rental property."  (talking points below and attached) John Doll 40 DFL 651- 296-5975 Sharon Erickson Ropes 31 DFL 651- 296-5649 Tony Lourey 8 DFL 651- 296-0293 Ann Lynch 30 DFL 651- 296-4848 Yvonne Prettner Solon 7 DFL 651- 296-4188 Patricia Torres Ray 62 DFL 651- 296-4274 FYI, there are three committee members who are authors of our bill. If you wan to call them and thank them for signing on, cool: Linda Berglin 61 DFL 651- 296-4261 Linda Higgins 58 DFL 651- 296-9246 John Marty 54 DFL 651- 296-5645 Minnesota Legislators: STOP Foreclosures and Evictions! VOTE for the PEOPLE of Minnesota, NOT for the BANKS! VOTE YES on HF2604/SF2242 Foreclosure Moratorium, Neighborhood Stabilization & Tenant Protection Bill. vote for the bill to put a Moratorium on Foreclosures and stop foreclosure-related evictions is a vote to keep Minnesotans in their homes. vote against HF2604/SF2242 is a vote to support the rich greedy banks, many who received billions and are doing nothing to support Minnesotans in this time of economic crisis. What this bill does: For Homeowners: The bill puts a two-year moratorium on foreclosures. The intention is for the bill to affect only owner-occupied properties. Homeowners are required to pay either their current payment or 41% of their income during the moratorium. For Renters: The bill lets renters stay in their homes, paying a fair market rent (ie, their current rent) to the forecloser. Some common-sense reasons to pass this bill in 2010: Save our homes. Many banks are stonewalling as people try to make adjustments to their mortgages. The programs we hear about that are supposed to help people help only a small fraction; these programs need major reform at the federal level. We need something to make these banks come to the table and truly negotiate in good faith. Until the feds (or the state) can make those changes, we need a moratorium so people and banks have time to get together to work out a deal that benefits everyone. Note that this bill is not a "free ride." Homeowners have to pay up to 41% of their income to the banks as both parties work to come together for a new arrangement. Protect innocent renters. Renters need the option of keeping their existing tenancy in effect. Despite current laws, many renters don't even know their landlords are getting foreclosed on; they have been paying rent, assuming it was going to the mortgage. There are also cases where "landlords" take the security deposit and disappear! Let renters stay in their homes, paying a fair market rent to the forecloser. This bill still allows renters to be evicted only "for cause," like not paying the rent or damaging the property. Save our neighborhoods. When houses (or apartments) go empty, everyone suffers. Housing values go down and there are health and safety issues. Empty houses turn into trashed houses. Lower property values mean less money for local governments. Stable neighborhoods are safer, healthier neighborhoods. Keep people housed, keep properties maintained, and even keep some money going to the lender. Don't make the state budget deficit worse: Because of the current economic crisis, home stability is more important than ever. Homeless families cost cities, counties and the state money. This is not just about homeowners losing their homes -- there is a trend of the unemployed taking refuge in the homes of friends and family, for the short or long-term. The bottom line is empty houses mean more money needed for city services, health care, social services - there are countless costs (both financial and social) that arise from foreclosure.  Committee on Health, Housing and Family Security Chair: Sen. John Marty S.F. 2708   Lynch   Attention deficit (hyperactivity) disorder (ADD, ADHD) mental health professionals diagnosing authority expansion. -- We have seen some politicians in the house pull tatics to try to stop this bill. Your calls are important to lend strength to the politicans that want to help people stay in there homes. We all need shelter. Homeless shelters and the streets AREN'T a real home. Thank you all for your continued support. Welfare Rights Committee PO Box 7266, Mpls MN 55407 pho: 612-822-8020 main email: welfarerightsmn [at] yahoo.com alt email: welfarerights [at] qwest.net --------10 of 12-------- Tracking a New Kind of Civil Disobedience by Kathleen Burge Sunday, February 21, 2010 The Boston Globe Common Dreams NEWTON, Mass. - As Newton resident Lisa Dodson, a Boston College sociology professor in the thick of a research project, was interviewing a grocery story manager in the Midwest about the difficulties of the low-income workers he supervised, he asked her a curious question: "Don't you want to know what this does to me too?'' "What is the worst wrong here?". asks BC professor Lisa Dodson: managers aiding workers or an unjust economy. (Joanne Rathe/Globe Staff) She did. And so the manager talked about the sense of unfairness he felt as a supervisor, making enough to live comfortably while overseeing workers who couldn't feed their families on the money they earned. That inequality, he told her, tainted his job, making him feel complicit in an unfair system that paid hard workers too little to cover basic needs. The interview changed the way Dodson talked with other supervisors and managers of low-income workers, and she began to find that many of them felt the same discomfort as the grocery store manager. And many went a step further, finding ways to undermine the system and slip their workers extra money, food, or time needed to care for sick children. She was surprised how widespread these acts were. In her new book, "The Moral Underground: How Ordinary Americans Subvert an Unfair Economy,'' she called such behavior "economic disobedience.'' As Dodson's questions grew more pointed, she began to hear fascinating stories. Andrew, a manager in a large Midwest food business, said he put extra money in the paychecks of those earning a "poverty wage,'' punched out their time cards at the usual quitting time when they had to leave early for a doctor's appointment, and gave them food. Andrew had decided that by supervising workers who were treated unfairly - paid too little and subjected to inflexible schedules that prevented them from taking care of their families - he was playing a direct role in the unfair system, and so he was morally obligated to act. Dodson concluded that Andrew and many like him were following the American tradition of civil disobedience - this time, against the economy - and creating a "moral underground.'' But her book, which came out late last year, has provoked debate about the morality of such acts. After Dodson talked about her book on a radio program, American Public Media's "Marketplace,'' some listeners posted comments on the show's website arguing that supervisors like Andrew are cheating their employers. Referring to the show's host, a listener from Leesburg, Va., wrote, "I was surprised that throughout the entire interview, neither Tess Vigeland nor Ms. Dodson touched on what would seem to me a rather crucial point - that these 'Ordinary Americans' are stealing from the companies who employ them. "The examples Ms. Dodson gave . . . are acts of theft from the companies, yet they are described as if somehow moral and virtuous. It's one thing for me to see someone in need and open my wallet; its quite another to address that need by giving something I've stolen from my neighbor.'' Although Dodson makes clear where she stands - the subtitle of her book includes the phrase "unfair economy'' - she said she believes the debate is important. "I think that this is a really important conversation that we should have in this country,'' Dodson said. "What is the worst wrong here? Is it to break a rule or to pass some food over, or is it that we have tens of millions of children and people in families that are working as hard as they can and they can't take care of their families?'' Not all supervisors felt troubled by the plight of those who worked under them. Dodson interviewed supervisors who said they had no obligation beyond the bottom line of their company; some complained bitterly about the work ethic of those who filled low-wage jobs. Dodson has had an unusual career trajectory for an academic. She was a union activist and an obstetrical nurse in Dorchester before she began teaching, first at Harvard and now at Boston College. In her first book, "Don't Call Us Out of Name: The Untold Lives of Women and Girls in Poor America,'' Dodson studied how women and their families coped in the face of welfare reform as their safety net vanished. This time, though, she was drawn largely to the stories of those Americans who worked with the working poor, suggesting that the difficulties of that group also affect the lives of those who intersect with them. "I feel as though there's this tendency is this society to kind of think about low-income people as those people over there,'' she said, "as though it's an experience that's sort of marginal and distant from those of us who are not poor.'' In her new book, some of the most wrenching stories are about women who cannot afford child care and leave their children unattended at home, asking older children to watch the younger ones. They feared social service agencies would investigate them for neglect, but they felt they had no choice if they were going to keep their jobs. "It was very common for parents to tell me that their kids spent a lot of time all by themselves at home,'' Dodson said. "That puts the parent into just an untenable position: You're a bad worker or you're a bad parent.'' 2010 The Globe Media Corp. --------11 of 12-------- Climate Skeptics Are Recycled Critics of Controls on Tobacco and Acid Rain by Jeffrey Sachs Sunday, February 21, 2010 The Observer/UK Common Dreams We must not be distracted from science's urgent message: we are fuelling dangerous changes in Earth's climate In the weeks before and after the Copenhagen climate change conference last December, the science of climate change came under harsh attack by critics who contend that climate scientists have deliberately suppressed evidence - and that the science itself is severely flawed. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global group of experts charged with assessing the state of climate science, has been accused of bias. The global public is disconcerted by these attacks. If experts cannot agree that there is a climate crisis, why should governments spend billions of dollars to address it? The fact is that the critics - who are few in number but aggressive in their attacks - are deploying tactics that they have honed for more than 25 years. During their long campaign, they have greatly exaggerated scientific disagreements in order to stop action on climate change, with special interests like Exxon Mobil footing the bill. Many books have recently documented the games played by the climate-change deniers. Merchants of Doubt, a new book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway set for release in mid-2010, will be an authoritative account of their misbehavior. The authors show that the same group of mischief-makers, given a platform by the free-market ideologues of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page, has consistently tried to confuse the public and discredit the scientists whose insights are helping to save the world from unintended environmental harm. Today's campaigners against action on climate change are in many cases backed by the same lobbies, individuals, and organizations that sided with the tobacco industry to discredit the science linking smoking and lung cancer. Later, they fought the scientific evidence that sulfur oxides from coal-fired power plants were causing "acid rain." Then, when it was discovered that certain chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were causing the depletion of ozone in the atmosphere, the same groups launched a nasty campaign to discredit that science, too. Later still, the group defended the tobacco giants against charges that second-hand smoke causes cancer and other diseases. And then, starting mainly in the 1980s, this same group took on the battle against climate change. What is amazing is that, although these attacks on science have been wrong for 30 years, they still sow doubts about established facts. The truth is that there is big money backing the climate-change deniers, whether it is companies that don't want to pay the extra costs of regulation, or free-market ideologues opposed to any government controls. The latest round of attacks involves two episodes. The first was the hacking of a climate-change research center in England. The emails that were stolen suggested a lack of forthrightness in the presentation of some climate data. Whatever the details of this specific case, the studies in question represent a tiny fraction of the overwhelming scientific evidence that points to the reality and urgency of man-made climate change. The second issue was a blatant error concerning glaciers that appeared in a major IPCC report. Here it should be understood that the IPCC issues thousands of pages of text. There are, no doubt, errors in those pages. But errors in the midst of a vast and complex report by the IPCC point to the inevitability of human shortcomings, not to any fundamental flaws in climate science. When the emails and the IPCC error were brought to light, editorial writers at The Wall Street Journal launched a vicious campaign describing climate science as a hoax and a conspiracy. They claimed that scientists were fabricating evidence in order to obtain government research grants - a ludicrous accusation, I thought at the time, given that the scientists under attack have devoted their lives to finding the truth, and have certainly not become rich relative to their peers in finance and business. But then I recalled that this line of attack - charging a scientific conspiracy to drum up "business" for science - was almost identical to that used by The Wall Street Journal and others in the past, when they fought controls on tobacco, acid rain, ozone depletion, second-hand smoke, and other dangerous pollutants. In other words, their arguments were systematic and contrived, not at all original to the circumstances. We are witnessing a predictable process by ideologues and right-wing think tanks and publications to discredit the scientific process. Their arguments have been repeatedly disproved for 30 years - time after time - but their aggressive methods of public propaganda succeed in causing delay and confusion. Climate change science is a wondrous intellectual activity. Great scientific minds have learned over the course of many decades to "read" the Earth's history, in order to understand how the climate system works. They have deployed brilliant physics, biology, and instrumentation (such as satellites reading detailed features of the Earth's systems) in order to advance our understanding. And the message is clear: large-scale use of oil, coal, and gas is threatening the biology and chemistry of the planet. We are fueling dangerous changes in Earth's climate and ocean chemistry, giving rise to extreme storms, droughts, and other hazards that will damage the food supply and the quality of life of the planet. The IPCC and the climate scientists are telling us a crucial message. We need urgently to transform our energy, transport, food, industrial, and construction systems to reduce the dangerous human impact on the climate. It is our responsibility to listen, to understand the message, and then to act. 2010 Guardian/UK Jeffrey Sachs is professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. He is also a special adviser to United Nations secretary-general on the millennium development goals. --------12 of 12-------- What Are We Bid for American Justice? by Bill Moyers and Michael Winship Saturday, February 20, 2010 CommonDreams.org That famous definition of a cynic as someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing has come to define this present moment of American politics. No wonder people have lost faith in politicians, parties and in our leadership. The power of money drives cynicism deep into the heart of every level of government. Everything - and everyone - comes with a price tag attached: from a seat at the table in the White House to a seat in Congress to the fate of health care reform, our environment and efforts to restrain Wall Street's greed and prevent another financial catastrophe. Our government is not broken; it's been bought out from under us, and on the right and the left and smack across the vast middle more and more Americans doubt representative democracy can survive the corruption of money. Last month, the Supreme Court carried cynicism to new heights with its decision in the "Citizens United" case. Spun from a legal dispute over the airing on a pay-per-view channel of a right-wing documentary attacking Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential primaries, the decision could have been made very narrowly. Instead, the conservative majority of five judges issued a sweeping opinion that greatly expands corporate power over our politics. Never mind that in at least two separate polls an overwhelming majority of Americans from both political parties say they want no part of the Court's decision; they want even more limits on the power of money in elections. But candidates and their campaign consultants are gearing up to exploit the court's gift in the fall elections. Just this week, that indispensable journalistic website Talking Points Memo reported that K&L Gates, an influential Washington lobbying firm, is alerting corporate clients on how to use trade associations like the Chamber of Commerce as passthroughs to dump unlimited amounts of cash directly into elections. They can advocate or oppose a candidate right up to Election Day, while keeping a low profile to prevent "public scrutiny" and bad press coverage. And media outlets already are licking their chops at the prospect of all that extra money to be spent buying airtime - as much as an additional $300 million. That's not even counting production and post-production costs of campaign ads, which are considerable. A bad situation just got worse. If you want to know just how much worse, look to the decision's potential impact on our court system, where integrity, independence and fair play count the most when it comes to preserving faith in our system. It's as susceptible to the lure of corporate wealth as the executive and legislative branches are. Ninety-eight percent of all the lawsuits in this country take place in the state courts. In 39 states, judges have to run for election - that's more than eighty percent of the state judges in America. The Citizens United decision makes those judges who are elected even more susceptible to the corrupting influence of cash, for many of their decisions in civil cases directly affect corporate America, and a significant amount of the money judges raise for their campaigns comes from lobbyists and lawyers. In the words of Charles W. Hall, a spokesman for the nonpartisan, judicial watchdog group Justice at Stake, "Corporate bottom lines are not affected by whether a bank robber gets 10 or 20 years in prison. The bottom lines are affected however by whether a large scale lawsuit is upheld or overturned." During the 1990's, candidates for high court judgeships in states around the country and the parties that supported them raised $85 million dollars for their campaigns. Since the year 2000, the numbers have more than doubled to over $200 million. The nine justices currently serving on the Texas Supreme Court have raised nearly $12 million in campaign contributions. The race for a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court last year was the most expensive judicial race in the country, with more than four and a half million dollars spent by the Democrats and Republicans. Now, with the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, corporate money's muscle just got a big hypodermic full of steroids. As Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in his 90-page Citizens United dissent, "At a time when concerns about the conduct of judicial elections have reached a fever pitch... the Court today unleashes the floodgates of corporate and union general treasury spending in these races." States that elect their judges, he said, "after today, may no longer have the ability to place modest limits on corporate electioneering even if they believe such limits to be critical to maintaining the integrity of their judicial systems." No wonder that legal experts, including former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (the only living current or former Supreme Court member to have been an elected state court judge), have called for states with judicial elections to switch to a system of merit selection. Judges would be appointed but possibly subject to "retention elections" in which voters can simply vote thumbs up or down as to whether jurists are qualified to remain on the bench. Until such changes are made, the temptations of corporate cash mean that in those states where judicial elections still prevail there hangs a crooked sign on every courthouse reading, "Justice for Sale." Bill Moyers is managing editor and Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers. From shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu Sun Feb 21 21:09:44 2010 Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:08:30 -0600 (CST) From: David Shove <shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu> To: David Shove <shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu> Subject: What Are We Bid for American Justice?by Bill Moyers and Michael Winship (fwd) Published on Saturday, February 20, 2010 by CommonDreams.org What Are We Bid for American Justice? by Bill Moyers and Michael Winship That famous definition of a cynic as someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing has come to define this present moment of American politics. No wonder people have lost faith in politicians, parties and in our leadership. The power of money drives cynicism deep into the heart of every level of government. Everything - and everyone - comes with a price tag attached: from a seat at the table in the White House to a seat in Congress to the fate of health care reform, our environment and efforts to restrain Wall Street's greed and prevent another financial catastrophe. Our government is not broken; it's been bought out from under us, and on the right and the left and smack across the vast middle more and more Americans doubt representative democracy can survive the corruption of money. Last month, the Supreme Court carried cynicism to new heights with its decision in the "Citizens United" case. Spun from a legal dispute over the airing on a pay-per-view channel of a right-wing documentary attacking Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential primaries, the decision could have been made very narrowly. Instead, the conservative majority of five judges issued a sweeping opinion that greatly expands corporate power over our politics. Never mind that in at least two separate polls an overwhelming majority of Americans from both political parties say they want no part of the Court's decision; they want even more limits on the power of money in elections. But candidates and their campaign consultants are gearing up to exploit the court's gift in the fall elections. Just this week, that indispensable journalistic website Talking Points Memo reported that K&L Gates, an influential Washington lobbying firm, is alerting corporate clients on how to use trade associations like the Chamber of Commerce as passthroughs to dump unlimited amounts of cash directly into elections. They can advocate or oppose a candidate right up to Election Day, while keeping a low profile to prevent "public scrutiny" and bad press coverage. And media outlets already are licking their chops at the prospect of all that extra money to be spent buying airtime - as much as an additional $300 million. That's not even counting production and post-production costs of campaign ads, which are considerable. A bad situation just got worse. If you want to know just how much worse, look to the decision's potential impact on our court system, where integrity, independence and fair play count the most when it comes to preserving faith in our system. It's as susceptible to the lure of corporate wealth as the executive and legislative branches are. Ninety-eight percent of all the lawsuits in this country take place in the state courts. In 39 states, judges have to run for election - that's more than eighty percent of the state judges in America. The Citizens United decision makes those judges who are elected even more susceptible to the corrupting influence of cash, for many of their decisions in civil cases directly affect corporate America, and a significant amount of the money judges raise for their campaigns comes from lobbyists and lawyers. In the words of Charles W. Hall, a spokesman for the nonpartisan, judicial watchdog group Justice at Stake, "Corporate bottom lines are not affected by whether a bank robber gets 10 or 20 years in prison. The bottom lines are affected however by whether a large scale lawsuit is upheld or overturned." During the 1990's, candidates for high court judgeships in states around the country and the parties that supported them raised $85 million dollars for their campaigns. Since the year 2000, the numbers have more than doubled to over $200 million. The nine justices currently serving on the Texas Supreme Court have raised nearly $12 million in campaign contributions. The race for a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court last year was the most expensive judicial race in the country, with more than four and a half million dollars spent by the Democrats and Republicans. Now, with the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, corporate money's muscle just got a big hypodermic full of steroids. As Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in his 90-page Citizens United dissent, "At a time when concerns about the conduct of judicial elections have reached a fever pitch... the Court today unleashes the floodgates of corporate and union general treasury spending in these races." States that elect their judges, he said, "after today, may no longer have the ability to place modest limits on corporate electioneering even if they believe such limits to be critical to maintaining the integrity of their judicial systems." No wonder that legal experts, including former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (the only living current or former Supreme Court member to have been an elected state court judge), have called for states with judicial elections to switch to a system of merit selection. Judges would be appointed but possibly subject to "retention elections" in which voters can simply vote thumbs up or down as to whether jurists are qualified to remain on the bench. Until such changes are made, the temptations of corporate cash mean that in those states where judicial elections still prevail there hangs a crooked sign on every courthouse reading, "Justice for Sale." Bill Moyers is managing editor and Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - David Shove shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu rhymes with clove Progressive Calendar over 2225 subscribers as of 12.19.02 please send all messages in plain text no attachments vote third party for president for congress now and forever Socialism YES Capitalism NO To GO DIRECTLY to an item, eg --------8 of x-------- do a find on --8 Research almost any topic raised here at: CounterPunch http://counterpunch.org Dissident Voice http://dissidentvoice.org Common Dreams http://commondreams.org Once you're there, do a search on your topic, eg obama drones
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.