By Will Parry
Each and every issue on our November ballot, if approved by voters, will affect the quality of life in our state for good or for evil, and for years to come. Here’s an effort to help our readers cast an informed vote on a very complicated ballot.
Five of the seven measures due to come before the electorate have this in common: They are the work of narrow special interests, designed to undermine existing institutions or programs and to increase private profit at public expense. None of the five deserve five cents worth of support.
Here are the “dirty five”:
Initiative 1082: The welfare of every injured worker is on the line here. The insurance industry and the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) want to privatize workers’ compensation, to open the door to domination of the system by insurance companies.
Long ago, Washington workers gave up the right to sue their employers in exchange for “sure and certain relief” – that is, for the right to receive pay and care and job retraining when job injury or job disease strike.
I-1082 would enable BIAW and the likes of AIG and Liberty Mutual to transform our nonprofit system, challenging, delaying and denying claims in the classic manner of health insurers. The measure would drive up employers’ costs by 25 percent or more, cost jobs, and compel taxpayers to bail out any insurer who became insolvent. Written by and for private insurance, it would wreck a program that has functioned well for decades.
Initiative 1107: The Office of Financial Management (OFM) says I-1107 will reduce revenue to the state by $352 million and to local governments by $83 million over the next five years. This during a deep, ongoing recession labeled by Governor Chris Gregoire “the worst in 80 years.”
But I-1107 will do wonders for the big national beverage companies by repealing small, mostly temporary taxes on soda pop, gum, candy and bottled water. That’s why the big soft drink companies have already poured $10 million into the campaign to enact the measure.
Revenue produced by I-1107’s small taxes on nonessential products helps to fund education, health care, senior services – or at the very least, to ward off cuts in those programs.
Initiatives 1100 and 1105: Both measures would end the carefully regulated sale of liquor in our state by privatizing the business. It’s estimated that passage of either would increase the number of outlets from the present 340 to as many as 5,000 – hard stuff in every corner drug store.
Privatization would cost the state. OFM estimates a reduction in state revenues from liquor sales of $277 million over five years under I-1100, and up to $730 million over five years under I-1105.
Either initiative would end Washington’s leadership in having the fewest illegal sales of any state. Either would increase illegal sales to underage persons, by up to 400 percent, according to the state auditor. And either would wipe out a thousand stable, family-wage jobs.
The liquor interests could care less. At our deadline, backers had poured $1.2 million into I-1100 and $2.2 million into I-1005. Booze bucks a-plenty to underwrite one big statewide binge.
Initiative 1053: Tim Eyman’s latest gridlock initiative would require a two-thirds vote to enact any revenue-raising legislation. Thus it would give a minority of legislators veto power over the majority. It would be our state’s counterpart to the 60-vote requirement that has tied the U.S. Senate in knots.
Passage of I-1053 would compel the 2011 legislature to deal with an anticipated $3 billion revenue shortfall with no recourse other than brutal cuts and drastic state employee layoffs.
Blood-soaked oil money is bankrolling the Eyman initiative. BP Corporation of North America, the architect of the Gulf oil disaster, and Tesoro Company, Inc., who gave us the Anacortes refinery explosion and fire, are the top donors to I-1053 at $65,000 each. BP killed 11 workers and Tesoro seven in their ghastly April dance of death.
So much for the “dirty five.” Let’s look now at two positive measures.
I-1098: It brings a long-overdue measure of equity to our state’s tax system. It establishes a limited income tax on the wealthiest 3 percent of Washingtonians. It helps thousands of small businesses by exempting them from the business and occupations tax. And it helps homeowners by reducing the state’s portion of the property tax by 20 percent.
I-1098’s tax on high incomes will generate about $2 billion a year, wholly dedicated to education and health care. And the money’s needed. Washington currently ranks 46th of the 50 states in the amount of our economy we invest in education. As for health care, there are 100,000 residents on the waiting list for the state’s Basic Health Plan right now.
(To volunteer for I-1098, use the form inserted with this issue of the Retiree Advocate.)
Referendum 52: A quality education also depends on the quality of the school buildings. Passage of Referendum 52 will enable the state to sell bonds to fund an energy refit of schools across the state. Nearly half our schools were built, or were last remodeled, 40 or more years ago. A retrofit will remove asbestos, mold, lead and other toxics. New energy-efficient systems will save money for years to come.
And the retrofit will create an estimated 30,000 jobs in a time of acute need, even as it gives our children the learning environment they deserve.
For our children, our health and our state’s future: YES on Initiative 1098 and on Referendum 52! NO on the ‘dirty five’ -- Initiatives 1082, 1107, 1100, 1105, and 1053!
Back to Home
Friday, September 3, 2010
Social Security: It’s there for all of us
By Marilyn Watkins
For 75 years, Social Security has been the foundation of economic security for Americans. It represents the best of American values, rewarding hard work, looking out for family and community, and honoring the contributions retirees have made to our current prosperity.
Despite its success and overwhelming popularity, the program faces two serious threats – but not the ones mainstream media have focused on.
The first threat is that the majority of young people are convinced they’ll never get Social Security. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that three fourths of those 18 to 34 believe they won’t receive Social Security when they retire. Even 56% of retirees believe their benefits will be cut. That level of resigned skepticism means voters are less likely to demand that Congress protect and strengthen the program.
The second threat stems from the deficit reduction frenzy. President Obama’s commission to consider ways to reduce the federal deficit is to make recommendations to Congress by December 1. Congressional leadership has agreed to an up or down vote. Prominent among the “solutions” under consideration are cuts to future Social Security benefits.
But Social Security has run surpluses for decades. It is in no way responsible for the federal deficit, nor does it face any looming crisis that needs to be “fixed.” Let’s take a look at the facts.
Social Security is not only the main source of income for seniors. Young Americans and their children are protected by its disability and survivors insurance if the unthinkable happens. In 2009, 3.4 million children through age 19 received Social Security benefits directly, and more than 3 million children lived in households with a beneficiary.
Social Security is also solidly financed. Its resources can continue to provide growing benefits clear through the end of the century.
When Social Security did face a financing problem during the 1970s and early 1980s, Congress raised benefits, instituted automatic COLAs, and raised payroll taxes both to finance those improvements and to build up the Trust Fund for the retirement of the baby boomers. The Trust Fund has now grown to $2.5 trillion.
When we deposit money in the bank, we receive interest because the bank loans out those funds for investments in homes and businesses. So, too, the federal government “invests” the Trust Fund in college loans, Head Start, transportation projects, basic research, and public structures that benefit all Americans.
Such investments make the future workforce more productive and boost economic growth. In the long run this means more revenue for Social Security. Loans from Social Security also enable the federal government to borrow less from individuals and foreign governments, and to keep personal income and corporate taxes low.
Every year, the Social Security Trustees project the program’s finances 75 years into the future. Doing so requires making numerous assumptions about economic growth, productivity, wages, fertility, longevity, immigration rates, and other factors. Three scenarios are created.
Under the assumptions of the “low cost” scenario, the Trust Fund will never be depleted. Under the “Intermediate” scenario, the Fund is projected to continue growing until 2025. Then Social Security will draw down the Fund as planned. In 2037 the assets of the Trust Fund will be depleted and payroll taxes alone will cover 78% of benefits under the current formula.
By that time everyone will be richer because of continuing gains in productivity. Average wages after accounting for inflation are expected to rise from $43,000 in 2010 to $60,000 in 2037. Typical retirement benefits will increase from $17,676 to $24,700 annually. If the Trust Fund is exhausted in 2037, payroll taxes alone would cover benefits averaging about $1,600 more than today’s typical retiree receives after inflation.
If the Fund does run out, Congress could eliminate the arbitrary cap on income subject to payroll taxes (currently $106,800) or adopt some other strategy to maintain the promised level of benefits.
The loudest advocates for reducing Social Security benefits seem to be saying, “To avoid having to cut benefits in the future, we should cut benefits for future recipients now.” What cutting future benefits now really does is allow tax rates on the wealthiest to remain at historic lows.
The Bush tax cuts set the federal income tax on the wealthiest lower than at any point since 1931, except for the years from 1988 to 1992. The Congressional Budget Office says those tax cuts have already increased the deficit by $1.6 trillion, and if extended, will keep future federal revenues well below anticipated expenses – including the cost of making good on the Social Security Trust Fund.
Some argue we must cut benefits because people are living longer. But raising the retirement age or otherwise cutting benefits is both unnecessary and certain to cause hardship. Ongoing increases in productivity mean workers in coming decades will have higher standards of living and be able to support more retirees – just as today a few farmers can feed many urbanites. And people who are in physically demanding jobs or who face early disability often cannot work even to age 65, let alone to 70.
Rather than debating cuts, we should focus on ways to increase benefits for those who are struggling. People of color and women are especially likely to be poor or near poor in their later years. Both groups earn far less than white men and have less access to pensions. Women also live five years longer than men on average, and take more time out of the labor force for family care.
Social Security could be strengthened by:
• Increasing benefits for the lowest income earners;
• Increasing benefits for a surviving spouse to 75% of the couple’s pre-death benefit;
• Providing Family Care Credits; and
• Treating state-recognized same-sex couples and their families equally with heterosexual couples.
A well-orchestrated and lavishly-funded misinformation campaign by Social Security’s opponents, echoed by opportunistic politicians and rarely examined by the media, has convinced most Americans that Social Security is going bankrupt. A proactive campaign of positive reforms is the best way to reach the public with the truth.
Social Security is more important now than ever. Traditional pensions have all but disappeared. Assets have evaporated. Half the workforce has no retirement plan other than Social Security.
We can never predict who will become disabled, who will die young leaving behind dependent children, or who will live to be 100. But we do know that every year a certain percentage of Americans face these challenges.
Social Security is there for the lucky and the unlucky. It is there for all of us. It will continue to be there only if we fight to protect it.
Back to Home
For 75 years, Social Security has been the foundation of economic security for Americans. It represents the best of American values, rewarding hard work, looking out for family and community, and honoring the contributions retirees have made to our current prosperity.
Despite its success and overwhelming popularity, the program faces two serious threats – but not the ones mainstream media have focused on.
The first threat is that the majority of young people are convinced they’ll never get Social Security. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that three fourths of those 18 to 34 believe they won’t receive Social Security when they retire. Even 56% of retirees believe their benefits will be cut. That level of resigned skepticism means voters are less likely to demand that Congress protect and strengthen the program.
The second threat stems from the deficit reduction frenzy. President Obama’s commission to consider ways to reduce the federal deficit is to make recommendations to Congress by December 1. Congressional leadership has agreed to an up or down vote. Prominent among the “solutions” under consideration are cuts to future Social Security benefits.
But Social Security has run surpluses for decades. It is in no way responsible for the federal deficit, nor does it face any looming crisis that needs to be “fixed.” Let’s take a look at the facts.
Social Security is not only the main source of income for seniors. Young Americans and their children are protected by its disability and survivors insurance if the unthinkable happens. In 2009, 3.4 million children through age 19 received Social Security benefits directly, and more than 3 million children lived in households with a beneficiary.
Social Security is also solidly financed. Its resources can continue to provide growing benefits clear through the end of the century.
When Social Security did face a financing problem during the 1970s and early 1980s, Congress raised benefits, instituted automatic COLAs, and raised payroll taxes both to finance those improvements and to build up the Trust Fund for the retirement of the baby boomers. The Trust Fund has now grown to $2.5 trillion.
When we deposit money in the bank, we receive interest because the bank loans out those funds for investments in homes and businesses. So, too, the federal government “invests” the Trust Fund in college loans, Head Start, transportation projects, basic research, and public structures that benefit all Americans.
Such investments make the future workforce more productive and boost economic growth. In the long run this means more revenue for Social Security. Loans from Social Security also enable the federal government to borrow less from individuals and foreign governments, and to keep personal income and corporate taxes low.
Every year, the Social Security Trustees project the program’s finances 75 years into the future. Doing so requires making numerous assumptions about economic growth, productivity, wages, fertility, longevity, immigration rates, and other factors. Three scenarios are created.
Under the assumptions of the “low cost” scenario, the Trust Fund will never be depleted. Under the “Intermediate” scenario, the Fund is projected to continue growing until 2025. Then Social Security will draw down the Fund as planned. In 2037 the assets of the Trust Fund will be depleted and payroll taxes alone will cover 78% of benefits under the current formula.
By that time everyone will be richer because of continuing gains in productivity. Average wages after accounting for inflation are expected to rise from $43,000 in 2010 to $60,000 in 2037. Typical retirement benefits will increase from $17,676 to $24,700 annually. If the Trust Fund is exhausted in 2037, payroll taxes alone would cover benefits averaging about $1,600 more than today’s typical retiree receives after inflation.
If the Fund does run out, Congress could eliminate the arbitrary cap on income subject to payroll taxes (currently $106,800) or adopt some other strategy to maintain the promised level of benefits.
The loudest advocates for reducing Social Security benefits seem to be saying, “To avoid having to cut benefits in the future, we should cut benefits for future recipients now.” What cutting future benefits now really does is allow tax rates on the wealthiest to remain at historic lows.
The Bush tax cuts set the federal income tax on the wealthiest lower than at any point since 1931, except for the years from 1988 to 1992. The Congressional Budget Office says those tax cuts have already increased the deficit by $1.6 trillion, and if extended, will keep future federal revenues well below anticipated expenses – including the cost of making good on the Social Security Trust Fund.
Some argue we must cut benefits because people are living longer. But raising the retirement age or otherwise cutting benefits is both unnecessary and certain to cause hardship. Ongoing increases in productivity mean workers in coming decades will have higher standards of living and be able to support more retirees – just as today a few farmers can feed many urbanites. And people who are in physically demanding jobs or who face early disability often cannot work even to age 65, let alone to 70.
Rather than debating cuts, we should focus on ways to increase benefits for those who are struggling. People of color and women are especially likely to be poor or near poor in their later years. Both groups earn far less than white men and have less access to pensions. Women also live five years longer than men on average, and take more time out of the labor force for family care.
Social Security could be strengthened by:
• Increasing benefits for the lowest income earners;
• Increasing benefits for a surviving spouse to 75% of the couple’s pre-death benefit;
• Providing Family Care Credits; and
• Treating state-recognized same-sex couples and their families equally with heterosexual couples.
A well-orchestrated and lavishly-funded misinformation campaign by Social Security’s opponents, echoed by opportunistic politicians and rarely examined by the media, has convinced most Americans that Social Security is going bankrupt. A proactive campaign of positive reforms is the best way to reach the public with the truth.
Social Security is more important now than ever. Traditional pensions have all but disappeared. Assets have evaporated. Half the workforce has no retirement plan other than Social Security.
We can never predict who will become disabled, who will die young leaving behind dependent children, or who will live to be 100. But we do know that every year a certain percentage of Americans face these challenges.
Social Security is there for the lucky and the unlucky. It is there for all of us. It will continue to be there only if we fight to protect it.
Back to Home
McDermott pledges on Labor Day
Join the PSARA contingent on Monday, September 6 – Labor Day – as Congressman Jim McDermott publicly signs a pledge to defend the integrity of Social Security. The ceremony will take place during organized labor’s traditional summer-ending holiday celebration at Seattle’s Woodland Park. The event runs from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Shelters 1, 2 and 3. McDermott is scheduled to sign the pledge at around 12:30 p.m.
Hot dogs, ice cream, coffee, popcorn and soda are free, with live music by the Fabulous Boomers and – a special treat – Mariachi Grullence, from Jalisco, Mexico. As always, PSARA’s literature table will offer brownies and chocolate chip cookies.
Congressional candidates of both parties throughout the state are being asked to join McDermott in pledging to reject any and all attempts to weaken Social Security, and to work instead to strengthen it. Thus far, Susan DelBene, Democratic candidate in the Eighth Congressional District, has said she will sign, and we are awaiting confirmation of a tentative agreement to sign from Fifth District Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
The pledge campaign is being led by Social Security Works/Washington, a broad coalition formed in response to attacks on Social Security emanating from the federal deficit reduction commission.
Back to Home
Hot dogs, ice cream, coffee, popcorn and soda are free, with live music by the Fabulous Boomers and – a special treat – Mariachi Grullence, from Jalisco, Mexico. As always, PSARA’s literature table will offer brownies and chocolate chip cookies.
Congressional candidates of both parties throughout the state are being asked to join McDermott in pledging to reject any and all attempts to weaken Social Security, and to work instead to strengthen it. Thus far, Susan DelBene, Democratic candidate in the Eighth Congressional District, has said she will sign, and we are awaiting confirmation of a tentative agreement to sign from Fifth District Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
The pledge campaign is being led by Social Security Works/Washington, a broad coalition formed in response to attacks on Social Security emanating from the federal deficit reduction commission.
Back to Home
Judy Cato is convention speaker
Judy Cato, executive vice president of the Alliance for Retired Americans, will join widely-known economist Dean Baker Wednesday, September 29, as speakers at the annual convention of the Washington State Alliance for Retired Americans (WASARA).
Cato, a veteran housing activist, is in charge of ARA’s community advocacy and outreach.
Registration begins at 8:30 a.m. and the convention will run from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Machinists Lodge 751 hall, 9125 15th Place South in Seattle. For directions, or for convention information, call (206) 448-0859. The registration fee of $25 covers materials and lunch.
(Registration form.)
The agenda includes workshops on Social Security, led by Steve Kofahl, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 3937; and on health care legislation, led by Robby Stern, who serves both as vice president of WASARA and as president of PSARA.
Back to Home
Cato, a veteran housing activist, is in charge of ARA’s community advocacy and outreach.
Registration begins at 8:30 a.m. and the convention will run from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Machinists Lodge 751 hall, 9125 15th Place South in Seattle. For directions, or for convention information, call (206) 448-0859. The registration fee of $25 covers materials and lunch.
(Registration form.)
The agenda includes workshops on Social Security, led by Steve Kofahl, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 3937; and on health care legislation, led by Robby Stern, who serves both as vice president of WASARA and as president of PSARA.
Back to Home
We’re nearing the home stretch
It’s not quite the last of the ninth inning, but we’re entering the home stretch and it’s time for the team to drive for the winning touchdown.
Translating today’s sorry bouquet of mixed sports metaphors, we’re looking at September, October, November and December to reach (and exceed) our goal of 250 new members in 2010.
We have now signed up 165 new members since January 1, 2010. PSARA has never in its history grown that fast. We can be proud of that growth. But not so cocky that we get tackled short of the goal line. Here’s what we propose.
Many of our members have responded to our monthly appeals in these pages. Some have come through for us time and again. We salute them. But a majority of our 900 members have yet to sign up their first recruit or send in their first gift membership. We appeal to these good members: Identify a friend, relative, neighbor or workmate right now. Introduce that person to The Retiree Advocate. Sign that person up. If need be, offer to give her or him an introductory year’s membership.
Let every member help pick up the pace as we near the finish line. Make September a victorious month!
Back to Home
Translating today’s sorry bouquet of mixed sports metaphors, we’re looking at September, October, November and December to reach (and exceed) our goal of 250 new members in 2010.
We have now signed up 165 new members since January 1, 2010. PSARA has never in its history grown that fast. We can be proud of that growth. But not so cocky that we get tackled short of the goal line. Here’s what we propose.
Many of our members have responded to our monthly appeals in these pages. Some have come through for us time and again. We salute them. But a majority of our 900 members have yet to sign up their first recruit or send in their first gift membership. We appeal to these good members: Identify a friend, relative, neighbor or workmate right now. Introduce that person to The Retiree Advocate. Sign that person up. If need be, offer to give her or him an introductory year’s membership.
Let every member help pick up the pace as we near the finish line. Make September a victorious month!
Back to Home
We will ally with those who fight to create investment in America.
By Robby Stern
More and more workers are losing their jobs. The “recovery” is weak and faltering. These are ominous tidings. How to address this economic crisis was a hot topic at the just completed Washington State Labor Council convention in Tacoma. Policy makers and our nation as a whole must address fundamental questions: Do we want a manufacturing base in our country? Do we want a growing middle class rather than a declining middle class?
One thoughtful presentation at the convention asserted that any hope to achieve an economic recovery requires the immediate implementation by the federal government of a five point plan:
1. Take care of families hard hit by the downturn,
2. Rebuild America’s infrastructure.
3. Help state and local governments meet pressing needs
4. Put people back to work doing work that needs to be done
5. Ease the credit crunch for small and medium sized businesses.
Compare this five point program with the prevailing agenda of a large sector of the economic elite in our country: deregulate, privatize, globalize and dismantle the safety net. They care little about the promise of the social contract -- that working hard and playing by the rules will yield real opportunities for good quality of life for families and communities.
Our state and country need an industrial investment program that requires coordinated economic development, quality job creation, raising the standard of living and committing to a higher quality of life for the people of our country. We have to move beyond the goal of industry success at any cost. That narrow goal leads to policies that facilitate off-shoring of jobs, a phenomenon we have seen expand exponentially in the last four decades, leading to the loss of quality jobs in our country.
PSARA will join with those who push governments to implement programs that have as their goal raising the standard of living and quality of life for the majority of people while helping to build stronger communities. Government policies need to encourage investment in America. Unfortunately, the trend is just the opposite.
As an organization, we will ally ourselves with organizations and communities that fight to create investment in America. At the state level, we will join with those who want to bar contracting of state services offshore. We will work for transparency to identify those companies who get taxpayer dollars and then offshore jobs. We will avoid the trap that identifies Washington as the most trade dependent state in the country and therefore promotes a free trade policy that leads to the deterioration of the standard of living of our residents and of masses of people around the world. We will embrace protecting American jobs and raising the standard of living of our communities. We do not oppose trade, but it must be fair trade that benefits workers all over the world.
As one of the speakers at the State Labor Council convention stated, unfortunately government, which is supposed to be the referee, has instead given the ball to the other team and then joined them. We need government that places as its top agenda item the welfare, standard of living and quality of life of the people of this country and recognizes the terrible price paid by people all over the world as a result of unfettered and unregulated free trade.
The road ahead looks tough but the road to real recovery is clear. We need an economic investment program that creates millions of good paying jobs and that rebuilds our declining infrastructure and industrial capacity. We are the majority and we must mobilize smartly to assure a decent future for ourselves and the generations to come.
Back to Home
More and more workers are losing their jobs. The “recovery” is weak and faltering. These are ominous tidings. How to address this economic crisis was a hot topic at the just completed Washington State Labor Council convention in Tacoma. Policy makers and our nation as a whole must address fundamental questions: Do we want a manufacturing base in our country? Do we want a growing middle class rather than a declining middle class?
One thoughtful presentation at the convention asserted that any hope to achieve an economic recovery requires the immediate implementation by the federal government of a five point plan:
1. Take care of families hard hit by the downturn,
2. Rebuild America’s infrastructure.
3. Help state and local governments meet pressing needs
4. Put people back to work doing work that needs to be done
5. Ease the credit crunch for small and medium sized businesses.
Compare this five point program with the prevailing agenda of a large sector of the economic elite in our country: deregulate, privatize, globalize and dismantle the safety net. They care little about the promise of the social contract -- that working hard and playing by the rules will yield real opportunities for good quality of life for families and communities.
Our state and country need an industrial investment program that requires coordinated economic development, quality job creation, raising the standard of living and committing to a higher quality of life for the people of our country. We have to move beyond the goal of industry success at any cost. That narrow goal leads to policies that facilitate off-shoring of jobs, a phenomenon we have seen expand exponentially in the last four decades, leading to the loss of quality jobs in our country.
PSARA will join with those who push governments to implement programs that have as their goal raising the standard of living and quality of life for the majority of people while helping to build stronger communities. Government policies need to encourage investment in America. Unfortunately, the trend is just the opposite.
As an organization, we will ally ourselves with organizations and communities that fight to create investment in America. At the state level, we will join with those who want to bar contracting of state services offshore. We will work for transparency to identify those companies who get taxpayer dollars and then offshore jobs. We will avoid the trap that identifies Washington as the most trade dependent state in the country and therefore promotes a free trade policy that leads to the deterioration of the standard of living of our residents and of masses of people around the world. We will embrace protecting American jobs and raising the standard of living of our communities. We do not oppose trade, but it must be fair trade that benefits workers all over the world.
As one of the speakers at the State Labor Council convention stated, unfortunately government, which is supposed to be the referee, has instead given the ball to the other team and then joined them. We need government that places as its top agenda item the welfare, standard of living and quality of life of the people of this country and recognizes the terrible price paid by people all over the world as a result of unfettered and unregulated free trade.
The road ahead looks tough but the road to real recovery is clear. We need an economic investment program that creates millions of good paying jobs and that rebuilds our declining infrastructure and industrial capacity. We are the majority and we must mobilize smartly to assure a decent future for ourselves and the generations to come.
Back to Home
For Reina and our future, vote for I-1098
By Frieda Takamura
My young friend, Reina, has just completed her second year as a third grade teacher in South Seattle. Reina was a social worker for two years after college, but decided she wanted to work more closely with individual children, so with a hefty loan from the bank, she went back to graduate school to get her masters in teaching with an endorsement in bilingual education. With that specialty in a “hard to fill” position, she quickly got a job and come September, found herself in a class with twenty-two eager students, as racially, ethnically, socially, economically diverse as the South Seattle community from which they came.
It was a tough first year, trying to meet the many needs of her students and families, but it was also a tremendously satisfying year as she saw her students progress academically and as individuals, not to mention the growth she felt as a person and as a teacher. And she had escaped being laid off because of school district budget cuts. Most of the following summer she spent taking professional development classes and preparing for the coming year. Reina was excited to begin her second year. This year, though, her class-size had grown from twenty-two to twenty-eight students.
As the year went on, Reina’s frustration grew. Slashes in state education funding and the school district budget forced the school to reduce or eliminate classroom and student resources. Gone were the full time librarian, the art, music, and physical education specialists, the nurse, and many of the classroom aides. Reina filled the gaps because she knows students need more than the “3-R’s.” At the same time, she faced constant pressure to “raise academic standards and student achievement,” too often measured only in terms of high stakes tests, required without the provision of additional time, resources or support.
By June, Reina was physically and mentally exhausted as once again, she was faced with the possibility that she might not have a job in September because once again, the district was facing a fiscal crisis. Luckily for her students, Reina will return in September for her third year. But for how many more years of uncertainty and lack of resources can an enthusiastic, dedicated, caring teacher like Reina persevere? For how long can she continue to do what she loves and does best?
The passage of Initiative 1098 on November’s ballot will help provide the resources that the thousands of Reina’s in our schools need. By restoring and dedicating funds for education and basic health care, I-1098 will provide the stable revenue needed for the basic infrastructure of a healthy community. It will do this by requiring those who can most readily afford it (couples making more than $400,000 and individuals more than $200,000) to pay their fair share through a modest income tax.
If we truly believe that the “children are our future,” that “it takes a village to raise a child,” and that “public education is an investment for a stronger, prosperous America,” we must vote “YES” for I-1098. We must prove to the Reina’s of our state that we believe in and support them because they are indeed, ensuring that our future generations will be well educated and productive, and that they, in turn, will support us.
(Frieda Takamura is a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
Back to Home
My young friend, Reina, has just completed her second year as a third grade teacher in South Seattle. Reina was a social worker for two years after college, but decided she wanted to work more closely with individual children, so with a hefty loan from the bank, she went back to graduate school to get her masters in teaching with an endorsement in bilingual education. With that specialty in a “hard to fill” position, she quickly got a job and come September, found herself in a class with twenty-two eager students, as racially, ethnically, socially, economically diverse as the South Seattle community from which they came.
It was a tough first year, trying to meet the many needs of her students and families, but it was also a tremendously satisfying year as she saw her students progress academically and as individuals, not to mention the growth she felt as a person and as a teacher. And she had escaped being laid off because of school district budget cuts. Most of the following summer she spent taking professional development classes and preparing for the coming year. Reina was excited to begin her second year. This year, though, her class-size had grown from twenty-two to twenty-eight students.
As the year went on, Reina’s frustration grew. Slashes in state education funding and the school district budget forced the school to reduce or eliminate classroom and student resources. Gone were the full time librarian, the art, music, and physical education specialists, the nurse, and many of the classroom aides. Reina filled the gaps because she knows students need more than the “3-R’s.” At the same time, she faced constant pressure to “raise academic standards and student achievement,” too often measured only in terms of high stakes tests, required without the provision of additional time, resources or support.
By June, Reina was physically and mentally exhausted as once again, she was faced with the possibility that she might not have a job in September because once again, the district was facing a fiscal crisis. Luckily for her students, Reina will return in September for her third year. But for how many more years of uncertainty and lack of resources can an enthusiastic, dedicated, caring teacher like Reina persevere? For how long can she continue to do what she loves and does best?
The passage of Initiative 1098 on November’s ballot will help provide the resources that the thousands of Reina’s in our schools need. By restoring and dedicating funds for education and basic health care, I-1098 will provide the stable revenue needed for the basic infrastructure of a healthy community. It will do this by requiring those who can most readily afford it (couples making more than $400,000 and individuals more than $200,000) to pay their fair share through a modest income tax.
If we truly believe that the “children are our future,” that “it takes a village to raise a child,” and that “public education is an investment for a stronger, prosperous America,” we must vote “YES” for I-1098. We must prove to the Reina’s of our state that we believe in and support them because they are indeed, ensuring that our future generations will be well educated and productive, and that they, in turn, will support us.
(Frieda Takamura is a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
Back to Home
Immigration reform we can be proud of
By Kendra Anderson, OneAmerica Organizer
We are faced with a moral crisis in our country because of the irresponsible inaction of our federal government in the face of our broken immigration system. Not updated for decades, our current system simply does not make sense for families or businesses across the nation and in Washington State. We are penalizing hardworking immigrants who are needed for our economy to function, and we are tearing apart families who want only to be together—simply because we lack the courage to fix the underlying system to allow people to come in legally.
In light of this moral crisis, OneAmerica is working on the ground with communities across Washington State as part of a national campaign for comprehensive immigration reform including:
• Legalization and a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are here;
• Family reunification and a clearing of the backlogs of applications for those who have applied legally for their family members and yet must endure cruelly long waits to be reunited;
• Full worker protections, and
• Due process and fairness in the immigration system.
We stand united as faith leaders, union members, retired people, veterans, teachers, lawyers, and community members in solidarity with the millions who contribute both to our communities and to our economy while being denied full access to either.
In fact, numerous reports show that immigrants, including those who are undocumented, not only make a substantial contribution to our economy, but could help lift us out of the recession. The Center for American Progress estimates that passing comprehensive immigration reform that includes creating a pathway to legal status for unauthorized immigrants would yield at least $1.5 trillion in cumulative U.S. gross domestic product over 10 years. And in 2009, here in Washington State, the purchasing power of Asians totaled $16.6 billion and that of Latinos $13.4 billion, the Immigration Policy Center reports.
Our leaders in Washington, D.C. continue to do nothing. Both President Obama and the Republicans propose enforcement-only or “secure the border first” strategies that are wasteful, that do not make us safer, and that cost lives. A comprehensive immigration reform bill has been introduced in the House, but leaders there are waiting for the Senate to move on a bill discussed by Senators Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham last spring. And like families across the country, we keep waiting.
But we’re also taking action. Early this year, OneAmerica helped launch the Washington Immigration Reform Coalition (WIRC) FOR America, more than 60 organizations, representing unions and faith communities across the state, working together to pass national reform this year. WIRC has marched in the nation’s capitol, held rallies across Washington State, met with key congressional members, collected thousands of petition signatures, and engaged in civil disobedience actions in downtown Seattle.
And the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans is playing an active part in our success.
To get involved with WIRC in upcoming actions for immigration reform across the state, please contact Kendra@weareoneamerica.org, Join us as we keep fighting for immigration reform we can be proud of.
Back to Home
We are faced with a moral crisis in our country because of the irresponsible inaction of our federal government in the face of our broken immigration system. Not updated for decades, our current system simply does not make sense for families or businesses across the nation and in Washington State. We are penalizing hardworking immigrants who are needed for our economy to function, and we are tearing apart families who want only to be together—simply because we lack the courage to fix the underlying system to allow people to come in legally.
In light of this moral crisis, OneAmerica is working on the ground with communities across Washington State as part of a national campaign for comprehensive immigration reform including:
• Legalization and a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are here;
• Family reunification and a clearing of the backlogs of applications for those who have applied legally for their family members and yet must endure cruelly long waits to be reunited;
• Full worker protections, and
• Due process and fairness in the immigration system.
We stand united as faith leaders, union members, retired people, veterans, teachers, lawyers, and community members in solidarity with the millions who contribute both to our communities and to our economy while being denied full access to either.
In fact, numerous reports show that immigrants, including those who are undocumented, not only make a substantial contribution to our economy, but could help lift us out of the recession. The Center for American Progress estimates that passing comprehensive immigration reform that includes creating a pathway to legal status for unauthorized immigrants would yield at least $1.5 trillion in cumulative U.S. gross domestic product over 10 years. And in 2009, here in Washington State, the purchasing power of Asians totaled $16.6 billion and that of Latinos $13.4 billion, the Immigration Policy Center reports.
Our leaders in Washington, D.C. continue to do nothing. Both President Obama and the Republicans propose enforcement-only or “secure the border first” strategies that are wasteful, that do not make us safer, and that cost lives. A comprehensive immigration reform bill has been introduced in the House, but leaders there are waiting for the Senate to move on a bill discussed by Senators Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham last spring. And like families across the country, we keep waiting.
But we’re also taking action. Early this year, OneAmerica helped launch the Washington Immigration Reform Coalition (WIRC) FOR America, more than 60 organizations, representing unions and faith communities across the state, working together to pass national reform this year. WIRC has marched in the nation’s capitol, held rallies across Washington State, met with key congressional members, collected thousands of petition signatures, and engaged in civil disobedience actions in downtown Seattle.
And the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans is playing an active part in our success.
To get involved with WIRC in upcoming actions for immigration reform across the state, please contact Kendra@weareoneamerica.org, Join us as we keep fighting for immigration reform we can be proud of.
Back to Home
National Day of Action October 2
A mighty “National Day of Action” will bring “potentially hundreds of thousands” to the Lincoln Memorial in the nation’s capital Sunday, October 2. For more information, click here
Under the ringing slogan, “One Nation, Marching Toward Our Dream,” the more than 150 sponsoring organizations declare that “we can put Americans back to work…restore our middle class…(and) rebuild the country we love.”
Sponsors include the AFL-CIO and many of its affiliated unions, the NAACP, La Raza, the Leadership Council on Civil and Human Rights, and the Center for Community Change.
“Today we are a nation in crisis,” the sponsors declare. “In the last ten years, we have lost eight million jobs. At least 1.2 million families have lost or are losing their homes. Schools are closing and remaining classrooms are bursting at the seams. Employers have trampled the rights of workers to bargain for fair wages and benefits.
“We can make things right again. As we organize and energize and mobilize, we will show fellow Americans that together we can truly change our country. We are joining together, members of…more than 150 groups in all, to make a difference.”
Back to Home
Under the ringing slogan, “One Nation, Marching Toward Our Dream,” the more than 150 sponsoring organizations declare that “we can put Americans back to work…restore our middle class…(and) rebuild the country we love.”
Sponsors include the AFL-CIO and many of its affiliated unions, the NAACP, La Raza, the Leadership Council on Civil and Human Rights, and the Center for Community Change.
“Today we are a nation in crisis,” the sponsors declare. “In the last ten years, we have lost eight million jobs. At least 1.2 million families have lost or are losing their homes. Schools are closing and remaining classrooms are bursting at the seams. Employers have trampled the rights of workers to bargain for fair wages and benefits.
“We can make things right again. As we organize and energize and mobilize, we will show fellow Americans that together we can truly change our country. We are joining together, members of…more than 150 groups in all, to make a difference.”
Back to Home
After Gou-Dou-Gou-Dou: Building Haiti back better
By Peter Costantini
May in Haiti is the last month of the rainy season before the hurricanes begin to spin up out of the Atlantic. It’s a month when armadas of bloodthirsty mosquitoes patrol the enveloping humidity that thickens in the afternoon into slate-gray clouds and driving downpours. It is not a good month to be living in a tent. But about a million and a half Haitians still are, after losing their homes and often their family members in the January 12 earthquake.
I spent the month of May in Haiti as a volunteer and journalist. I saw some encouraging efforts at the grassroots level, where a strong community spirit has survived. I witnessed inspiring generosity, cooperation and inventiveness on the part of many Haitians in the face of unimaginable destruction.
But after the initial outpouring of emergency assistance, many international initiatives by the United Nations, the United States, and large non-governmental organizations seemed to become fragmented and disjointed as they tried to transition towards reconstruction. As for the Haitian government, perhaps a quarter of its employees were killed or injured, and its equivalent of the White House, Capitol, Supreme Court, and most federal departments were leveled. Much of it remained barely functional and disconnected from the needs of its citizens.
Now, over half a year after Gou-Dou-Gou-Dou (a nickname derived from the sound it made), why are so many people are still displaced and living in makeshift, unsafe camps?
The huge scale of the event itself may explain some of the slowness of the recovery. The death toll –estimated by the government at 220 thousand to 300 thousand in a county of 10 million – is equivalent to that of a major war.
The location of the epicenter just west of Port-au-Prince on the coastal plain meant that the full force struck the most heavily populated area. The nation’s capital, where the public and private sectors were excessively concentrated, was decimated. Total damages amounted to nearly $8 billion, about 20 percent more than Haiti’s yearly gross domestic product.
Everywhere, the prevalent poor quality of construction and the marginalization of poor people into unstable areas contributed heavily to the disaster. Fifty years of kleptocratic dictatorships, usually supported by our government, relieved occasionally by weak democratic governments, usually undermined by our government, left virtually no building regulations or urban planning.
Since long before the quake, decades of high-level looting of the economy had left roughly three-quarters of Haitians living on two or less dollars a day, with half of those earning under one dollar. As a result, 58 percent are undernourished and life expectancy is roughly 52 years. Adult literacy is 56 percent.
Some 75 percent of the people still live and work in rural areas, but agriculture accounts for only 28 percent of Haiti’s economic output. Seeking a livelihood, many rural residents have migrated to bidonvilles, the slums that skirt Port-au-Prince, where jobs, drinkable water and basic services are rare.
To respond to such a devastating geological and social blitzkrieg, a sustained Marshall Plan-like effort is clearly required of the world. And much of the initial response was generous. At a March conference in New York, international donors pledged $5.3 billion for the first year and a half, and more than $9 billion over five years. So far, though, only about 10 percent of the promised funds have actually been disbursed. In the U.S., enabling legislation for most of the aid is stalled in the Senate.
In Haiti, however, competing visions of how the aid will be used have intensified a long-running debate over what development should mean.
The initial United Nations plan envisions primarily the same model that had long been imposed on Haiti by international financial institutions and had failed before: industrial agriculture for export and offshore assembly manufacturing competing on the basis of low wages.
Many progressive Haitians and popular organizations say Haiti shouldn’t be re-built in the sense of restoring the previous dysfunctional government and economy – instead, they say, it needs to be built up from the grassroots for the first time to meet the needs of all its people and encourage more just and durable development.
Haiti’s large and sophisticated peasant and community organizations are also advancing alternative visions. Some advocate “agro-ecology”, which prioritizes sustainable small farming building on the organic farming that many Haitians have always practiced out of necessity.
For the 1.6 million people stuck in temporary camps, immediate prospects are dismal. Less than 2 percent of them have been moved into supposedly safer transitional camps with better drainage and stronger tents. The absence of clean water, sanitation and lighting leave women and children particularly vulnerable to crime, exploitation and disease.
Ominously, when a July 12 wind and rain storm well below hurricane strength struck the transitional resettlement camp at Corail, it destroyed the tents of nearly a quarter of the 7,000 residents. If a hurricane hits Port-au-Prince this season, which lasts until November, it could cause many more deaths and injuries.
Those of us who want to support Haiti need to hold donors accountable for disbursing all the aid they pledged. Beyond that, we should follow the money to make sure that it quickly develops safe homes and communities for those in desperate situations and that it empowers Haitian citizens and organizations to democratically build Haiti back better for all.
_________________________________
Peter Costantini writes for Inter Press Service (www.ipsnews.net) and blogs on Huffington Post at (www.huffingtonpost.com/crossover-dreams).
Note: Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group and Architecture for Humanity need experienced masons, concrete workers and building contractors to do training in Haiti. Contact jpetercostantini@comcast.net.
Back to Home
May in Haiti is the last month of the rainy season before the hurricanes begin to spin up out of the Atlantic. It’s a month when armadas of bloodthirsty mosquitoes patrol the enveloping humidity that thickens in the afternoon into slate-gray clouds and driving downpours. It is not a good month to be living in a tent. But about a million and a half Haitians still are, after losing their homes and often their family members in the January 12 earthquake.
I spent the month of May in Haiti as a volunteer and journalist. I saw some encouraging efforts at the grassroots level, where a strong community spirit has survived. I witnessed inspiring generosity, cooperation and inventiveness on the part of many Haitians in the face of unimaginable destruction.
But after the initial outpouring of emergency assistance, many international initiatives by the United Nations, the United States, and large non-governmental organizations seemed to become fragmented and disjointed as they tried to transition towards reconstruction. As for the Haitian government, perhaps a quarter of its employees were killed or injured, and its equivalent of the White House, Capitol, Supreme Court, and most federal departments were leveled. Much of it remained barely functional and disconnected from the needs of its citizens.
Now, over half a year after Gou-Dou-Gou-Dou (a nickname derived from the sound it made), why are so many people are still displaced and living in makeshift, unsafe camps?
The huge scale of the event itself may explain some of the slowness of the recovery. The death toll –estimated by the government at 220 thousand to 300 thousand in a county of 10 million – is equivalent to that of a major war.
The location of the epicenter just west of Port-au-Prince on the coastal plain meant that the full force struck the most heavily populated area. The nation’s capital, where the public and private sectors were excessively concentrated, was decimated. Total damages amounted to nearly $8 billion, about 20 percent more than Haiti’s yearly gross domestic product.
Everywhere, the prevalent poor quality of construction and the marginalization of poor people into unstable areas contributed heavily to the disaster. Fifty years of kleptocratic dictatorships, usually supported by our government, relieved occasionally by weak democratic governments, usually undermined by our government, left virtually no building regulations or urban planning.
Since long before the quake, decades of high-level looting of the economy had left roughly three-quarters of Haitians living on two or less dollars a day, with half of those earning under one dollar. As a result, 58 percent are undernourished and life expectancy is roughly 52 years. Adult literacy is 56 percent.
Some 75 percent of the people still live and work in rural areas, but agriculture accounts for only 28 percent of Haiti’s economic output. Seeking a livelihood, many rural residents have migrated to bidonvilles, the slums that skirt Port-au-Prince, where jobs, drinkable water and basic services are rare.
To respond to such a devastating geological and social blitzkrieg, a sustained Marshall Plan-like effort is clearly required of the world. And much of the initial response was generous. At a March conference in New York, international donors pledged $5.3 billion for the first year and a half, and more than $9 billion over five years. So far, though, only about 10 percent of the promised funds have actually been disbursed. In the U.S., enabling legislation for most of the aid is stalled in the Senate.
In Haiti, however, competing visions of how the aid will be used have intensified a long-running debate over what development should mean.
The initial United Nations plan envisions primarily the same model that had long been imposed on Haiti by international financial institutions and had failed before: industrial agriculture for export and offshore assembly manufacturing competing on the basis of low wages.
Many progressive Haitians and popular organizations say Haiti shouldn’t be re-built in the sense of restoring the previous dysfunctional government and economy – instead, they say, it needs to be built up from the grassroots for the first time to meet the needs of all its people and encourage more just and durable development.
Haiti’s large and sophisticated peasant and community organizations are also advancing alternative visions. Some advocate “agro-ecology”, which prioritizes sustainable small farming building on the organic farming that many Haitians have always practiced out of necessity.
For the 1.6 million people stuck in temporary camps, immediate prospects are dismal. Less than 2 percent of them have been moved into supposedly safer transitional camps with better drainage and stronger tents. The absence of clean water, sanitation and lighting leave women and children particularly vulnerable to crime, exploitation and disease.
Ominously, when a July 12 wind and rain storm well below hurricane strength struck the transitional resettlement camp at Corail, it destroyed the tents of nearly a quarter of the 7,000 residents. If a hurricane hits Port-au-Prince this season, which lasts until November, it could cause many more deaths and injuries.
Those of us who want to support Haiti need to hold donors accountable for disbursing all the aid they pledged. Beyond that, we should follow the money to make sure that it quickly develops safe homes and communities for those in desperate situations and that it empowers Haitian citizens and organizations to democratically build Haiti back better for all.
_________________________________
Peter Costantini writes for Inter Press Service (www.ipsnews.net) and blogs on Huffington Post at (www.huffingtonpost.com/crossover-dreams).
Note: Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group and Architecture for Humanity need experienced masons, concrete workers and building contractors to do training in Haiti. Contact jpetercostantini@comcast.net.
Back to Home
Gay couples’ marital rights are affirmed
By Mac McIntosh
Two federal court decisions in the last month could lead to the legalization of gay marriage. In Massachusetts Federal District Court, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was declared unconstitutional. In a separate case, California’s Proposition 8 was also declared unconstitutional by the Federal District Court. If these decisions are upheld through the appeals process, gay marriage may at last become legally recognized across the United States.
The repeal of DOMA would probably have a more far-reaching effect. As enacted by the U.S. Congress, DOMA describes marriage as between one woman and one man. Justice Joseph Tauro declared that DOMA violates the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution.
This decision is especially important because it concerns federal laws and benefits. Many states have passed legislation that gives domestic partners and married gay couples all the benefits and rights that the state is able to give. But married gay couples do not have the federal rights and protections that straight couples have because of DOMA’s definition of marriage.
For example, gay couples are denied survivor benefits from Social Security or other federal pensions unless they are married as described in DOMA. Married couples also benefit in filing their income taxes, including the advantage of filing joint returns or claiming one partner as a dependent.
A very important effect of eliminating DOMA would be that states would have to recognize all marriages from other states. I could list other federal benefits and protections for married couples. The critical issue is that all married couples, including gay couples, should enjoy exactly the same rights, protections and benefits.
In the second case, Justice Vaughn Walker in California Federal District Court declared California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Walker asked for a detailed factual record to establish any public interest in supporting Proposition 8. According to Jennifer Pizer of Lambda Legal, proponents were unable to advance any such public interest.
Judge Walker’s decision held that “the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”
Justice Walker found the proponents’ arguments so flimsy he ordered the California to reinstate gay marriages effective August 19. When supporters of Proposition 8 appealed his decision, gay marriages in California were put on hold again, pending the outcome of the appeal.
The two decisions are important advances along the road to legalization of gay marriages. Unfortunately, going through the appeals process will take years.
Back to Home
Two federal court decisions in the last month could lead to the legalization of gay marriage. In Massachusetts Federal District Court, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was declared unconstitutional. In a separate case, California’s Proposition 8 was also declared unconstitutional by the Federal District Court. If these decisions are upheld through the appeals process, gay marriage may at last become legally recognized across the United States.
The repeal of DOMA would probably have a more far-reaching effect. As enacted by the U.S. Congress, DOMA describes marriage as between one woman and one man. Justice Joseph Tauro declared that DOMA violates the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution.
This decision is especially important because it concerns federal laws and benefits. Many states have passed legislation that gives domestic partners and married gay couples all the benefits and rights that the state is able to give. But married gay couples do not have the federal rights and protections that straight couples have because of DOMA’s definition of marriage.
For example, gay couples are denied survivor benefits from Social Security or other federal pensions unless they are married as described in DOMA. Married couples also benefit in filing their income taxes, including the advantage of filing joint returns or claiming one partner as a dependent.
A very important effect of eliminating DOMA would be that states would have to recognize all marriages from other states. I could list other federal benefits and protections for married couples. The critical issue is that all married couples, including gay couples, should enjoy exactly the same rights, protections and benefits.
In the second case, Justice Vaughn Walker in California Federal District Court declared California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Walker asked for a detailed factual record to establish any public interest in supporting Proposition 8. According to Jennifer Pizer of Lambda Legal, proponents were unable to advance any such public interest.
Judge Walker’s decision held that “the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”
Justice Walker found the proponents’ arguments so flimsy he ordered the California to reinstate gay marriages effective August 19. When supporters of Proposition 8 appealed his decision, gay marriages in California were put on hold again, pending the outcome of the appeal.
The two decisions are important advances along the road to legalization of gay marriages. Unfortunately, going through the appeals process will take years.
Back to Home
Alan Simpson must go
Alan Simpson, the co-chair who should never have been appointed to the deficit reduction commission that should never have been established, should resign now or be fired forthwith by the President who appointed him.
Simpson has written his own ticket:
By calling Social Security “a milk cow with 310 million tits.”
By insulting a distinguished woman, Executive Director Ashley Carson of OWL, the Older Women’s League, accusing her of “babbling into the vapors” and inviting her to “call when you get honest work.”
By calling Americans who rely on Social Security “greedy geezers” and “lesser people.”
If there is a “lesser person” in America, it is Alan Simpson.
Ashley Carson speaks for us when she says: “This kind of blatant disrespect for women, and for the social fabric of our country, has no place in a serious discussion about the deficit.”
And OWL speaks for us when it declares:
“Mr. Simpson’s fifteen minutes of sexism and degradation are over. Now is the time for serious people to have serious conversations about how to move our nation forward, protecting the men and women who have worked their whole lives to make this country great.”
Simpson should resign or be fired forthwith by the President. He should also be publicly repudiated by Commission Co-Chair Erskine Bowles and by the full commission.
Back to Home
Simpson has written his own ticket:
By calling Social Security “a milk cow with 310 million tits.”
By insulting a distinguished woman, Executive Director Ashley Carson of OWL, the Older Women’s League, accusing her of “babbling into the vapors” and inviting her to “call when you get honest work.”
By calling Americans who rely on Social Security “greedy geezers” and “lesser people.”
If there is a “lesser person” in America, it is Alan Simpson.
Ashley Carson speaks for us when she says: “This kind of blatant disrespect for women, and for the social fabric of our country, has no place in a serious discussion about the deficit.”
And OWL speaks for us when it declares:
“Mr. Simpson’s fifteen minutes of sexism and degradation are over. Now is the time for serious people to have serious conversations about how to move our nation forward, protecting the men and women who have worked their whole lives to make this country great.”
Simpson should resign or be fired forthwith by the President. He should also be publicly repudiated by Commission Co-Chair Erskine Bowles and by the full commission.
Back to Home
We salute Real Change, a voice for all of us
Real Change is a real friend to the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans. The hard-hitting Seattle-based weekly gives the area’s homeless thousands a voice, even as it crusades for a broad progressive agenda that includes the interests of retired working people.
In recent issues, Real Change has featured articles warning of the looming attack on Social Security, including an interview with PSARA President Robby Stern and a feature story under the joint by-line of Retiree Advocate Editor Will Parry and freelance writer Thalia Syracopoulos.
Earlier, a 90th birthday profile of Parry was given prominent play in its pages.
Homeless men and women earn a modest income selling Real Change for a dollar a copy in front of stores and on street corners throughout Seattle. In doing so, they educate the paper’s readers on social, economic and political issues rarely covered in the major media.
Real Change: Week after week, it sows the seeds of change – real change.
Back to Home
In recent issues, Real Change has featured articles warning of the looming attack on Social Security, including an interview with PSARA President Robby Stern and a feature story under the joint by-line of Retiree Advocate Editor Will Parry and freelance writer Thalia Syracopoulos.
Earlier, a 90th birthday profile of Parry was given prominent play in its pages.
Homeless men and women earn a modest income selling Real Change for a dollar a copy in front of stores and on street corners throughout Seattle. In doing so, they educate the paper’s readers on social, economic and political issues rarely covered in the major media.
Real Change: Week after week, it sows the seeds of change – real change.
Back to Home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)