rossl Although the political ramifications remain to be seen from this shocking revelation, in an interview with Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks, former Senator Mike Gravel (D-AK) admitted to both smoking marijuana and eating brownies “laced” with it. ”Those were pretty good,” said Senator Gravel.
The text of Senator Gravel’s heartfelt confession:
Cenk Uygur: Do you still smoke up at all?
Mike Gravel: No, uh, not at all. I did when I was younger, but – I’ll tell you the truth – I never got a high out of it.
Cenk Uygur: Ah, me too.
Mike Gravel: Never got a high. For some reason my metabolism did not respond. Once I had some brownies that were laced, and those were pretty good.
[Laughs]
Cenk Uygur: Well, that’s why we love having Senator Gravel on the show: pure honesty. I love it.
Over the rest of the interview, the two men covered a wide range of topics – from Sarah Palin and offshore drilling (Alaska sure does produce some special politicians, doesn’t it?) to direct democracy and a sitcom starring Gravel. It’s a very interesting interview and I hope you watch the whole thing.
Gravel was on the show to promote his ideas, his books, and a TV show he is producing. The books mentioned – of several he has published in the past few years – were Citizen Power and A Political Odyssey. They are about Gravel’s presidential platform that had a basis in direct democracy and his life, intertwined with the story of American militarism, respectively.
The television show will be based around the idea of direct democracy, just as Gravel’s presidency was. And that’s fitting, since the plot of the show is that Gravel was elected president. He mentioned that he is trying to distribute it worldwide and how he has already raised $250,000 for the show. A few short webisodes are being made first, and each episode will focus around a current issue, with the conclusion being that the viewers can directly vote on the issue. It will be called “I Like Mike,” and if you’re interested in helping in any capacity just let me know in the comments or email me (rossmlevin at gmail dot com).
The most interesting part of the interview, though, were the ideas that Uygur and Gravel talked about. They are not anything you would hear on CNN or the nightly news.
Gravel talked about his perception of Sarah Palin before and after she came onto the national political scene. He said she was actually much less partisan, at least in terms of laws regarding oil, before McCain picked her as his vice presidential candidate. And the Senator cleared up Uygur’s confusion about what exactly Palin did as governor in that respect: the Alaska permanent fund, he said, which distributes oil revenue to citizens “was taken care of 20 years before she came onto the scene.” Also, in terms of the more substantive issues of the environment and offshore drilling, Gravel said that as a nation we should be focusing on renewables like wind and tidal so that “we could remove our dependency from oil.”
And, of course, Gravel talked about the failed war on drugs. He called the drug war “terrible” and “a disaster.” Gravel not only spoke in favor of legalizing marijuana, but decriminalizing – he actually said “deregulate” in the interview – all drugs. Just as in his presidential campaign, he stressed that it is a medical and not a criminal problem when someone is addicted to a drug.
Gravel talked a lot about his idea called The National Initiative for Democracy, which would set up a specific process for citizens to put laws on the ballot and vote on them. When Uygur asked what the average citizen can do to help push through financial reform, Gravel didn’t sugarcoat it. ”The sad thing is,” he said, “the average citizen can’t do a damn thing.”
But he has a solution. After talking about what’s wrong with politics and government, Gravel talked about the National Initiative, which he said is,
…meta legislation that puts the tools in the hands of the people to be able to make laws. Presently, representative government has a monopoly on lawmaking. Well, lawmaking is the central power of government. And so if you’re not in a position to make laws, to establish polcy through the laws, then all you can do is obey what the elites dictate to you. And that’s what we have today.
rossl Yesterday, local Green Parties and Greens across Pennsylvania participated in protests against natural gas drilling in the state. There was a protest at each regional Department of Environmental Protection, including one in the state capital, Harrisburg. A press release announcing the protests can be found here.
I (Ross Levin) attended the rally in Norristown, which is the county seat of Montgomery County. There were no more than twenty people there, but we made ourselves heard. We stood outside the regional DEP building with signs and a microphone, and we told them that we want a moratorium on new gas drilling and significant studies and regulations for existing drills. Green Party candidate for US Senate Mel Packer was there to speak, as were Green Party candidates for state representative Hugh Giordano and Ed Bonsell. Most, if not all, of the attendees were Green Party members.
A video of the Norristown demonstration accompanies an article about it, which can be read in its entirety here.
A group of protestors stormed the Regional Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) offices on Earth Day, Thursday, to demand the resignation of DEP Secretary John Hanger and speak out against gas drilling in Pennsylvania.
Among the demands of the Green Party of Philadelphia, the group, which largely organized the demonstration, were an immediate moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in the commonwealth, a freeze on new Marcellus Shale drilling permits and an environmental impact statement assessed for state gas drilling…
“We’re here today because the DEP, which is supposed to protect people, is in fact protecting corporations,” said Giordano.
In Williamsport, the Sun-Gazette reported on one of the smaller of such protests:
Two activists opposing the Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling showed up outside the state Department of Environmental Protection regional office here…
The group members demanded an immediate moratorium on all horizontal hydrofracturing, a suspension of drilling-related water withdrawals anywhere in the Delaware and Susquehanna River Basin watersheds and, if necessary, the immediate resignation of DEP secretary John Hanger.
The event in Wilkes-Barre was one of the more well-attended and well-organized ones. Greens such as Jay Sweeney, who was elected to be a township auditor in a partisan election last year and is running for state representative this year, and Carl Romanelli, who ran for US Senate in 2006 as a Green and was infamously charged with the legal fees for being thrown off the ballot, were in attendance, along with other Greens and people from different organizations.
From the Standard Speaker:
The Green Parties of Northeastern Pennsylvania coordinated a rally/protest on Public Square on Thursday, in the shadow of the state Department of Environmental Protection’s eastern regional office.
“I hope they’re listening across the street,” said Jay Sweeney of the Wyoming County Green Party. “No more permits, no more fracking, and we demand (DEP Secretary) John Hanger’s resignation. He is not the secretary of the Chamber of Commerce.”
Hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” which involves sending millions of gallons of water deep into the earth to break up the shale and release natural gas, came under fire.
“From day one, the Pennsylvania Green Party has been opposed to allowing fracking and gas drilling in Pennsylvania,” Carl Romanelli, co-chairman of the Luzerne County Green Party and master of ceremonies, told the approximately 50 people gathered around.
And from the Times Leader:
Members of the Luzerne County Green Party held a rally on Public Square around lunchtime Thursday explaining their fears that gas companies drilling throughout Northeastern Pennsylvania will cause more environmental harm than good by drilling.
This year was the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, the international movement to bring awareness to economical issues.
Party co-chairman Carl Romanelli thinks the state needs to enact stiffer guidelines to protect the water resources because the gas drillers were given what he called a loophole in 2005 in the federal Clean Water Act.
For some additional information, see an opinion piece that I wrote yesterday (which does not reflect the views of IPR or anyone else but myself), “No Fracking Way!“
rossl This Earth Day, while an oil rig was burning and sinking and spilling out into the Gulf of Mexico, I joined a small band of protesters during my lunch break to tell the government to stop a similar crime against nature, one that is taking place in my home state of Pennsylvania. There are no offshore oil rigs here, of course, but the new and dangerous method of extracting natural gas through fracking is becoming a larger and larger threat to our water, our land, and our climate. And Pennsylvania is ground zero.
So I took to the streets at a Green Party-organized protest. We stood outside the regional Department of Environmental Protection and made our voices heard.
So just what is fracking? It’s short for “hydraulic fracturing” and it’s a dirty process for extracting natural gas from the ground. ProPublica, which has this nifty graphic and a whole investigative series on the subject, defines it simply:
Hydraulic fracturing is a process used in nine out of 10 natural gas wells in the United States, where millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals are pumped underground to break apart the rock and release the gas.
And where do those chemicals go? And what chemicals are they? Well, that’s a big part of the problem.
So what’s in this stuff? Hydrochloric acid, solvents, surfactants, petroleum-based lubricants, corrosion inhibitors, microbe killers. Basically, it’s a lot of the same carcinogenic chemicals found in household cleaners like Formula 409 and Drano.
Forbes, which is quoted above, goes on to say that generally “most of the fracking fluids are recovered.” But when there are thousands of wells, “most” isn’t good enough. ”Most” – especially when wells are exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act, like they are here in PA, and subject to pretty much no regulation – is just not good enough when it results in things like this:
GAS COMMISSIONER: If a well is drilled next to your residence or near your residence within the legal setbacks, and there’s a perceived or real impact on your property value, we don’t address that.NARRATOR: In 2001, gas wells were drilled using the fracking technique a mere 500 feet from the Amos home. Underground, the drilling breached their water well, causing their drinking water to fill with grey sediment and fizz like soda pop. The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission tested the water well and found methane but said it was safe. But they warned the Amoses to keep a window open, so the methane gas wouldn’t build up and cause an explosion in their home. The Amoses stopped drinking the water but continued to bathe in it.
Not even a decade into the widespread use of this technology, we’ve already seen a lot of what’s wrong with it.
The spills, which occurred at a well site run by Cabot Oil and Gas, involve a compound manufactured by Halliburton that is described as a “potential carcinogen” and is used in the drilling process of hydraulic fracturing, according to state officials. The contaminants have seeped into a nearby creek, where a fish kill was reported by the state Department of Environmental Protection. The DEP also reported fish “swimming erratically”.
Don’t buy into the greenwashing. There is nothing clean, nothing green, nothing environmentally friendly about natural gas. It IS a fossil fuel. It IS poisoning our water. It IS produced by the same gas companies that never have, and still don’t, care about the innocent people they’re hurting in so many ways.
Mayer, a heavyset Vietnam vet, shouldn’t be smoking this cigarette because his house and property are inundated with high levels of methane gas. There’s so much of it that he can hold a barbecue lighter up to his tap and watch his drinking water explode in a blue fireball.Mayer blames his problems on natural gas drilling operations a few miles away. He believes the methane escaped during hydraulic fracturing (a process that involves shooting water, sand and a mix of chemicals deep into the ground to break up rock and release gas), then migrated through two underground fissures that converge about 100 feet from his well. Industry representatives disagree, as does New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation. Without ever visiting Mayer’s home, the DEC issued a notice of cleanup on Feb. 25, 2009. No such cleanup ever took place.
So I went to a protest today. A few Green candidates were there, and they all spoke. This includes Hugh Giordano, a strong union-backed candidate for state representative in Philadelphia, and Mel Packer, who’s running for US Senate. (Although the Democrats are clearly better than the Republicans on this issue, the Greens are really standing up for the moratorium.) A few others spoke, too. Only about a dozen and a half people were there, but we had a microphone and a lot of signs! Seriously, though, this is just part of a growing movement against this unnatural gas production, a movement that is saying to Democratic Governer Ed Rendell (who helped give out over 5,000 permits to drillers) and others responsible for this disgusting policy: NO FRACKING WAY!
We’re demanding a moratorium on natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania.
In fact, we’re so serious about this that we’re protesting Governor Rendell this Saturday night while he receives an award for allegedly being a “green” governor (gimme a break!). If you want to come, show up at Walnut and Front Streets in Philadelphia at 7 PM this Saturday.
So what’s being done about it? And what can we do as citizens? Well, small progress is being made on the national scale through things like the EPA’s recently announced study of natural gas drilling, which is kind of like the wild west of the energy world right now. And Democratic lawmakers are trying to impose some regulations on these drillers, like actually getting rid of the bizarre exemption they have from Safe Drinking Water Act.
You can learn more about the FRAC Act, which would implement some much needed reforms nationally, here.
But why is the government even encouraging natural gas drilling when there’s a climate crisis and multiple other environmental crises linked to this? What’s needed more than ever is more people demanding a stop to these inane, purely profit-driven practices.
So here’s what you can do, especially if you’re in Pennsylvania:
1. Call Governor Rendell to demand a moratorium on this: 717-787-2500
2. Check out local environmental groups involved with this. In PA, that includes the Green Party and the Environmental Working Group. Check out your state here.
3. If you’re a Pennsylvania Democrat, vote for Joe Hoeffel in the gubernatorial primary – he’s the only candidate who supports a moratorium.
4. Check out the movie Gasland and the blog for more info on this, along with the links in the diary.
rossl Apparently inspired by certain Democrats voting against the health insurance reform, the Service Employees International Union – a union representing over 2 million workers – is surprisingly planning to work against Democrats this election season.
Perhaps the strongest challenge to Democrats, if not the Democratic establishment itself, will be in North Carolina. The national SEIU is working with the State Employees Association of North Carolina, its state affiliate, to form the North Carolina First Party.
The only text on the party’s website says,
For too long parties and politicians in Washington have worked more for their own political self interest, or worse, corporate special interests, instead of the hard working families of North Carolina.That’s why members of progressive groups across North Carolina, including the State Employees Association of North Carolina (SEANC) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) began work to form North Carolina First to ensure that politicians put middle class families first and not their own special interests.
North Carolina First is on the ground talking to voters. Right now, North Carolina First is gathering signatures to determine whether toqualify as a state party – to give working families the ability to choose a candidate that will fight for their interests – or to identify Congressional candidates who will stay accountable to the needs of working families not Washington’s special interests.
And confirming the thought that this is not to challenge the Democratic Party itself, but to challenge individual Democrats who voted against the health insurance bill, is Jim Morrill of Campaign Tracker:
Spokesman Greg Rideout said they have about 10,000 of the 80,000 or so required signatures. He described the effort as an alternative for disgruntled progressives…Rideout, a former aide in the N.C. Justice Department, said the movement isn’t aimed at any particular person or party. But if the effort does manage to get on the ballot, expect candidates in U.S. House races in Districts 7, 8 and 11. They’re the homes of the three Democratic members of Congress who voted against their party’s health care bill.
And in New York, SEIU is allying itself with the Working Families Party and against a Democratic Congressman who voted against the bill, Michael Arcuri. The Utica Observer-Dispatch reports:
The state Working Families Party and 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East union announced Friday they will be withdrawing support of Arcuri for the November election…The union has 275,000 members in the state and several thousand in the district.
John Furman, a member of the state Working Families Party Committee, said the party also is recruiting candidates and having preliminary conversations because of concern that Arcuri is siding with the insurance industry instead of his constituents.
“We feel it’s a litmus test for candidates to show that they do represent progressive, core values,” Furman said of the health care vote…
In 2008, Arcuri received 9,454 votes on the Working Families Party line and defeated Hanna by 9,919 votes, party spokesman Dan Levitan has said…
On Friday, the New York State AFL-CIO union, which represents more than 2½ million people in the state, also sent Arcuri a letter signed by more than 20 labor leaders from across the state expressing their sense of betrayal at his decision to vote against the health care bill.
Already, a few progressives are doubting SEIU’s sincerity. At Firedoglake, David Dayen writes in a post titled “Wake Me When SEIU’s ‘North Carolina First Party’ Runs a Candidate:”
I’ve been saying for a while now that the vaunted “accountability moment” that labor and Democratic allies will run against those in the caucus who voted against health care is a mirage. I don’t know how many examples people need. First the primary challenger to Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin was talked out of the race, then Jason Altmire’s challenger realized he waited too long to make a serious run, then Stephen Lynch’s possible primary disintegrated…SEIU isn’t really at war with the Obama Administration. Andy Stern was just appointed to the President’s deficit commission. They may have problems with some of the Blue Dogs in North Carolina, to be sure. But the third party route is just destined to be squelched by national Democrats.
This analysis of the union’s intentions, however, should be taken with a grain of salt. Later in the piece Dayen advocates a strategy of challenging Blue Dog Democrats in the primary rather than as independents in the general election. Also, Dayen incorrectly asserts that SEIU is challenging the Obama Administration, when they actually supported President Obama’s health plan and are running candiates against people who voted “no” on the health bill.
It remains to be seen whether SEIU is sincere or not, whether candidates will emerge to challenge these Democratic Congresspeople or not. In any case, it’s a situation worth watching.
rossl A national health insurance reform bill is on the brink of passing and all is well on Capitol Hill.
But that doesn’t mean too much for the rest of the country. Much of the country still wants more than a public-option-free, far-from-single-payer, band-aid-like bill to fix our broken health care system. One writer states, from the interesting vantage point of Australia, where they do have universal health care:
But Australia has something that America lacks: a universal public system that provides basic medical services for all.
Here, thanks to Medicare, you can be cared for in a public hospital without going broke regardless of your health insurance status…But the political compromise [Barack Obama's] been forced to adopt fails to address the morbidity at the heart of the system.
It’s taking the disease and trying to turn it into the cure.
The solution, the real health care reform that we’ve been asking for since Teddy Roosevelt’s time, lies with the state single payer movement. And, at least here in Pennsylvania, we’re moving full speed ahead. All that this bill means for us is that we’d better move fast if we want real health care reform any time soon.
For now, this health care bill seems to be the best we’ll get out of our dysfunctional national government. It does expand Medicaid coverage, it does set up new health clinics, it does expand insurance coverage in some helpful ways. But it doesn’t address at all some fundamental problems in our system.
In that sense, it is like a band-aid. Instead of just patching up the system, though, we need to completely rework it. The idea of making profit off of someone’s sickness – off of keeping someone else sick instead of treating them! – is fundamentally flawed. And the bureaucracy of the insurance companies, among other factors, inflates health care costs to a ridiculous point.
So, as most of you reading this probably agree, the solution is single payer. And we’re not going to get that at the national level. Just like they did in Canada, we’ve got to take it to the states.
In Pennsylvania, we’ve got a supportive governor, a supportive Democratic Party, and strong bipartisan support in the legislature.
And, according to the people who are at the top of this campaign, the passage of the health bill in DC isn’t stopping us.
So, politically, HR 3590 is a feat; policy-wise, HR 3590 is rife with problems, challenges, and opportunities.
Washington’s election year “spin” aside, HR 3590 does not deal fundamentally, systemically, or expeditiously (2014 implementation date) with questions of “affordable, comprehensive, quality, healthcare for all” even close to the degree that PA’s HR 1660/SB 400 tackles those questions.
Moreover, while the national healthcare bill funnels nearly a trillion dollars to buy or subsidize insurance for the uninsured in the profit-first market, and compels (through threat of fines) the purchase of more insurance in the same Blues-monopoly market, HR 3590 does nearly nothing to address the problem of underinsurance – either for the newly insured or for those who are currently insured. Insurance premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and incidence of medical bankruptcy will continue to escalate under HR 3590.
We citizens of Pennsylvania cannot afford to wait until 2014. Nor will we ignore the obvious shortcomings of HR 3590 or the new policy opening presented by this political breakthrough.
Taking action on this has become more urgent than before. If states are to establish insurance exchanges by 2014, that means that they will already by making major changes to their health care system then, and support for single payer could seriously wane. Combine this with the fact that supportive Governor Ed Rendell is not up for reelection (although pretty much all of the Democratic candidates support the legislation) in 2010, and you start to get an idea of what is needed.
So what can you do?
Well, the one organization really pushing for this is HealthCare4AllPA. If you’re not in Pennsylvania, please donate to them and tell any friends or family or colleagues in PA about the important work they’re doing. Also, check out similar national organizations and organizations in other states, including (but certainly not limited to) Montana, California, Kentucky, and Wisconsin. (If you’re in PA, this page will also help you find other groups in PA and local groups.)
If you’re lucky enough to be in Pennslyvania, there are several steps you can take. See if your representative and senator supports the bill. Email them. Call them. Lobby them. Circulate petitions around your neighborhood and then deliver them to your legislators, like I’m in the process of doing. Write a letter to the editor. There are so many options! Some are easy and only take five minutes, but if you want you can also give hours upon hours of your time to this worthy cause.
No matter where you live, no matter how you live, this is worth your time. The states are where fundamental health care reform will come from, and here in PA we’re lucky enough to be closer than most. Without your help, though, this will never become a reality.
rossl Everyone seems to know that the tea party “movement” had a rally on the steps of the capitol yesterday. They got in the face of a few Congressmen and now every Beltway media outlet from the Washington Post to Meet the Press is talking about it. But there was another protest in town yesterday. Thousands of people showed up in front of the White House to tell Obama (and Congress) to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to treat Palestinians fairly, and to generally end the US military empire.
MSNBC estimates that somewhere between 1,500 and 2,000 tea party people showed up at the capitol building. Yet the low end of the estimates for the number of people who showed up at the peace demonstration (including myself) is about 2,500, and the high end is about 10,000. Where’s our moment on Meet the Press? Where’s our article in the New York Times?
If you ever needed proof that the tea party “movement” is not really a movement but a few people newly interested in politics magnified one thousand times by a lazy, irresponsibly press, this is it. Two rallies in DC yesterday. One was for peace, one was for stopping the health care bill. One was put together by the ANSWER Coalition and other antiwar groups. One was put together by the tea party people and their friends in high places. One had as many as 2,000 people attend. One had as many as 10,000 people attend. Yet the smaller tea party protest had a much higher profile in the news than the march for peace!
The peace movement is a real grassroots movement that exists Without the wmagnifying glass of the corporate media to exaggerate the impact of it. Unfortunately, it doesn’t benefit the Washington Post to admit that the reason the march stopped in front of their building was not actually their “editorial board’s positions on the wars,” but their reporting which – in its substance and topics which are covered – is completely biased in favor of a corporatist, echo chamber view of reality. Maybe that’s the reason why there was a speaker from Project Censored.
As for what happened at the protest, starting at about noon there were speakers on a platform that had been set up in Lafayette Park, across the street from the White House. When I arrived, I spoke to Mike Gravel for a bit, although he did not give a speech. Famous personalities like Cindy Sheehan and Ralph Nader spoke, as well as prominent people in the antiwar movement like Kevin Zeese, along with some lesser known people, like a group of high school students.
At one point, the Raging Grannies got up and sang a song in honor of the late Granny D. I couldn’t find a video of it, but here’s an equally entertaining and poignant song about the Citizens United ruling:
Some speakers were veterans – one of Korea, a few of Afghanistan and Iraq, including one who burnt a flag while saying, “This is what I think of this country!” – and some were mothers who have had their children killed in the line of duty. One representative of labor spoke, and a few representatives of the Arab and Muslim communities spoke. There was a strong socialist presence at the rally (maybe it’s a good thing we didn’t run into the tea party protesters…), including speaker and 2009 candidate for mayor of New York City Frances Villar of the Party for Socialism and Liberation.
The ages of protesters spanned from toddlers to people who have been on Medicare since before most of the people there were born. I’m seventeen on Monday and saw plenty of people my age there. The largest age group was probably those same people who have been showing up at these events since the ’60s. Some see that as a sign of desperation, that they still have to show up forty years later, but I think it’s admirable that they haven’t given up yet. An organizer from World Can’t Wait (they are actually having a fundraising drive right now, and I highly recommend you donate at least a few bucks!) said to me yesterday that he hopes I won’t be doing “this same shit” forty years from now. I hope so, too, but we can, if we need to, take comfort in the words of those great radicals Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn.
The Iraq War – there was massive protests before it officially started, and I stress “officially” because your candidate for president of the, presidency of the EU, and his colleague George Bush knew that they were already…start[ing] the war when they were putting on a show about wanting diplomacy and so on. But before it was officially started – March, 2003 – there was a massive international protest. I think that’s the first time in history that an imperialist war has been massively protested before it was officially begun… There was no saturation bombing by B-52s, there was no chemical warfare – horrible enough, but it could’ve been a lot worse.And furthermore, the Bush Administration had to back down on its war aims. Step by step, it had to allow elections, which they didn’t want to do; mainly a victory for nonviolent Iraqi protest. They could kill insurgents, they couldn’t deal with hundreds of thousands of people in the streets, and their hands were tied by the domestic constraints…They had to back down…Iraq’s a horror story, but it could’ve been a lot worse. So, yes, citizen protest can do something…we know that from this and many other examples. When there’s no protest and no attention, the power just goes wild. Like in Cambodia, Northern Laos.
–Noam Chomsky, “Crises and the Unipolar Moment,” October, 2009
You can never predict how something will take place… There’s no way of predicting how a movement develops. All you can do, really, you do your part, you do whatever you can, you organize with other people, you… You try to get some, some kind of change, and if enough people do enough things, even if they’re little things, they will add up. Because that’s what happens in movements…just millions of people doing small things which they cannot predict…its results.
–Howard Zinn on The Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show
After the speakers, we walked for maybe ten or fifteen blocks. I spent a lot of the time with my brother, who was filming a lot of what was going on. In the next few weeks, I’ll make a video or three out of the footage and post it here. We stopped at the Halliburton headquarters, the Washington Post building, and a few other places. In front of Halliburton, an effigy of Dick Cheney was torn apart, cursed at, and kicked.
Finally, we again reached the White House, where some protesters – including Cindy Sheehan – laid fake coffins down near the White House, and were arrested for it. As cops later tore apart the flag-draped coffins and threw the pieces on the ground, protesters yelled, “Don’t let those flags hit the ground.”
After that it calmed down, with people quietly mulling in the street or in Lafayette Park. Some were sleeping and one man was rapping into a megaphone while a group that had been playing drums for the march played for him and the people dancing around them.
Less people showed up than in 2006 or 2007, but more showed up than in November of 2009, after Obama announced the escalation of forces in Afghanistan. I have faith in the people. I think we are starting to realize that these wars are wrong, no matter who is president.
rossl If you want to help end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, challenge the military industrial complex, fight for jobs not wars, or anything along those lines, SATURDAY IS YOUR DAY OF ACTION! There will be a massive peace march in DC – some say they are expecting hundreds of thousands to show up – and events all over the nation. On Sunday there will also be an event in Seattle, for those of you near there.
Please join me in DC – if you’re looking for me, I’ll be with the “We Are Not Your Soldiers” contingent (carrying a peace flag and with my brother, who will be videotaping) and for part of the day I’ll be marching with former US Senator and presidential candidate Mike Gravel.
Here are events going on, on Saturday:
Washington, DC
Puerto Rico (this is asking people to put candles in their windows all weekend – do it wherever you live!)
Five Days of peace action in New Jersey leading up to the DC march
North Country Peace Group in New York
Seattle (Sunday)
To get excited, check out these videos of Cindy Sheehan’s launch of her new project, Camp OUT NOW. It is an encampment on the national mall that will remain there until our troops are out of the Middle East and veterans are getting fair treatment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oExYq4iIio&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUx1a2Bgfgw&feature=player_embedded
A lot of people are hoping that the antiwar movement will be reinvigorated this weekend. I’ll be doing my part to make sure that comes true. Will you?
rossl This is going to be an action packed weekend in DC and around the nation. On Friday, there will be protests of Yoo. On Saturday, there will be a massive antiwar demonstration (there will also be demonstrations in Philly, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, and South Dakota, among other places). On Sunday, there will be a large march for immigration reform. And there will be other related events around the country, along with the small protests and events that happen all the time.
(Let me know if I miss anything – and post local events in the comments)
Friday
Since I live in Philadelphia, I try to keep up to date on what’s happening in my area. Probably the best source for this is the Bucks/Mont Progressive Events Email, which you can view in blog form here. For Friday, they’ve got this listed:
Fri. March 19, Noon to 1 PM – 7th Anniversary of the Iraq War Events sponsored by the Coalition for Peace Action
- 7:30AM-9AM, Peace Vigil at Silver Lake Park on Rt. 413 Bypass in Newtown, next to Lockheed Matin
- Noon to 1 PM, Regional Rally in Trenton on the State House Steps, 125 W. State St.
- 4:30PM-6PM, Vigil on the Morrisville side of the Trenton Makes Bridge on Bridge Street in Morrisville.
Near DC, war criminal and torture lover John Yoo will be on his book tour. Related events start at 2 PM.
March 19, 2010, Charlottesville, Va.Year 8 Begins in Iraq War, as Afghanistan escalates
2 p.m. March With Funk the War: meet on grass across from The Corner at the University of Virginia.
3 p.m. Rally to Protest John Yoo: meet in front of Minor Hall at the University of Virginia to protest John Yoo, who speaks in Minor Hall at 3:30.
Speakers at Protest include: Cindy Sheehan (Peace of the Action), Susan Harman (National Accountability Network), Ray McGovern (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity), Charlotte Dennett (Robert Jackson Steering Committee), Mike Ferner and Ann Wright (Veterans for Peace), Debra Sweet (World Can’t Wait), Shahid Buttar (Bill of Rights Defense Committee), Nancy Mancias (CODE PINK: Women for Peace), Dahr Jamail (journalist), Mark Lane (attorney).
Saturday
This is the big day for me. My brother and I are going down to DC from Philadelphia with a video camera and a peace flag. Hopefully I’ll be able to interview some interesting people and post a few videos about it on Youtube. I’ll also be helping World Can’t Wait do twitter updates from my phone (I’ll text them, they’ll post it, since I ain’t got one of them newfangled blackberries or anything like it).
Info for March 20 in DC:
The March 20 National March on Washington to demand “U.S. Out of Afghanistan and Iraq Now” is shaping up to be a dramatic and highly significant demonstration.People will be coming to D.C. by bus, van, car, train, plane and metro from over 50 different cities and towns across the East Coast, South and Midwest. Large numbers of veterans, service members, and their families; members of the Arab and Muslim community; students and teachers; representatives of local anti-war and peace groups; and many others are mobilizing to join the demonstration.
We will gather at 12 noon at the White House (Lafayette Park on the north side).
This is not only an antiwar march, but a celebration of Cindy Sheehan’s new encampment on the national mall called Camp OUT NOW.
Info for different locations:
MARCH 20
MARCH & RALLY TO STOP THE WAR
This Saturday, 12 noon
Gather @ Hollywood & Vine, LA
In an exciting development, the March 20 anti-war protest will show solidarity with UNITE-HERE Local 2 workers by marching to two of the hotels being boycotted by Local 2. Local 2 represents more than 9,000 hotel workers who are fighting for a new contract. The big transnational hotel chains are trying to force the Local 2 workers to make huge co-payments for their health care benefits. Most Local 2 members are immigrant workers who can barely get by as it is due to the Bay Area’s high cost of living.
Vigil Rally Memorial Protest
Saturday, March 20, 11:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Army Experience Center/Franklin Mills Mall
Knights & Woodhaven Roads, Northeast Philadelphia
Saturday, March 20, 10 AM – “After Seven Years, War is STILL Not the Answer” Vigil at the intersection of Rt. 29 and Rt. 663 in Pennsburg. Unami Quaker Meeting Peace and Social Concerns Committee ask you join them for a silent, peaceful vigil commemorating the seventh anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq. Contact Joyce Moore at joyce@jmfs.com or at 610-966-6127 for details.
Chicago (this one’s actually on Thursday)
Assemble, 5:30 pm at Federal Plaza (Adams and Dearborn)
March on Michigan Ave.
For more info call 773-463-0311
Saturday, March 20 – 12pmat the Battleship Memorial
west of Kiawanis and 12th St.
Sioux Falls, SD
Sunday
Before I get to the immigration march, there will be an antiwar demonstration in Seattle on Sunday.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Haiti…End US War and Occupation! Fund Human Needs! Iraq war anniversary March and Rally
Sunday, March 21, 2010 12:01 PM
Westlake Park 4th and Pine
March and Rally with street theater on the 7th anniversary of the Iraq War. Held in coordination with the national March 20 march on the Pentagon. (Local action on Sunday to avoid logistical conflict with St. Patrick’s day parade.)
Details for the immigration march:
Today we are at a pivotal moment in the history of this nation. We are faced with a choice. We can do nothing, and watch as our families and communities continue to be torn apart by the broken immigration system; watch as profiteers continue to take advantage of people desperate for work; watch as due process is taken away from our understanding of justice; and watch as our leaders work on economic solutions that simply aren’t bold enough to turn this country around. Or we can stand up for our families and our communities.Join thousands from across the country at the March For America in Washington, DC on March 21st. It is up to us.
March For America!
This is your call. We need you in DC to show our collective power and energy. Join the March For America. Mark your calendars for Sunday, March 21st.
Whether you can make it or not, there’s a great page for online organizing and general information (and to see a few people who are going) that you can go to right here.
And some general progressive events in or near Philly:
Sun. March 21, 2-4 PM – Peace Event near the home of Senator Arlen Specter, West Schoolhouse Lane (at Vaux St) in East Falls, Phila. For more info call 215-843-4256. (3rd Sun)Sun. March 21, 6 PM – Northeast Philly for Peace and Justice Monthly Meeting at Holy Spirit Evangelical Lutheran Church, Robbins Avenue & Loretto Avenue, Phila. The meeting starts with a potluck supper. For info – Harvey Chanin at 215-698-2422 or nephillyactivist @ yahoo.com. (3rd Sun)
Sat. March 20 and Sun. March 21 – Democracy for American (DFA) Campaign School Training Sessions in Chester County at Stetson Middle School, 1060 Wilmington Pike (Route 202) in Westtown. Cost is $60 for the 2-day weekend training all inclusive ($30/weekend for low income, students, and seniors.) Open to local and regional Democratic and progressive activists. More details and sign up at http://democracyforamerica.com…
Sun. March 21 – Providence Meeting Peace and Justice Committee presents “Can We Stop Paying for War?”. For info go to http://www.Providencemeeting.o…
Sun. March 21, 6 PM – The Lower Bucks Lyme Disease Support Group will meet at the Middletown Municipal Building at 3 Municipal Way Langhorne PA. For info email evelyn @ lowerbuckslymegroup.org or call Evelyn at (215) 741-5902 or go to http://www.lowerbuckslymegroup…
Hope to see you there!
rossl 
In a recent diary by Daily Kos user Cassiodorus, one point of his in particular struck me:
Thus the comparison between the Great Depression and the current Great Recession falls flat, because the popular upheavals of the 1930s are only in evidence today among the least helpful segments of the population. This of course is a major reason why we can expect no FDR-like President to save us from the…economic collapse…
…During the 1930s…intellectual figures such as John Dos Passos, John Steinbeck, Kenneth Burke, and Richard Wright were actual socialists and not just mere liberals offering occasional plugs for John Kerry.
Another prominent socialist, albeit a bit later than the Depression, was Albert Einstein. He was an all around brilliant man, someone whom I admire greatly. And he wisely said this, although today it would probably be considered way too radical for anyone respectable to utter:
[I am] a passionate pacifist and anti-militarist. I am against any nationalism, even in the guise of mere patriotism. Privileges based on position and property have always seemed to me unjust and pernicious, as did any exaggerated personality cult.
Where are our Einsteins today? It seems that even ordinary citizens with in an interest in politics bare a greater resemblance to James Carville than Einstein or Martin Luther King or John Steinbeck. Radicalism has waned in politics, and although moderation is frequently what uncreative thinkers in the media salivate over, this is a terrible shame.
Less radicalism means less ideas on the fringe of mainstream politics and less people radically involved in politics. Now, the “fringe” is often derided as a place that not many people want to be and of those people that are there anyway, many are crazy. That’s an unfair characterization. Before an idea reaches mainstream acceptance, it must pass first through the fringe – in fact, almost every good idea in politics first emerges from some fringe before it reaches mainstream acceptance and then possibly societal acceptance.
Founding Father John Adams understood this idea. He realized that it was not bullets and combat that made independence from Britain inevitable, but a radicalization of the people of the American colonies.
“The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations … This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.”
Unfortunately, today there are few prominent and openly radical leaders – like John Adams and George Washington and Ben Franklin were in the early 1770s – in the political world. We have let ourselves be consigned to a surprisingly partisan world, in which the two major political parties and a sympathetic media, for the most part, determine what is acceptable discussion in politics. One of the great radical leaders of our time, Noam Chomsky, does a good job of summarizing what is wrong with this in his famous lecture “Manufacturing Consent.”
Perhaps this is an obvious point, but the democratic postulate is that the media are independent and committed to discovering and reporting the truth, and that they do not merely reflect the world as powerful groups wish it to be perceived. Leaders of the media claim that their news choices rest on unbiased professional and objective criteria, and they have support for this contention in the intellectual community. If, however, the powerful are able to fix the premises of discourse, to decide what the general populace is allowed to see, hear, and think about, and to “manage” public opinion by regular propaganda campaigns, the standard view of how the system works is at serious odds with reality…
…The mass media are not a solid monolith on all issues. Where the powerful are in disagreement, there will be a certain diversity of tactical judgments on how to attain generally shared aims, reflected in media debate. But views that challenge fundamental premises or suggest that the observed modes of exercise of state power are based on systemic factors will be excluded from the mass media even when elite controversy over tactics rages fiercely.
The significance of Einstein is that when figures as prominent and well-respected as him are vocally in favor of radical ideologies like socialism, they can get through a media blackout and radicalize and mobilize the population. That’s what Cassiodorus was talking about – there were proudly radical intellectuals, which meant there was a large section of the populace that was proudly radical, as well.
Just read some of Einstein’s famous essay “Why Socialism?” – it does not offer the same creed of compromising with those in power and bending to their prejudices in order to succeed as “Taking on the System.” That may be an unfair comparison, but Moulitsas is often portrayed as some kind of radical on the fringe of acceptable political debate (in fact, “radical” is in the subtitle of his book).
Another unabashed radical in today’s political discourse, Chris Hedges (a man who recently called for a return en masse to socialist philophies and the Green Party), addressed this idea in his most recent column from a slightly different angle. Liberals in particular, he says, have been neutered by the ruling political class, and that is preventing any sort of useful rebellion, like the kinds seen in the late 1800s, early 1900s, 1930s, and 1960s, to name a few notable times.
Those in power have disarmed the liberal class. They do not argue that the current system is just or good, because they cannot, but they have convinced liberals that there is no alternative.
And Glenn Greenwald – who is not a particularly ideological commentator, but is radically in favor of the rule of law and civil liberties (shouldn’t that be a contradiction?) – delved into this idea recently, paying particular attention to how political consultants have influenced the Democratic Party. And since the progressive “movement” has voluntarily and stubbornly attached itself to the Democratic Party, that has a tangible and negative effect on progressive change.
Whether one agreed with their original view or their election-year view mattered little; what was clear is that they were poll-driven opportunists with no core beliefs who were eager to shift with the slightest change in wind. That — far more than any specific position on war and Terrorism — is what makes Democrats appear to be weak losers, and it’s what they’ve been doing — and what the Carville/Greenberg faction — has been urging for years and years.
That’s the same mindset that led Democrats to pretend to want to end the Iraq War so that they could win the 2006 mid-term election by exploiting anti-war sentiment, but then, once they won, continue to fund the war without limits or conditions because they were politically afraid to follow through on their alleged convictions (and like clockwork, there, in 2007, was Democracy Corps predictably warning Democrats not to equate opposition to the war with a desire for Congress to actually end the war).
At the same time, powerful Democrats have been playing to radical desires for peace and other things without actually making radical change, and playing the game of the power structure by limiting radical thought through their influence on media and political discourse. This would not be much of a concern for radical and progressive activists if progressives (and unfortunately, many radical or formerly radical activists) hadn’t made themselves dependent on the Democratic Party. If the Democrats don’t support radicalism at all (and one wouldn’t expect them to, since those in power rarely do, except radicalism that keeps them in power), then the progressive foot soldiers supporting the party naturally won’t either.
And let me make myself clear. That is not a good thing. This disappearance, or at least extreme marginalization, of radicalism is unhealthy for politics.
Howard Zinn adressed this in a broad sense when, in response to MoveOn and other progressive organizations congratulating Democrats on a meek and fruitless effort to end the war in Iraq in 2007, he wrote,
When a social movement adopts the compromises of legislators, it has forgotten its role, which is to push and challenge the politicians, not to fall in meekly behind them.
We who protest the war are not politicians. We are citizens. Whatever politicians may do, let them first feel the full force of citizens who speak for what is right, not for what is winnable, in a shamefully timorous Congress.
————————————
Things do not change in a positive direction without radicals. They are one of several important ingredients present in any large shift in policy. There were the populists and Greenbacks and Socialists and progressives that ended the Gilded Age through reforms like initiative and referenda, anti-trust actions, regulation, and so on. There were the hippies and yippies and followers of Martin Luther King and followers of Malcom X and Black Panthers that affected some mighty societal and political changes that we’re all very aware of. Today, that ingredient is missing, in a sense. Before her tragic passing, Granny D had something to say about this:
A century ago, the ordinary people of America joined together to tie down the giant. The antitrust laws and environmental laws and the rights of workers to organize and collectively bargain for wages and benefits all joined to nurture the restoration of a great middle class — always the bedrock of democracy. The robber barons, the great giants, remained tied down, no longer free, liberated, to do as they pleased in crushing us with their great wealth and political power. And so it was for a time.
And now, loosed again, these giants have taken over our television networks and most of our newspapers, turning them against our interests and against the truth itself. These giants send our young people off to fight their commercial wars — great profitable ventures.
Despite this seemingly desperate message, Granny D kept her head up. She did not do so because she was willingly ignorant of how hopeless her situation was, but because she really believed, as do I, that positive change is possible. If they could do it during the Gilded Age, we can do it now.
Yes, let’s continue our efforts to reform our government, most especially with campaign finance reform. But, with revolutionary new tools, we are capable of redefining democracy at a critical moment. Let us not be shy about it for time is short. We stand for love and fairness in the world. That is not gentle work, nor is it painless or bloodless, as so many people around the world know.
I definitely agree with this, as do most of the people reading this, probably. But the question remains of how do we get from sitting on our rear ends and whining to creating change. Traditional protest has become ineffective, say some, at achieving any sort of ends we would have in mind. But Howard Zinn once again has something to contribute on this topic.
The responses are never adequate, until they build and build and something changes. People very often think that there must be some magical tactic, beyond the traditional ones–protests, demonstrations, vigils, civil disobedience–but there is no magical panacea, only persistence in continuing and escalating the usual tactics of protest and resistance. The end of the Vietnam War did not come because the Left suddenly did something new and dramatic, but because all of the actions built up over time.
Of course, there’s no reason to stop people from protesting creatively, but the overall message is that the ineffectiveness of traditional forms of protest is greatly exaggerated. Even with regards to the Iraq war, which is rightfully lamented as having an unfortunately small movement opposing it, the effect of protesters is there. Noam Chomsky contended in a lecture called “Crises and the Unipolar Moment” that he gave in October,
The Iraq War – there was massive protests before it officially started, and I stress “officially” because your candidate for president of the, presidency of the EU, and his colleague George Bush knew that they were already…start[ing] the war when they were putting on a show about wanting diplomacy and so on. But before it was officially started – March, 2003 – there was a massive international protest. I think that’s the first time in history that an imperialist war has been massively protested before it was officially begun. And it had an effect. The United States could not use – the United States and Britain – couldn’t use the tactics they used in South Vietnam. There was no saturation bombing by B-52s, there was no chemical warfare – horrible enough, but it could’ve been a lot worse.
And furthermore, the Bush Administration had to back down on its war aims. Step by step, it had to allow elections, which they didn’t want to do; mainly a victory for nonviolent Iraqi protest. They could kill insurgents, they couldn’t deal with hundreds of thousands of people in the streets, and their hands were tied by the domestic constraints. They had to abandon…officially, at least, virtually all the war aims – I mean, as late as November, 2007, the US was still insisting that the Status of Forces agreement allowed for an indefinite US military presence and…privileged access to Ira[q]’s resources by US investors. Well, they didn’t get that on paper, at least. They had to back down…Iraq’s a horror story, but it could’ve been a lot worse. So, yes, citizen protest can do something…we know that from this and many other examples. When there’s no protest and no attention, the power just goes wild. Like in Cambodia, Northern Laos.
The frequent feeling of desperation, however, may come from our willingness to believe what we are told. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it can contribute to bouts of hopelessness. A lifetime ago, in September 2009, I went to a protest of a video game military recruiting center, then did some amateur reporting about it online. I cited an article in which a military spokesperson said that there were going to be no more recruiting centers like this for economic reasons. When I posted this, David Swanson saw it much more clearly than I had, and said,
for godsake we’re shutting the place down thanks to your work, and you quote their nonsense about an economic motive???
as if they didn’t knwo the cost all along??
as if they don’t want more recruits??
CLAIM VICTORY. It is nothing else. They will not announce our victories for us.
I had bought the military’s excuse, when in reality they’re probably closing the center because of the awful press it gets them. It’s just one of these places, and they were all over the newspapers, TV, and internet (not to mention, a Frontline special that I almost made it onto) just because a few hundred angry, disgusted people showed up. That’s people power right there, something that is mostly ignored by the media. The important conclusion of what Howard Zinn was saying when I quoted him earlier is this:
If you listen to the media, you get no sense of what’s happening. I speak to groups of people in different parts of the country. I was in Austin, Texas recently and a thousand people showed up. I believe people are basically decent, they just lack information….
And there are people taking action against the warfare state, the corporate state, poverty, corruption, and all kinds of other things all over the place.
Cindy Sheehan, for instance, is one of the great dissidents of our time. Her latest project is a permanent encampment on the National Mall that will be opening this week. And closing once our troops are out of the Middle East and getting fair treatment from the government. And it’s not just political celebrities that are doing this. Some of the best resistance comes from everyday people like you and me who are fed up with being dehumanized and taken advantage of.
In fact, there is going to be a large peace march in Washington on Saturday, March 20 (and complementary demonstrations in San Francisco and Los Angeles). If you haven’t joined these people in their resistance yet – if your political action is limited to blogging or donations or calling your congressperson – then there’s no better time than that.
It’s not even necessary that we all become leaders. Some of us, however, need to take the plunge and get behind people like Cindy Sheehan, or else the ideas of people like that will never have mainstream acceptance, and they will never be adopted by government or society. Although it is funny, the following video offers a valuable lesson on how leadership and movements work.
————————————
Howard Zinn, Granny D, Noam Chomsky, Cindy Sheehan, David Swanson – these are all (at least) somewhat prominent radicals in our world today. This seemingly goes against everything I said about Einstein and the lack of radicalism in our political discourse.
It is true that these are some great dissidents, but they are not quite the same as the towering cultural figures that John Steinbeck and Albert Einstein were. Along with that, there is the problem of these people being consistently marginalized and not being backed up by large enough political movements to counter that. Instead of cheering on Cindy Sheehan and working for her campaign of radical dissent against Nancy Pelosi, many progressives – the same exact ones who are attached to the Democrats – wrote her off for not being loyal to the Democratic Party. It was not only the party leadership that did this, but many ordinary people who are also progressive activists.
In an interview with Bill Moyers a few months before his death, Howard Zinn said,
I think there are people like [the protesters of yore] today. But very often, they’re ignored in the media. You know, or they appear for a day, you know, on the pages of the Times or the Post. They- and then they disappear. But, well, you know, there are those people recently who sat in Chicago in this plant that was going to be closed by the Bank of America and these people sat in and refused to leave…But there are people — there are people today who are fighting evictions, fighting foreclosures. And, you know, very often, there’s a superficial understanding of a passive citizenry today, which is not true…the media are not covering them very well.
So maybe there are a few incarnations of Einstein out there today. But, like Zinn says, having a radical action in the news for one day is not the same as having a large and consistent radical movement. We as activists must not be afraid to be radicals. And we as radicals must commit ourselves to being activists. That is how we create a culture in which figures like Einstein can emerge, because right now there is no powerful and famous figure like Einstein doing it for us.
rossl In a lengthy interview on Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman, Congressman Dennis Kucinich explained why he would not vote for the present health care bill and defended his position against attacks from people on the left like Markos Moulitsas. He also spoke about the subjects of Afghanistan, campaign finance, and the passing of activist Granny D.
I mean, I have a responsibility to take a stand here on behalf of those who want a public option. There’s about thirty-four members of the Senate, at least, who have signed on to saying they support a public option. If I were to just concede right now and say, “Well, you know, whatever you want. All this pressure’s building. Just forget about it,” actually weakens every last-minute bit of negotiations that would try to improve the bill. So I think that it’s really critical to take this stand, because without it, there’s no real control over premiums. Without it, we have nothing in the bill except the privatization of our healthcare system.
The main topic of the interview was health care. Earlier in the week, of course, Kucinich said that he was willing to be the deciding vote against this health care bill. However, on Democracy Now! the Congressman said that his vote was not by a long shot a guaranteed “no:”
AMY GOODMAN: Is anything that would cause you to support the bill at this point?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, I mean, it’s—we don’t have the vote yet. The ball is still in play. The White House could decide that in order to pass the bill, they need to put public option in it, a meaningful public option. That would certainly get my attention. Or they could decide that they also want to protect the right of states to proceed with single payer, and not some place far into the future, but do it now. I mean, you have movements in Pennsylvania and in California, in my own state of Ohio, for states to be able to take responsibility for healthcare. I mean, create the possibility now. Let the momentum go in many different areas. But to say 2017 at best, and then it’s an if-come waiver to not permit the states to have legal protection against challenge by the insurance companies?
I should just mention here that I’m involved with the movement for single payer in Pennsylvania, which is currently supporting a bipartisan bill (with support from the governor and the state Democratic party, as well) in the state legislature.
There are two things that Kucinich is demanding, and apparently trying to get by building up pressure, from the health care bill. It remains unclear if he would vote for a bill with just one of the two. One is, of course, a strong public option, a subject which has been covered to death. The other is a way to change ERISA so that it does not interfere with implementing single payer systems on a state by state basis.
AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, President Obama says that the Senate bill does include single-payer language. He was talking about a provision by Senator Bernie Sanders which would allow states to use federal money to set up a single-payer system years down the road. What do you think of that?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, it provides for a waiver; it doesn’t grant the waiver. And it takes effect 2017. But by then, we’ll already have a system in place that will be very difficult to move out of. And it doesn’t cure the attack that insurance companies can make on state plans using the Employee—the ERISA Act. And so, my amendment that was passed in committee would have protected states from illegal challenge by insurance companies. The Sanders amendment doesn’t do that, so you still have the problem that, no matter what reforms are enacted, can be knocked out. I mean, I talked to the President personally about this. I’ve met with the President three times on this bill. The White House knows my position.
He was also asked to directly respond to what Markos Moulitsas said of him on the MSNBC show Countdown:
AMY GOODMAN: Our guest is Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. Juan?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Congressman, on the issue of healthcare, you’ve come under intense criticism by some commentators. Earlier this week, Markos Moulitsas, the founder of the website Daily Kos, appeared on MSNBC and slammed you for threatening to vote against the Democrats’ healthcare reform bill.
MARKOS MOULITSAS: [I’m going to hold] people like Dennis Kucinich responsible for the 40,000 Americans that die each year from a lack of healthcare. And I don’t care if you’re a Republican or you’re a conservative Democrat or you’re somebody like Dennis Kucinich. The fact is, this does a heck of a lot for a lot of people. And like I said, it’s not perfect, it definitely needs to be improved, but it’s a first step. And God knows, it’s taken us a long time to even get our toe in the door, given the corporate interests that are arrayed against any kind of real reform. So I think this is a first step. It’s definitely not the end of the path. It’s not the ideal solution. But we are—our foot’s in the door. And if somebody like Kucinich wants to block that, I find that completely reprehensible.
And he’s elected, not to run for president, which he seems to do every four years. He’s not elected to grandstand and to—and to give us this ideal utopian society. He’s elected to represent the people of his district, and he’s not representing the uninsured constituents in his district by pretending to take the high ground here. What he’s doing, he’s undermining this reform. He’s making common cause with the Republicans. And I think that’s a perfect excuse and a rationale for a primary challenge.
And just one note here. It has been pointed out that it’s too late to mount a 2010 primary challenge to Kucinich.
Kucinich said:
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I brought the issue of single-payer healthcare before three separate meetings of the Democratic Platform Committee. I brought it into two presidential campaigns to raise the bar about what’s possible. Now I made a compromise when I backed the public option and voted for it in committee. I also had an amendment passed that would protect the rights of states to proceed with a single-payer approach at a state level. Each step along the way, I’ve shown a willingness to try to work with the White House so that we can have meaningful healthcare reform. I signed a letter, along with seventy-seven other members of Congress, saying that I would not vote for the bill unless it had a robust public option. At this point, I’m the only one left standing who has kept that pledge.
I think that we have to ask ourselves why we would have a circumstance where, you know, a week or two before a vote would come, that it would be said that this is going to come down to a single member of Congress, who stands for healthcare for all, Medicare for all, who stands for a public option, who stands to protect right of states, to pursue it, and yet, we should sweep all that aside in favor of a bill that gives the insurance companies a lock on health insurance in America, privatizes the health insurance—$70 billion-a-year subsidy to the insurance industry.
Kucinich has reiterated these ideas elsewhere, such as ABC’s Top Line (skip to about 4 minutes into the video).
“You know, this thing isn’t over. They know what they have to do to get the votes and if they need my vote badly enough I suppose they have to think about a robust public option and about the [Employee Retirement Income Security Act], addressing the ERISA preemption which would in effect, protect states from a tax by insurance companies if the states want to establish a single-payer system.”
“I think that the Democrats ought not to be fronting for insurance company interests, and frankly every time they lay a bill out insurance stocks go up. I mean, how — how would that happen?” he added. “I mean, we have to have a bill for the American people and if the administration wants to change its position, I’m all ears.”
Before health care, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez asked Kucinich about the symbolic resolution on Afghanistan that he introduced and was subsequently voted on, about which he said,
I felt, after a eight-and-a-half years, we had waited long enough to have the debate, and so I used the War Powers Act to create the debate.
I’m glad there was a debate. Now Congress has taken responsibility. The debate didn’t turn out the way I would have liked it to, but at least we brought it into the public’s awareness that Congress has now entered into essentially affirming the Obama administration’s policy on Afghanistan.
The Citizens United decision and the death of Granny D were both mentioned, as well.
What an amazing woman, who lived her life with great passion and commitment to the highest principles of our country. Her commitment to seeing real campaign finance reform, you know, has really been a central part of a movement that tells us we have to change the way we finance elections in order to reclaim our government.
