People Before Profit blog

War Vets Support Controversial "Mosque" Project

Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:45:00 +0000

In a letter of support for the First Amendment, veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have sent an open letter to the organizers of Park51 Community Center in lower Manhattan describing the effort as being "about as pro-America as one can get."

Park51 is the new name of the community center, which would, in addition to athletic and cultural facilities, house a prayer room for Muslim users of the center. It recently came under fire from Republican Party leaders and pundits like Sarah Palin, Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich. In a chorus they argued that Muslims shouldn't be allowed to build a center in lower Manhattan, the site of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

Despite the opposition from the Republican Party, and because of the long community ties the Park51 group has in New York, both the city's political establishment and most of its residents have supported the move.

The veterans' letter comes after strong statements on behalf of the religious freedoms of all Americans from New York Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama.

Authored by VoteVets.org, an organization that advocates for veterans' issues and supports veterans for elected office, the letter urged the Park51 organizers not to abandon the project.

In addition the letter asked the group to circulate the letter to any interested party, "so they know that veterans like us see this as an important issue of our very Constitution and our national security."

The veterans cited their sworn oath as members of the military "to uphold the Constitution" as a basic reason for their support for the project.

The letter noted the hypocrisy of the opponents of the project:

"For all the talk these days from some quarters about the importance of protecting the Constitution and allowing the free market to work unfettered, those same people are fighting against your community's right to buy property and worship freely. Our duty to protect the Constitution didn't end when our service did. It's up to us to stand up for the right for all Americans to enjoy the Constitutional freedoms that so many around the world don't have. So, we are standing up for you."

Protection of the rights of all Americans to practice their faith in the manner of their choosing would also "deal a blow to the propaganda of al Qaeda and Islamist extremists, who recruit on the talking point that the United States is in a war against Islam."

Finally, the letter noted that taking a stand on behalf of the Constitution promotes the safety of U.S. military forces abroad.

"As veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan," it concluded, "we believe the construction of your community center isn't 'anti-America' at all. In fact, building your community center is about as pro-America as one can get."

The full letter can be found here, and veterans are encouraged to sign and circulate it.

Photo by Paul Stein, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0.

Cuban Writer Leonardo Padura Announces New Film Project

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:44:00 +0000

Editor's note: See the Political Affairs interview with Padura here.

HAVANA, Cuba, Aug 24 (acn) Cuban writer Leonardo Padura said he’s now working on a script of two stories for a film entitled Siete dias en La Habana (Seven Days in Havana), along with directors Benicio del Toro and Juan Carlos Tabio.

Now teaching courses at a Spanish university, the Cuban novelist announced that the film’s shooting has been scheduled for next year, the El Pais newspaper reports.

Under Morena Films Productions, the film is composed of seven shorts, in which six foreign directors will take part as well as Tabio, who is the project’s host.

Laurent Cantet is another of the filmmakers who have announced their participation in the film.

During a visit to Havana a few months ago, the director of La clase (The Class), the winner of the Palma de Oro Prize of the 2008 Cannes Festival, said that he will direct one of the plots making up the movie.

Recently, Padura told a newspaper from Cantabria that the French producer liked his story so much that he will shoot a feature film in the near future.

According to El Pais newspaper, the Cuban writer also revealed that an important US producer and director has expressed his interest in adapting to cinema his series of detective stories, which have Mario Conde as their investigator.

The author of El hombre que amaba los perros (The Man who Loved Dogs) preferred not to disclose the name, since for 12 years now he has been longing to see one of his works adapted to the big screen.

Leonardo Padura, a graduate of Philosophy and a journalist, has won several important prizes during his career as a writer, like the Novel Prize of the Cuban Association of Writers and Artists and the internationals Cafe Gijon and Hammett.

From the Cuban News Agency

Photo: Leonardo Padura.

GOP Senate Candidate Dino Rossi's Corruption Problems and More

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:41:00 +0000

For his shady business dealings and efforts to bypass campaign laws, Republican Senate candidate from Washington state, Dino Rossi, has been listed as one of 12 "crooked candidates" in 2010 by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

According to CREW research, Rossi's relationship with lobbyists David and Richard Ducharme and real estate mogul Michael Mastro deserves investigation. In the 1990s, as a state senator, Rossi accepted, along with the and the Ducharmes, a $2 million loan from Mastro to buy a property. Rossi failed to report a separate $50,000 portion of the deal on his campaign financial disclosure forms. It was a failure to report that launched an ethics investigation into the financial records of now-troubled Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y.

Mastro, who donated thousands to Rossi's failed campaigns for Washington state governor, subsequently filed for bankruptcy as his investment schemes collapsed in 2009. At the time of the failure of his real estate empire, Mastro's dealings with investors came under investigation by the Washington Department of Financial Institutions, after creating a scheme that, according to descriptions of the deal on CREW's website, seemed not unlike the Bernie Madoff scandal.

Because such ethic violations are not investigated after five years in Washington state, the details of Rossi's relationship with Mastro have not been fully revealed. In fact, some in Washington state are demanding a more careful scrutiny of Rossi's income tax filings and business dealings after Rossi and the Ducharme's made $600,000 on the real estate deal with Mastro. Some media accounts also raised questions about Rossi's failure to pay thousands in back taxes.

While Mastro's motives for providing then-State Senator Rossi with such a lucrative deal and his subsequent campaign donations are unclear, Rossi's political positions seem to be based on his personal ambitions and financial dealings. According to the Seattle Times, Rossi has complained about state regulations that govern health and safety in apartment buildings he owned. The news report also uncovered complaints by tenants in Rossi-owned buildings about a "mold problem." If elected, Rossi has promised to fight state and federal regulation of industries he holds investments in.

Rossi's get rich quick schemes weren't confined to real estate. According to the CREW analysis, he also talked the Ducharmes into investing thousands in the Eastside Commercial Bank, installing David Ducharme as CEO. As of 2007, when he prepared to launch his second failed bid for governor, Rossi claimed to hold only $75,000 worth of investments in the bank on his financial disclosure forms.

Rossi's bank then undertook the sort of deals and practices that most observers blame for the collapse of the U.S. financial sector in 2008. In 2009, federal investigators declared the bank to be "engaged in unsafe and unsound banking practices relating to its strategic and capital planning, credit underwriting, credit administration, concentration risk management, and liquidity management." They demanded the bank owners inject $3 million into the bank to make it sound. As of May 2010, Rossi's group had not yet complied.

Apart from his shady business dealings and failure to fully report them on campaign disclosure documents, CREW also described how Rossi created a foundation with obvious ambitions for political office that helped him further avoid full transparency. He used his foundation, called Forward Washington, to pay himself an annual salary of $75,000 and to use its resources like a campaign fund without abiding "by campaign contribution limits or disclosure laws," CREW stated.

Only when state investigators looked into the matter did Rossi step down as president of the foundation.

In 2008, watchdog groups filed a 180-page complaint against Rossi for accepting almost $7 million in campaign funds from the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) and allegedly coordinating campaign activities with that group, for which Richard Ducharme has been a lobbyist. While state investigators cleared Rossi of technical violations of the law, CREW maintained that Rossi and BIAW "skirted the law in promoting his candidacy" and attacking Rossi's Democratic opponents.

If Rossi succeeds in his bid for Senate, it is likely that he will face immediate ethics-related scrutiny, likely undermining his effectiveness in that body.

But it his ideological positions that anger working families most, according to analysis of his voting record by the Washington State Labor Council.

While in the state legislature, Rossi voted to cut benefits for unemployed workers, to gut laws that provide overtime pay to workers, to kill collective bargaining rights for workers, and to block protections for victims of domestic abuse. Worst of all Rossi voted to give legal immunity to employers that intentionally harm workers and to weaken state laws the protect workers, notably in the building industry with which he has strong business ties.

Photo by Matt Stoller, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0

Clear Choice in Michigan Gov. Race: Snyder the Outsourcer vs. Bernero the Fighter

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:04:00 +0000

Grand Rapids, Mich. – In the race for the Michigan governor's job, the choice is simple. The Republican is a former corporate executive who oversaw moving jobs out of the country while the state's economy tanked. The Democrat, Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero, presided over new economic growth in the past year that saw the creation of 3,100 manufacturing jobs in mid-Michigan.

According to state government data, the return of mostly unionized manufacturing jobs to mid-Michigan outpaced job growth in all sectors. Industry analysts have been pleasantly surprised by the new jobs creation and link it directly to new growth in the auto sector. Right now, Bernero's city trails only Detroit in manufacturing jobs growth.

In the state as a whole, since the implementation of President Obama's recovery act, Michigan's high unemployment rate has fallen by more than 2 full percentage points. Michigan Republicans uniformly opposed the recovery act, and other job-creating measures, claiming a "do nothing" approach would be better.

After a significant federally-financed bailout of two of the big three auto companies and the wildly popular "cash for clunkers" program last summer, Ford, GM and Chrysler have reported new profits in the billions. GM even has announced plans for a new stock sale to repay the government funds.

Clearly, however, Michigan working families have been most responsible for the turn around. As newly elected UAW President Bob King said in a recent statement touting GM's rosier financial reports, “The commitment, sacrifices and hard work of UAW members at GM is an enormous part of this positive news coming from the company."

While some Michigan Republicans supported the auto bailout, most did not. As a potential candidate for the Republican nomination for governor last year, corporate executive Rick Snyder kept mum. In fact, he still has little to say, a stance that risks alienating the anti-bailout hysteria of the angry Tea Party base of the Michigan GOP.

On the other hand, Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero earned a national reputation for his consistent defense of autoworkers and Michigan from attacks by the national mainstream media and the hacks who blamed workers for the collapse of the industry and Michigan's economic decline. Bernero criticized parts of the bailout plan that asked working families to take wage and benefit cuts to pay for bad corporate decisions that led to problem in the first place.

For this, the right-wing, big business media labeled him "America's Angriest Mayor," a nickname he now wears proudly. In a recent interview on mid-Michigan talk radio, Bernero said, "What I was angry about was how the national pundits in news media were treating Michigan autoworkers."

"It really did get under my skin, they way they talked about autoworkers, the auto companies, and even the UAW," the son of a retired autoworker said. "I think there was just an unfair portrayal of our state."

Bernero pointed out also that during the crisis he helped organize a trip to Washington with other mayors whose towns and cities need a strong auto industry to fight for its revitalization.

Even as auto recovers, experts have noted that new job growth in Michigan hasn't been confined to auto. New jobs are being created in significant numbers in the bio-medical and renewable energy fields, both a special focus of outgoing Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm (D), who cannot run for reelection.

New economic growth has become increasingly diverse, reported Mark Bashore of East Lansing's WKAR radio. He cited the opening of plants in mid-Michigan that are making medical devices and wind energy products.

Meanwhile, GOP gubernatorial candidate Rick Snyder's record on jobs is less than appealing to Michigan workers still concerned about high unemployment. Michigan Democrats recently slammed Snyder for his role in sending jobs out of the country in the midst of Michigan's economic crisis. While an executive at Gateway Computers based in Ann Arbor, Mich., Snyder's company reportedly outsourced 20,000 jobs out of the country.

Even a report in the conservative Wall Street Journal recently questioned Snyder's own claims about his achievements in business, saying he didn't really create jobs as a venture capitalist and noting the "jury is still out" on the success of some of his business investments.

While Snyder correctly claims he can't be held responsible for every single one of the jobs outsourced by Gateway, he offered no criticism of his company for doing so. He has refused to provide a serious plan to recover those jobs, except to reward his old company, and others like it, with new tax breaks for killing jobs at the expense of an already overstretched state budget.

In fact, multinational companies like Gateway Computers may have led the way in slowing economic growth in the U.S. since the recession began. A new study out this week from the Commerce Department revealed that since the recession began in 2007, outsourcing companies have reduced the number of jobs in their U.S. operations by 2.1 percent while increasing their workforces in other countries by 1.1 percent. These small percentages add up to millions of lost jobs.

Fortunately, some of the loopholes in tax law that rewarded companies for moving jobs out of the country are being closed. As part of the recently passed state aid and teacher jobs bill – a bill opposed by every single Michigan Republican member of Congress – corporations will no longer be given tax breaks in the U.S. for creating jobs in other parts of the world.

While Michigan's working families aren't ready to sing "Happy Days are Here Again," the economy is pointed in the right direction, and they can ill afford to risk that future by voting for Snyder the outsourcer.

Photo: Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero (l) campaigns in Detroit's Eastern Market. (Photo by j/k_lolz, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0)

Pentagon's Distortion on China's Military

Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:13:00 +0000

Original source: Global Times (China)

The Pentagon's annual report on the strength of China's military 2010 contained very little surprising material.

Other than limited credit given to the Chinese military's overseas peacekeeping efforts and humanitarian assistance, the annual report is making vague accusations over China's military power, growth and intentions.

The report calls for sustained and reliable US-China military-to-military relations. Yet, given the recent US military activities surrounding China's Yellow Sea and the South China Sea, including the symbolic presence of the aircraft carrier George Washington, has US military shown willingness to build mutual trust?

The report illustrates the Pentagon's hostility against the Chinese defense sector. It also sent a confusing message to the world about China's military role.

Washington' s report was released one day after it was reported that China became the world's second largest economy. Whether the timing is a coincidence or not, China's military growth is matching the increase of its economic power. The Pentagon, facing budget pressures due to the economic downturn, naturally wants to keep China as a lasting military threat.

The US continues to flex its military muscle by surrounding China with its military bases, engaging in a war in neighboring Afghanistan, and continuing to sell weapons to Taiwan.

China bears the burden of realizing sovereign unity and fending off separatists, which is a daunting challenge among other large nations. It is Washington that makes China feel insecure. Neither side wants war, but mistrust between the two will only line the pockets of defense contractors in the US.

Chinese citizens want the same things that most US citizens want. They want a peaceful and stable life. They want a life better for their kids than they had.

Perhaps US officials should look closer at the real situation in China and they would find out the two peoples are not so different.

The Chinese public wants the government to provide them with security, like any other country, and consistent economic growth. Daily life, not confrontation and provocation, tops the agenda of ordinary Chinese.

China is sticking firmly to the principle of peaceful development, but will a war be forced upon China? The question increasingly puzzles the Chinese public.

The Pentagon needs to forget its old mentality and start looking toward a peaceful future.

Photo: US Naval operations in the South China Sea. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ernesto Bonilla/Released)

Labor Launches Campaign to Mobilize Unemployed Voters

Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:12:00 +0000

Original source: Working America

Working America Unveils Campaign to Organize & Mobilize Unemployed Voters
August 18, 2010

(Washington, DC, Aug. 18) Working America is launching a campaign that will organize & mobilize hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers across the nation for the November elections. The campaign will engage unemployed Working America members who are registered voters by reaching out to them in their homes, on the street and in unemployment offices, with the goal of rallying voters around the crucial issues of jobs and trade.

"Millions of people are unemployed and underemployed, and millions more are worried about the future. Twenty-five percent of Working America members who are working are afraid they will lose their jobs," said Karen Nussbaum, director of Working America. "Yet some politicians are willing to play politics with the survival of unemployed workers and their families. We'll make sure that unemployed workers get out and vote, and that they know the records of the candidates on issues like extending unemployment insurance, investing in jobs and preventing outsourcing."

Over this past year, Working America has spoken to over 25,000 people a week about jobs and the economy through door-to-door canvasses. The organization is stepping up its field mobilization efforts in the fall with a tele-town hall that will reach 20,000 unemployed voters across the country to talk about unemployment, job creation and the November elections.

Working America is mobilizing unemployed voters through a combination of face-to-face and mail campaigns. In addition to talking to everyday voters on the streets, field organizers in 12 cities are talking to unemployed workers at unemployment offices and job training facilities. Workers at these facilities will have the chance to fill out "Help Wanted" petitions to send to Congress asking them what they've done to create jobs and help unemployed workers. Working America organizers are also reaching out to members by mail and phone to pledge to vote in the November elections.

Working America is encouraging unemployed voters to reach out to each other by hosting a "Pledge to Vote" postcard campaign in September. Workers in several cities will organize parties where they will write personal notes to other unemployed voters, encouraging them to vote the right way to create jobs. The goal is to provide workers with a unique opportunity to come together, share their stories, and take action.

Working America also manages the Unemployment Lifeline (www.unemploymentlifeline.com), an online site that unemployed workers can use to communicate with other unemployed workers and access vital local and national resources, such as listings for local unemployment offices, childcare and healthcare facilities. And starting in October, workers will be able to use the Job Tracker, an online resource provided by Working America, to look up companies in their towns that are outsourcing jobs, endangering their workers, or violating their rights at work.

Working America, community affiliate of the AFL-CIO, represents working families to mobilize around economic issues like health care and good jobs. Working America represents 3 million people and is the fastest-growing organization for working people in the country. For more information, go to www.workingamerica.org.

Protecting Social Security: Let’s Tell The Deficit Commission Not to Slash Entitlements

Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:07:00 +0000

Original source: HandsOffOurMedicare.org

Earlier today [Aug. 18, 2010] I sent a letter to the White House, signed by myself and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Lynn Woolsey, making it clear that we will stand against any potential cuts to Social Security benefits. Whether they come from the president’s debt commission or from members of Congress, any proposals to reduce entitlement benefits — one of the most fundamental bonds between the American people and the federal government — will be dead on arrival in the House of Representatives.

It’s become conventional wisdom that Social Security is in crisis. As the story goes, we can’t afford to ensure our retirees maintain a decent standard of living and we need to slash and burn our way to fiscal “responsibility” or we’ll all fall off a cliff. In fact, Social Security is not funded from the general treasury and does not contribute to the national debt, a point we make clear in our letter. Calls for fiscal austerity often include the disingenuous claim that tax cuts magically pay for themselves — as Sen. Jon Kyl recently suggested — and all we need to do is take money from America’s older citizens and working families to put our checkbook in order. This is nonsense.

What these fiscal hawks don’t tell you is that income above a $106,800 earnings cap is not subject to Social Security payroll taxes. That’s right: anything you earn above that figure doesn’t go into Social Security. Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking this is just a liberal position — it’s an objective fact. Instead of hacking away at one of America’s fundamental promises to its retirees, the debt commission should think about the possibility of having high-wage earners pay the same amount to protect our retirement system as everyone else does.

What else don’t the fiscal hawks tell you? Well, have you heard this one?

After 2037, Social Security will not contribute to the deficit, because it is prohibited by law from taking on debt in order to pay benefits. Instead, if the projected shortfall were to go unaddressed, Social Security would pay reduced benefits, equal to about 75% to 80% of promised benefits, according to the Social Security actuaries and CBO, respectively. This is a situation that Congress must take action to avoid, but it is not the catastrophic collapse that some alarmists warn about. Eliminating this shortfall would require raising revenues equal to about 0.5% to 0.7% of gross domestic product, according to CBO and Social Security, respectively.

Probably not. Instead you’ve probably heard, as GOP House leader John Boehner recently said, that Social Security is flat broke and we need to raise the retirement age to 70 immediately.

This is a fight that the American people are going to win. According to a major new poll just released by AARP, 63 percent of Americans view Social Security as one of the “very most important” programs in the country “and over seven in ten believe that most people on Social Security could not do very well without it” (emphasis in the original). When you hear someone holding forth about Social Security being unsustainable, remember those numbers. We need Social Security now more than ever before, especially given an economic downturn that’s cost several generations trillions of dollars in net worth. These are the times that Social Security was designed to address. A struggling economy shouldn’t mean a financially insecure future for ourselves, our neighbors and our communities. That’s just not the American way.

Photo by ProgressOhio, courtesy Flickr

One Nation Working Together – March on Washington

Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:05:00 +0000

Original source: United for Peace and Justice

UFPJ 2010 Fall Call to Action:
Peace, Jobs and Justice Now!
August 28th - Washington DC and Detroit!
Oct. 2nd - One Nation Movement, Washington DC

This fall movements for peace and justice will have unprecedented opportunities to support and build on one another's work while highlighting one of the root causes of all of our struggles – war. The US military consumes over 50% of our national budget – tax dollars that are desperately needed here at home to save jobs and support families. Outpaced only by 35 nations in oil consumption, the U.S. war machine is a huge contributor to climate change. With more than 700 bases girdling the globe, U.S. foreign policy of endless war has wreaked havoc on people around the world as we see today in the ongoing occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, and U.S. support for the occupation of Palestine. To maintain a nuclear umbrella of intimidation, war makers continue to build new generations of expensive weapons that risk nuclear annihilation. Chronic war or threat of war ensures that ruling elites benefit while ensuring that succeeding generations of the world's people are impoverished. We must stop this madness!

The peace and anti-war movements cannot stop it alone. UFPJ is working with hundreds of groups across the nation to take action to build a peoples' movement. Mark August 28th and especially October 2nd on your calendar as days for hitting the streets in solidarity. It is time to stand up with our friends and allies.

Demand Change

Rainbow Push, the United Auto Workers and the National Action Center are calling on people to join them on August 28 in Washington DC and Detroit, the 47th Anniversary of King's March on Washington.

The NAACP, SEIU 1199, Green for All, National Council of La Raza, US Student Association, and the Center for Community Change have called on the progressive movement to unite and join them on October 2 in Washington DC.

United for Peace and Justice is leading an effort to bring the peace movement into these mobilizations UFPJ joins the AFL-CIO, SEIU and a broad range of civil rights, labor, peace and social justice organizations in endorsing this call and in organizing for August 28 and October 2 to bring as visible and strong message to the Obama Administration that it is time to deliver on their promises to end war and rebuild our country!

One Nation Working Together?

Come to Washington DC on October 2 for an emergency mobilization of all progressive movements at this critical moment!

* Take our government back from big oil and the banks.
* Stand up for the well-being and economic security of all our families.
* Stand up against hatred, intolerance and immigrant-bashing.
* Stand up for a society that works for all of us.
* Cut military spending -- fund jobs and human needs.
* Peace abroad, renewable energy at home.
* Demand the change that was promised!

March With Us

Our country is at a crossroads. Big oil, big banks, big pharmaceuticals, the military-industrial complex and big money of all types have a stranglehold on our government and our society. Their corporate agenda has led us into an unparalleled social crisis marked by economic distress, environmental danger, unsustainable military spending and endless war.

We call on all parts of the peace and justice movement to mobilize for the October 2 demonstration and participate in the One Nation Working Together Campaign and bring our priorities to D.C. We will march as a peace contingent bearing slogans such as: "Fund Jobs, Not War", "Cut the Military Budget, Invest in America", "Stop the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq", and "Jobs, Peace, Justice"!

It's time to take the streets again!
Join the Fall Campaign for Peace, Jobs and Justice for All!
Spread the word and organize where and when you can this fall!

Aug 28th: March in Detroit for Jobs, Justice and Peace
Aug 28th: 47th Anniversary of March on Washington to Reclaim King's vision of Peace and Justice
Oct. 2: One Nation Working Together March in Washington, DC - ALL out for a major Peace and Justice contingent
Oct. 7-10: Global Days of Local Actions to Stop the Afghanistan War - Bring the Troops and Money Home!

Don't Deport Ivan Nikolov

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:45:00 +0000

Detained for more than three months and held by federal immigration officials, he waits for imminent deportation to a country he has not called his home since he was 11. His name is Ivan Nikolov, 21, and his case has garnered the attention of immigration reform activists and local community leaders in his hometown of Roseville, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit.

His fiance for the past three years, Allana Woolley of neighboring Grosse Point, Mich., says, “My fiancé, Ivan, has called America home since the age of 11 and is an American in every way, except for a piece of paper." Woolley is a student at Detroit's Wayne State University, where Ivan had also hoped to pursue a degree in film.

According to Woolley, Ivan came to the U.S. ten years ago from Russia with his mother and biological father. Early on his father may have held legal papers for the family, but after a year and an abusive relationship, the father left the family, possibly ending up in China.

Ivan first learned about his illegal status, a situation over which he had no control, at the age of 15 when he began asking his mother for a drivers' license. Her papers had never been "fixed," and she was deported back to Russia more than a week ago, despite being married to Ivan's stepfather, an American citizen.

Ivan and Allana wanted to marry as soon as possible, but Woolley fears their hopes to build a family here may be shattered before they even get the chance.

She wants the federal government to intervene and halt Nikolov's deportation proceedings. "Secretary Napolitano and ICE Director John Morton should listen to the community and let Ivan fix his papers and stay with his family, here in Michigan," Woolley pleaded.

Woolley also believes Ivan's case is a good example for why immigration reform must happen soon, specifically passage of a bipartisan bill that addresses undocumented immigrant youth pending in Congress now. That bill, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors or DREAM Act, according to the United States Student Association (USSA), an advocacy organization of millions of college students, would ease legalization for tens of thousands of undocumented immigrant youth of college age and allow them access to colleges and universities.

Of this law, USSA President Lindsay McCluskey points out, “Access to higher education is a fundamental right and is being violated by our current education and immigration laws. Passage of the DREAM Act will lead to and strengthen comprehensive immigration reform that will move our country closer to a truly just society.”

According to Ryan Bates of Reform Immigration for America, Michigan, "The DREAM Act would be an important down payment on the commitment that the President and leaders in Congress have made to passing comprehensive immigration reform, and should pass this year."

Echoing this point, Lizbeth Mateo, co-founder of pro-reform DREAM Team L.A., said, “Every day we hear of hard working, talented students like Ivan who are facing deportation, which is why youth-led organizations like Dream Team Los Angeles and many more continue to push for the immediate passage of the DREAM Act."

"We will continue doing our part, but we need Congress to step up and address this issue immediately," she added.

Woolley says, “[Ivan] is the perfect example of why the DREAM Act should be passed – he’s worked hard and wants to contribute to our community. Talented immigrant youth are assets to this country and should be realizing their potential instead of languishing in jails across America.”

"It's cruel," she continues, "to send Ivan to a country he doesn't even know, that he hasn't even seen since he was a child, and to separate him from his family here."

Woolley says Ivan's mother doesn't want him to come to Russia and hopes he will be able to stay with Allana and his stepfather.

Woolley has led the campaign to keep Ivan in Michigan. She rallied friends and neighbors to a vigil at Rep. Sander Levin's office recently. And a number of community leaders and elected officials have joined her cause.

For example, Pastor Charles Williams of King Solomon Baptist Church in Detroit and a board member of an African American ministers' group affiliated with People for the American Way, said protecting immigrants from deportation is a basic civil rights issue. “Immigration reform is truly a pressing civil rights issue,” he told reporters on a conference call this week. “I want to express my unwavering support for Ivan and Allana. This is a future family that is being broken up."

"It is very easy to think of immigration as an issue that happens to someone else, someone else's family, someone else's neighborhood," Rev. Williams added, "But this is an issue that affects all groups."

"The United States is full of immigrants," he said. "We built this country together and opened it up for all of us to share in it. We need our leaders to stand up straight and do what is right before it is too late.”

Irene Kepler, a Macomb County Commissioner who represents Ivan's hometown of Roseville, continued the call for reform by saying, “In Roseville, we value our heritage as a nation of immigrants. It's a tragedy that young people like Ivan, who could be part of the next generation of Macomb County's leaders, face an uncertain future. We need to make sure that something as simple as a paperwork error, in this case a mis-filed change of address form, doesn't result in a whole family facing deportation.”

“Ivan embodies the core values of America yet our broken system means he is about to be torn from his family and sent back to what is now a foreign land to him in Russia,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of the immigration reform advocacy group America’s Voice. “His story, along with countless others from hard working students and residents in this country, underscore the need for immediate action by Congress."

Sharry urged full support for Senate Majority Harry Reid's call for passage of the DREAM Act. Woolley said she hopes Reid's efforts are successful when Congress returns in September. "I hope Ivan is one of the least people this has to happen to and that no other kid has to go through this," she said after a deep sigh.

Obama Administration Slams GOP Obstruction, Unveils Broadband Projects

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:40:00 +0000

An Obama administration official slammed Republican roadblocks to economic recovery as Vice President Joe Biden, this week, announced recovery act-funded investments in 94 broadband projects. Aiming to provide high-speed Internet access to communities in 37 states, some $7 billion in recovery act funds have been allocated for investments in broadband development.

Currently, 36 percent of Americans lack access to high-speed Internet service, government officials estimate.

The funds will come in the form of grants and loans, some of which leverage additional private investments, to utility companies to lay fiber optic cable, build wireless transmission towers and purchase other technologies to construct 25,000 miles of broadband networks, the administration said.

These infrastructure improvements will link some 19 million people, 1.8 million small businesses, and thousands of other "anchor institutions," like schools, libraries, community centers, hospitals, and public safety facilities, to high-speed Internet service.

“Today's investment in broadband technology will create jobs across the country and expand opportunities for millions of Americans and American companies," Vice President Biden said in a press statement. "In addition to bringing 21st century infrastructure to underserved communities and rural areas, these investments will begin to harness the power of broadband to improve education, health care and public safety."

In a conference call with the media to announce the projects, the Vice President's top economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, also suggested Republicans who have delayed recovery act funds have blocked economic growth. Their ideological opposition to the President's economic policies likely slowed the return of job creation for their states and localities.

"It's certainly the case if you were late to act on recovery act funds that were available to your community, you delayed job creation and that's a very significant cost to the workforces in those communities," he said.

Despite these partisan roadblocks, Bernstein told reporters, the recovery act has sparked much progress, especially when compared to where the economy stood when President Obama took office. "At that time, the depth of the recession was just becoming clear," he said. "We now know that the economy was contracting at the nightmarish rate of almost seven percent in 2008." And in the first six months of 2009 alone some 4 million jobs were lost.

The pace of the economic disaster was slowed and even turned around after President Obama signed the recovery act, however. "Over the past year, GDP has grown at the rate of three percent, and we've added over 600,000 private sector jobs," he said. The recovery act also played a role in protecting or creating about 3 million jobs, according to Congressional Budget Office data and other non-government studies.

He explained the recovery act has moved into the "investment" phase with billions for developments in clean energy and technology, high-speed rail, and the new broadband Internet projects just announced.

"We need to grow faster and to create more jobs," he added, "but the huge swing here from negatives to positives is historically unprecedented."

Responding to Republican charges that broadband access is a "luxury" in a time of deficits and slow growth, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke stated that high-speed Internet is an important tool for business growth, education and job creation.

"When you talk to the small businesses I've come across throughout the country, for them, high-speed Internet service is a necessity," he said. Without broadband access, "they're losing orders. They're not able to market themselves. They're not able to transact with more customers or suppliers."

"For them, high-speed Internet is just as important as electrification was for the country in the 30's," Locke explained. Access to high-speed Internet will open up the world to small businesses, students seeking online education, and local institutions like schools, libraries, healthcare facilities, and public safety organizations.

Photo: These students in rural Oklahoma have access to foreign language courses through new high-speed Internet service as a result of President Obama's recovery act. (USDA)

The Myth of the "Sub-Prime Crisis"

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:36:00 +0000

Original source: People's Democracy (India)

Capitalism, like the proverbial horse, kicks even when in decline. Even as the current crisis hit it, it gave an ideological kick by attributing the crisis to “sub-prime” lending; and so well-directed was its kick that the whole world ended up calling it the “sub-prime crisis.”

The idea, bought even in progressive circles, was that in the euphoria of the boom that had preceded the crisis, financial institutions in the U.S. had given loans even to sections of the population who were not really “credit-worthy,” i.e. who were poor and had few assets of their own. They would normally not get loans from banks; they were not “prime borrowers.” They got loans only because the boom had lowered guards everywhere and banks had started underestimating risks. But if you give loans to people who are not “creditworthy,” who are not “true blue,” then you inevitably come to grief, which is what ultimately happened, precipitating the crisis.

Remarkably, the idea appealed not only to the Right but even to sections of the Left. Sections of the Left liked it because they read into this explanation a basic contradiction of the system: to keep the boom going the capitalist system needs to give more and more loans, and therefore to bring an ever larger number of people into the ambit of borrowing, so that the level of aggregate demand is kept suitably up. This necessarily means that “sub-prime” borrowers have to be brought in more and more for the sustenance of the boom, which therefore must eventually lead to a collapse. The Right saw in it an opportunity to argue that the crisis arose because capitalism had become “too soft”: people who should not be touched by financial institutions with a barge-pole had actually been given huge loans. The problem therefore lay not with the system as such, since it normally would never do such silly things, but with an aberration it had suddenly got afflicted with. Some even saw in this aberration a muddle-headed humaneness which the system had suddenly developed. And they used the crisis as an illustration of the fact that all such humaneness is fundamentally misplaced, that there is, as they had always maintained, no scope for sentiment in the harsh world of economics.

APOLOGISTS OF NEO-LIBERALISM

In India, apologists of neo-liberalism worked overtime to use the fact of the crisis itself to discredit policies of “social banking,” such as priority sector lending and differential interest rates, that the country had embarked on after bank nationalization. All such policies, they argued, saddle banks with the responsibility of lending to “sub-prime” borrowers, and hence put on their shoulders an unbearable burden of “non-performing assets.” This ultimately makes them unviable and in need of substantial doses of government assistance to survive, as had happened in the US and elsewhere. The moral of the story therefore was that in countries like India the markets should be left to work in their own pitiless manner without having to accommodate sentimental hogwash like “social banking” and “financial inclusion.” Hence by a curious irony, a crisis precipitated in the advanced capitalist world by the free functioning of the markets was used in the Indian context to argue for an unleashing of the free functioning of the markets.

The basic argument about “sub-prime” lending causing the crisis however was a flawed one. The banks had given loans to the so-called “sub-prime borrowers” against the security of the houses they had bought with these loans. If the values of the houses collapsed then banks’ asset values collapsed relative to their liabilities, precipitating a financial crisis. The cause of the crisis therefore lay not in the identity of the borrowers, the fact of their being “sub-prime,” but in the collapse of the asset values, which in turn was because asset markets in a capitalist economy are dominated by speculators whose behavior produces asset-price bubbles that are prone to collapse. Indeed when the banks were giving loans against houses to the so-called “sub-prime borrowers,” they too were essentially speculating in the asset markets, using the “sub-prime borrowers” only as instruments, or as mere intermediaries in the process.

SIFTING ATTENTION

To attribute the crisis to sub-prime lending therefore amounted to shifting attention from the immanent nature of the system, the fact that it is characterized by asset markets, which are intrinsically prone to being dominated by speculators whose behavior produces asset-price bubbles that necessarily must collapse, to a mere aberration, a misjudgment on the part of the financial institutions that made them lend to the “wrong people.” It was a deft ideological maneuver. The identity of the people who borrowed, whether they were in rags or drove limousines, was actually irrelevant to the cause of the crisis, but it was presented as the cause. The blame for the crisis was put falsely on “sub-prime lending”; and a fabrication, a complete myth, called the “sub-prime crisis” was sold to the world, quite successfully.

Let us for a moment imagine that no loans were made to the so-called “sub-prime” borrowers, and that all loans were made only to “prime borrowers” against the security of the houses that were purchased through such loans. True, “prime borrowers” might not have been interested in taking more loans than they already had, in order to purchase houses, and that “sub-prime” borrowers had to be brought in. But, let us, just for a moment, assume that all the loans that the banks had actually made were made to “prime borrowers” rather than “sub-prime borrowers.” With the collapse in house prices, which had to happen sooner or later, the “prime borrowers” would have found their balance sheets going into the red, and so would the banks who gave them the loans. The borrowers would have been hard put to keep to their payments commitments, and the same denouement that unfolded with “sub-prime borrowers” would have unfolded with “prime borrowers.” The fact that the latter owned other assets would not have made any difference; they would not have easily or voluntarily liquidated those assets to pay the banks for the housing loans (and, besides, those other asset prices too would have collapsed if the “prime borrowers” had tried to liquidate them). And if such forced liquidation was insisted upon for paying off housing debt, then there would have been prolonged court battles to prevent it; the crisis certainly would not have been averted. Hence the real reason for the crisis lies in the collapse of the house price-bubble (which was bound to happen no matter what the identity of the borrowers), and not the identity of the borrowers themselves.

Of course it may be argued that with consumer credit the matter is entirely different, since such credit has been given to large sections of the population without any security. In other words, it may be argued that consumer credit to “sub-prime borrowers” is necessarily crisis-causing, in a sense that consumer credit to “prime borrowers” is not, since it is given without any collateral. But the consumer credit bubble has not yet busted; so it is idle to speculate on this matter. The fact remains that with regard to the bubble that has actually busted, namely the housing bubble, the identity of the borrowers, whether they are prime borrowers or sub-prime borrowers makes little difference.

SUSTAINING SPECULATION

To say this is not necessarily to deny that the sustenance of boom under capitalism may require bringing more and more people under the ambit of borrowing, including the so-called “sub-prime” borrowers who normally do not have access to credit. But this is not the cause of the crisis; the bringing in of “sub-prime” borrowers, the widening of the circle of borrowers, is merely the mechanism through which speculation may get sustained. It may determine the size of the “bubble,” but the real cause of the crisis lies in these “bubbles” themselves, i.e. in the fundamental fact that in a modern capitalist economy, where fiscal deficits are sought to be restricted, booms are necessarily “bubbles-led” or at least “bubbles-sustained”; and the inevitable collapse of these “bubbles” necessarily produces crises.

Or putting it differently, if “sub-prime” lending had not happened, then the crisis would have occurred even earlier than it did, i.e. the bubble would have collapsed even earlier. This would of course have limited the size of the collapse relative to the top of the boom, since the bubble would have burst before it became too big; but by the same token it would also have limited the size of the boom itself that preceded the collapse, so that the unemployment rate, experienced with the crisis, would not have differed much between the two situations.

A modern capitalist economy is characterized by highly-developed and highly-complex asset markets, where it is not only the physical assets themselves, but, above all, financial assets, which represent claims on physical assets, that are bought and sold. Since the carrying costs of these financial assets are extremely low (rats do not eat them up as they eat up foodgrains for instance, and they do not need godowns for storage and for protection from the elements), they are particularly prone to speculation. Their markets tend to be dominated by speculators who buy assets not “for keeps” but for selling at the opportune moment to realize capital gains. The prices of these financial assets therefore are determined largely by the behavior of speculators. When there is a rise in their prices for whatever reason, speculators often rush in expecting a further rise and this pushes up prices even further. This process may go on for sometime, creating a “bubble.” But when, for whatever reason, the price rise comes to a halt, speculators start running away from this asset like rats deserting a sinking ship and the “bubble” collapses.

INHERENT IN THE SYSTEM

The real point however is this: the amount of the physical asset that is produced depends upon the price of the claims upon it, i.e. of the financial assets that represent claims upon this physical asset. If the price of these claims is high, then more of such physical assets are produced, and if the price is low then less. But while the price of these claims is determined by the behavior of the speculators, the output and employment in the real economy is determined by the amount of physical assets that are produced. Hence in a modern capitalist economy, it is the caprices of a bunch of speculators that determines the real living conditions of millions of people, their employment and incomes. When speculators are bidding up the prices of assets (or claims upon assets) employment and output start rising and we have a boom. When speculators leave assets like rats leaving a sinking ship and wish only to hold money (and in extreme cases, when confidence in banks gets impaired, only currency), we have a crisis.

John Maynard Keynes, acutely aware of the irrationality of this system that made the lives of millions of people dependent upon the caprices of a bunch of speculators, and yet extremely keen to prevent its transcendence by socialism, sought to alter this state of affairs by advocating “socialization of investment.” This would mean that how much of physical assets were produced depended not upon the whims of speculators but upon the decisions of the State, which made these decisions with the objective of keeping the economy close to full employment.

The Keynesian remedy was tried out for nearly two decades after the second world war; and the unemployment rate in the advanced capitalist countries was indeed kept at levels that were extremely low by the historical standards of capitalism. But with the ascendancy of international finance capital, and the consequent transformation in the nature of the nation-State, whose interventions now are meant exclusively for promoting the interests of finance capital, Keynesian “demand management” recedes to the background; and we are back to a regime of booms and busts associated with the formation and collapse of “bubbles.” The current crisis is not caused by any aberration on the part of financial institutions; it is immanent to a regime of finance capital.

Photo by respres, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0

New York Daycare Illegally Fires Pro-union Workers

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:31:00 +0000

The corporation that owns the Preschool of America West End Day Care Center in New York City illegally fired several workers who voted for a union in their workplace, charges AFSCME DC 1707, the union they elected to represent them.

According to a statement from union officials, the company fired the workers August 5th just after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the federal agency that oversees union elections, certified the pro-union vote on August 2.

Employees of the daycare said Preschool Site Director Robin Mauro told them blatantly that the company was angered by their support for a union and would terminate all employees it believed had voted for the union. The workers also said that the company CEO, Joanna Fan, told them at a meeting that she would not negotiate a contract with the union. Both situations are apparent violations of federal labor laws.

In protest of the mass firings, the union has organized a public demonstration at the pre-school for Thursday August 19th and has filed new NLRB charges against the company.

Employees filed NLRB charges back in June against the company for illegal harassment of pro-union workers. Federal labor law prohibits employers from harassing, threatening, or firing workers for union activity. Company officials also apparently told parents that they would fire employees until all who supported the union are terminated.

“Representation elections are held daily across the nation without such dire actions," DC 1707 Executive Director Raglan George, Jr. said. "But employers like Preschool of America and Joanna Fan must be compelled to respect the law and respect the basic rights of their employees."

Labor law experts and union advocates say situations like this happen everyday in the U.S. and show why labor law reform is needed. Corporations like this one regularly violate federal labor laws because enforcement has been intermittent and punishments are typically mild.

Rather than a uniform system of legal protections, enforcement usually depends on the political will and motives of federally appointed NLRB and Labor Department officials. Labor union leaders have noted, for example, that under the Bush administration, anti-union appointees typically sided with employers. Further, President Bush's refusal to fill vacant posts or provide meaningful financial support for Labor Department investigators allowed employers to regularly get away with violations of the law.

By contrast, Obama administration appointments to the NLRB and its funding increases to the Labor Department for workplace enforcement are important gains for the labor movement, they say. These moves have made the Obama administration a "strong advocate" for working families, labor activists state.

Still, no matter how well one pro-working families administration enforces existing law, it obviously hasn't been a strong enough signal to companies like this New York daycare that they must stop illegal actions against their employees.

The reason for this was documented in a 2009 report from Human Rights Watch (HRW). That internationally organization found that "[s]anctions for illegal conduct are too feeble to adequately discourage employer law breaking" or "sufficiently disuasive to deter violations."

Union supporters say that passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill pending in Congress, would provide important remedies to this ongoing problem. By imposing stiffer penalties on companies that flout labor laws, speeding up the certification process, and providing workers with a choice about how to vote for the union, the law would give workers stronger workplace protections. The HRW report concurred, saying the "Employee Free Choice Act ... would remedy many of these deficiencies and create a more level playing field for US workers."

Photo by Rafael Chamorro, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0

Support Garment Workers in Bangladesh

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:29:00 +0000

Take action here and speak up here

Appeal to Trade Unions, Workers and All Humanitarian Organizations of the World Support Struggle of The Garment Workers of Bangladesh

Original source: Communist Party of Bangladesh

More than three million garments workers in Bangladesh are on strike in support of their demand for taka 5000 (US $70) as monthly basic wage, other fringe benefits trade union rights according to law and ILO convention, rights and benefits ensured by labor laws, compliance to regulations ensuring work place safety etc. In the face of sporadic movements of workers in various parts of Bangladesh for better wages and living conditions government formed a minimum wage board which on 28th July declared taka 2000 as basic monthly minimum wage + taka 800 as house rent and taka 200 as medical allowance. Gross minimum being taka 3000.

Garment Workers are paid the lowest wages in comparison to most of the other workers employed in Bangladesh. They are also the lowest paid in relation to Garment Workers of other countries including Nepal.

Cheap labor and extreme exploitation is the main source of high profit in Garment sector. In the face of spontaneous uprising of millions of Garment workers on 2nd May 2006, the Minimum Wage Board declared taka 1662.50 (US Dollar 25) as gross minimum wage. Such a low wage compelled the garment workers to live in inhuman conditions. Despite prevailing labor laws almost all workers in the garment sector are deprived of trade union rights. Attempts to form trade union were thwarted by severe repression, dismissal, arrest assault by hired hooligans of employers. Thousands of workers loss their life due to non-compliance of workplace safety regulation causing accident, fire and stampede. Such a situation was the reason for the chronic unrest in the sector.

The declaration of the new minimum wage on 25th of July could not satisfy most of the workers. Furthermore the wages in the upper grades were not increased proportionately. Nor deed the Wage Board award mention about minimum wages in the sweater, knit, and piece rate workers. Moreover it was announced that the new structure will be effective from November 1, which is unusual.

The declaration caused resentment amongst garment workers. Many trade union leaders rejected the proposal.

Workers of Readymade Garment (RMG) in the Tejgaon industrial area in the capital city of Dhaka went on spontaneous strike on 30th of July. Police attacked peaceful demonstration and many workers were injured and arrested. Late at night, house of several trade union leaders were raided by the police and the advisers of Garment Trade Union Center, the biggest trade union in the RMG sector advocate Montu Ghosh was arrested. False cases were filed against leaders of Garment workers including more than 30,000 workers. Large scale repressions, arrest, assault by police and hooligans hired by employers further agitated the workers. On the 31st of July strike and massive demonstrations spread in all the industrial areas in and around the capital city of Dhaka.

A press conference organized by 12 trade unions of garment workers called upon the government and employer to stop repression, release trade union leaders, withdraw warrant of arrest and false cases against activist and workers. The press conference addressed by veteran trade union leader Manzurul Ahsan Khan,also adviser of Garment Workers Trade Union Center GWTC called upon the government and employers to initiate bipartite and tripartite negotiation to settle the labor dispute. Unfortunately the government continued arrest and repressions.

The government organized a fake tripartite meeting at the office of the Garment Owners Association which failed to reconsider any of the demands of the workers. The so-called tripartite meetings announced that the factories will run from Monday, 2nd of August.

The failure of the government and employers to reconsider demands of the workers and brutal repression further infuriated the workers and the strike struggle and demonstrations spread throughout the country. Police fired on peaceful demonstration of workers, injuring hundreds. Hundreds of workers were arrested. Hired hooligans and muscle men are going to slums and workers colonies to find out activist and beat them up.

A reign of terror has been unleashed on the workers.

Police is not allowing workers to demonstrate on the streets.Political and other mass organizations are not being allowed by to organize any program to express solidarity to RMG workers.

Print media and electronic media are under secret censorship not to publish any news about the struggle of the workers and brutal violation of trade union, democratic and human rights. Mantu Ghosh has been taken into police custody on remand for nine days. Every one knows that in Bangladesh people are taken on remand for interrogation and torture.

Quite often during such times prisoners are killed and stories are concocted saying that they were killed during cross fire or so called encounter.Many were killed this way during the tenure of last governments.The present government was elected about 17 months back.

Despite electoral commitment that there will be no more extra judicial killings, more than 100 people were killed in so called cross fire.

The workers continue to fight despite ruthless repressions.

Garments Workers Trade Union Center and 11 other trade unions of Garment workers have called upon international trade unions, trade unions of different countries, all workers of the world, all humanitarian organizations to come forward in support of the demands of striking garment workers of Bangladesh express solidarity, condemn repression and demand release of Montu Ghosh and other leaders of trade union.

Bangladesh Unions Demand Measures to Supplement the Newly-Increased Minimum Wage

Original source: International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers' Federation

ITGLWF affiliates in Bangladesh have responded to last week’s increase in the minimum wage with a series of demands to enable workers to make ends meet.

The Bangladesh National Council of Textile Garments and Leather (BNC) has called for the introduction of provisions on food, housing, healthcare and childcare to supplement the minimum wage.

The government announcement last week that the minimum wage would be increased in November from 1,662 takas a month to 3,000 takas based on the recommendation of the minimum wage board. The decision has sparked protests in Bangladesh, where unions were demanding a new minimum wage of 5,000 taka a month.

Noting that 3,000 taka a month is not sufficient to meet the basic needs of workers, the Bangladesh National Council of Textile Garments and Leather (BNC) has called for additional measures to supplement the minimum wage, including the provision of rations of staple foods such as rice and dhal, as well as the provision of housing, childcare and healthcare facilities for garment workers. The BNC has also asked the government to legislate the new wage with immediate effect rather than waiting until November.

The BNC has further called on the government to ensure that trade union rights are upheld in line with ILO Conventions.

The unions have urged workers to refrain from violence but rather to organise into trade unions in order to ensure the new wage is implemented and to negotiate improvements. Buyers have been urged to encourage trade union involvement in their supply chains and to factor the increased wage into their price negotiation.

The mantle of global struggle
Original source: The Morning Star

The lowest-paid industrial workers in the world have finally had enough. Strikes, lockouts, street blockades and riots have engulfed the bustling megacity of Dhaka in central Bangladesh after the government failed to implement garment workers' modest demands for a decent monthly minimum wage.

Some 3.5 million Bangladeshis have been brutally exploited for years by the profit-hungry garment employers, producing for household names like Wal-Mart, Asda and Marks & Spencer.

These workers have existed on a mere 1,662 taka (£15) a month for the last five years while inflation in the necessities of life, especially rice, wheat and housing, has risen incessantly (43 per cent over the period).

Their working conditions are 19th century. Workers are often not paid on time and women, who make up 80 per cent of the garment industry workforce, regularly suffer beatings and harassment. Something had to give.

The ITUC is calling on the Government of Bangladesh to support decent wages and living standards for the country’s workers, particularly in the garments sector, and cease harassment of trade unionists and other worker-rights advocates.

Original source: International Trade Union Confederation

Thousands of workers in the ready-made garments sector, a key industry exporting to countries around the world, protested against a government announcement in July that the minimum wage would only be increased to Taka 3,000 per month instead of the 5,000 proposed by unions, and to delay implementing the increase until November. The ITUC is particularly concerned over arrest warrants issued against leaders of the Bangladesh Center for Workers Solidarity (BCWS), who are currently in hiding. The government had already canceled the BCWS registration as an NGO in early June, confiscated its property and frozen its bank account. A BCWS staff member was subsequently detained and severely beaten by security police before managing to escape. Factory owners supplying some of the biggest names in global retailing are thought to be behind the repression.

“The new minimum wage of 21 US cents per hour is not enough to live on, with workers putting in extremely long hours in difficult working conditions but still unable to make ends meet. It is an absolute disgrace that this industry, worth $12bn a year, treats its workforce with such contempt. The government should stop the harassment of those defending the fundamental rights to a living wage and to union representation, and help push the multinational companies which control the global garment industry to ensure their workers get a fair deal,” said ITUC General Secretary Sharan Burrow.

Prime Minister Sheik Hasina has described wages in the sector as “inhuman” in comments to the national parliament, and the government has called for unions to be established in the garment factories, which employ mainly young women.

“We are calling on the government to match its words with action, to end the appalling treatment of the millions of workers in the garment industry. They should start by immediately ceasing all actions against legitimate advocates of workers’ rights, and ensuring that the employees have the right to join and form trade unions without interference,” said Burrow.

Trade unions in the garment sector have called for proper provision of health, housing and childcare, and even rations of food staples, to supplement the meager minimum wage as food prices continue to rise. They have also urged the government to fully respect trade union rights, noting that frustration amongst workers in the majority of factories where unions are not permitted, contributed to the levels of anger shown by many workers at the decision to hold the minimum wage below the level needed.

Take action here and speak up here

Photo: Protests of workers and union supporters take to the streets to demand fair pay for garment workers. (photo by Communist Party of Bangladesh)

Pros and Cons of Hydroelectric Dams

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:27:00 +0000

EarthTalk®
From the Editors of E/The Environmental Magazine

Dear EarthTalk: Many people oppose dams because they change the flow of rivers and affect the migrating patterns of fish and other species, but aren’t they also a great renewable energy source? -- Ryan Clark, Milton, WA

Hydroelectric dams are among the greenest and most affordable electricity sources in the world—and by far the most widely used renewable energy sources—but they also take a heavy environmental toll in the form of compromised landscapes, ecosystems and fisheries. Hydroelectric dams have been an important component of America’s energy mix since the powerful flow of rivers was first harnessed for industrial use in the 1880s. Today hydroelectric power accounts for seven percent of U.S. electricity generation—and some two-thirds of the country’s renewable power—according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Globally, about 19 percent of electricity comes from hydroelectric sources. The U.S. Energy Information Administration reports that China is the world’s largest producer of hydroelectricity, followed by Canada, Brazil and the U.S. Some two-thirds of the economically feasible potential for hydro power remains to be developed around the world, with untapped resources most abundant in Latin America, India and China.

Of course, despite the inexpensive and emissions-free power, many environmentalists consider hydroelectric dams to be man-made abominations that prevent salmon and other fish from swimming upstream, divert otherwise natural riparian settings, and fundamentally change the character of surrounding ecosystems. Green groups including American Rivers, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, the Endangered Species Coalition, Friends of the Earth, National Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club are pushing the federal government to mandate the removal of four dams along the Snake River in Washington State that help the region have the lowest power-related carbon footprint in the country. The dams have decimated once teeming salmon runs, and upstream forest ecosystems have suffered accordingly.

But the Bonneville Power Administration, the quasi-federal utility that runs the dams and distributes the electricity they produce, says that keeping them going is crucial even as wind plays an increasingly larger role in the region’s electricity mix. Since hydro power can be generated and released when most needed, it is an important resource for backup power when intermittent sources like wind (and solar) aren’t available.

The scheduled removal of two century-old dams on the Elwha River in Washington State’s Olympic National Park beginning in 2011 may well serve as test cases for larger dam removal projects in the Pacific Northwest and beyond. Planners hope wild salmon numbers will rebound as a result, and that other wildlife—such as bald eagles and black bears—will follow suit.

President Obama has committed $32 million to modernize existing hydropower dams, increase efficiency and reduce environmental impacts. “There’s no one solution to the energy crisis, but hydropower is clearly part of the solution and represents a major opportunity to create more clean energy jobs,” U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu told reporters last year. “Investing in our existing hydropower infrastructure will strengthen our economy, reduce pollution and help us toward energy independence.”

CONTACTS: U.S. Geological Survey, www.usgs.gov; U.S. Energy Information Administration, www.eia.doe.gov; Bonneville Power Administration, www.bpa.gov.

SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk®, c/o E – The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. E is a nonprofit publication. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe; Request a Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.

Photo by George Green, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Pics: Migrant Workers in a Maine Blueberry Labor Camp

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:26:00 +0000

DEBLOIS, MAINE (4/18/10) - Agustin Martinez, Juan Rayas and Martin Martinez are all migrant blueberry pickers who come to Maine every year from Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato. Agustin worked for three years during the bracero contract labor program, which ended in 1964. He came across the border each year at Calexico, where he remembers being given X-rays, and dusted with DDT, supposedly because workers from Mexico were "flea-ridden." He worked picking tomatoes in Sacramento and Oxnard, in California. A thousand people slept in a huge barracks, he remembers. On loudspeakers they'd be called by numbers to the bathroom to wash, to the dining hall to eat, and to go to work. Juan Rayas also remembers working in that program, although he went to Georgia and Arkansas to pick cotton.

(All photos by David Bacon)

The three men live most of the year in a huge labor camp operated by Jasper Wyman, the world's largest blueberry producer, in Deblois. The labor camp in Maine is not so different from the old bracero barracks, Agustin thnks. His hand is injured, and he fears he won't be able to continue working. Workers get paid $2.25 per 23 point box, the same rate growers were paying in 1975, when it had the purchasing power of $8.50 today.

Ike Hubbard makes the rakes used by migrant blueberry pickers, who to come to Maine every year for the harvest. The work is very hard, because workers must bend over to push the rake under the plants all day. Hubbard has worked with community health advocates to develop rakes that are less painful and cause fewer injuries. He makes the rakes in an old-fashioned New England machine shop.

--David Bacon is the author of Illegal People – How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants

Blue-Green Alliance Launches Campaign for Clean Energy Jobs

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:22:00 +0000

A coalition of labor unions and environmental organizations announced the launch of a new campaign this week to overcome Republican roadblocks in the Senate to passing climate change and clean energy jobs legislation.

Beginning this week and extending through early September, the group is initiating a nationwide bus tour called "The Job's Not Done Tour." The tour will visit 17 states with 30 stops from California, Nevada, Missouri, Arkansas, Michigan all the way to Richmond, Virginia. Clean energy sector workers will participate in the tour.

Blue-Green Alliance Executive Director David Foster told reporters on a press conference call the tour will work to highlight the relationship between the ongoing economic crisis and the need to pass climate change and clean energy jobs legislation.

"Our nation has a 30 million jobs deficit today that is growing by 100,000 to 200,000 per month," Foster explained, citing government jobs data that estimates 15 million unemployed, 8 million underemployed, and 6 million "discouraged" workers.

Comprehensive clean energy jobs legislation is the simple solution to this problem, Foster added. "That kind of bold action will be the bold step to put Americans back to work."

Communication Workers of America President Larry Cohen linked the growing significance of clean energy jobs in the high-tech sector to the need for serious investments to build that sector to create new jobs and modernize the economy. "We need action now," he indicated.

Cohen also slammed Republican obstructionism in the Senate. He noted that arcane Senate rules have allowed the small Republican minority to hold hundreds of pieces of legislation hostage and charged that such procedures are fundamentally undemocratic. "We're all building toward the kind of coalition that can say to the Senate: 'Enough's enough. It's time you join with the mainstream democracies around the world.'"

Republican obstructionism in the Senate has blocked economic recovery and modernization, added Mike Langford, president of the Utility Workers Union of America. "By not having action, their just stalling millions of jobs."

To this, Sierra Club Chair Carl Pope pointed out why the Republicans have taken such a hard line in Congress. "The Republican leadership of the U.S. Senate wants to send America a message of failure," he said. "The Republican leadership wants Americans to think this country is failing and they think that will help them in the November elections.

Wesley Warren, director of programs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, noted that Obama administration's efforts to regulate climate change emissions is a good step but comprehensive legislation is needed to control pollution and invest in renewable energy, a modernized energy grid, and advanced, clean transportation.

"What we really need," he explained, "is for Congress to establish a national system for the 21st century that will really provide the incentives and certainty that investors need to move us forward down this path that'll create jobs, reduce our dependence on oil, therefore enhance our national security, and really reduce pollution in a way that will help us to address the threat of climate change."

Efforts to pass comprehensive climate legislation fell apart this summer after several Republicans who had previously supported climate change legislation chose to join a Republican filibuster against the bill.

The Blue-Green Alliance called for changing Senate rules in order to give climate change legislation an up-or-down vote in the next session of Congress.

Photo: President Obama visited a cleaner energy battery factory in Wisconsin this week. (White House photo)

Obama Administration Announces New Aid for Struggling Homeowners

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:39:00 +0000

After a generally dismal report on home foreclosures last month, the Obama administration took steps to beef up its support to unemployed workers who face losing their homes.

According to industry experts, some 325,000 homes underwent "foreclosure activity" (default notices, auction or bank repossession) last month. Though this number is a 10 percent decrease over July 2009, it is a slight rise over June 2010.

According to a press statement from RealtyTrac, a company that follows the housing market and helps its customers profit on foreclosed homes, July was the 17th straight month where foreclosure activity stood at over 300,000. California and Florida alone accounted for more than one-third of these homes, with Illinois and Michigan combining to total just over one-tenth of all home foreclosure activity.

To combat the continuing trend, the Obama administration announced last week, additional funds for its "targeted foreclosure-prevention programs" administered through the Treasury and Housing and Urban Development Departments. Using money from the TARP fund, originally designed by the Bush administration to aid major banks and Wall Street firms, and the Wall Street regulatory law recently enacted, the administration said it was making $3 billion in new funds available to help homeowners at risk of losing their homes due to unemployment.

$2 billion will go to the Treasury Department's "Hardest Hit Fund," which provides aid to the 17 states and the District of Columbia with unemployment rates above the national average for the past year. The program is designed to help states provide assistance to homeowners who have lost their jobs and struggle to make their house payments as a result.

"This is part of the administration's comprehensive housing policy that has helped to stabilize a fragile housing market and allows responsible homeowners the chance to reduce their monthly mortgage payments to affordable levels," Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability Herb Allison told reporters last week.

Under the program, Treasury officials projected that states like California and Florida would receive just over $700 million with Illinois and Michigan eligible for almost $300 million to aid struggling homeowners.

In addition, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Emergency Homeowners Loan Program works with states and non-profits to assist homeowners impacted by the weak job market in making their mortgage payments. The program provides deferred payment "bridge loans" for eligible borrowers for up to $50,000 on mortgages, interest, insurance, or taxes for two years to help them stay in their homes while they find new jobs.

According to Bill Apgar, HUD Senior Advisor for Mortgage Finance, the $1 billion for this program comes from the Wall Street reform law and aims to assist homeowners who do not live in the hardest-hit states but who nevertheless have lost their jobs.

"The effort will focus on homeowners who are at least three months delinquent in their payments, have a reasonable likelihood to resume their mortgage when they regain employment and related housing expenses within two years," Apgar added.

"Together," he concluded, "these initiatives represent a combined $3 billion investment that will ultimately impact a broad group of struggling borrowers across the country and in doing so further contribute to the Administration's efforts to stabilize housing markets and communities across the country."

Supporters of the president's homeowner initiatives have also argued for passage of a bankruptcy law reform that would allow judges to reduce the total price of a mortgage, a move known as a "cram-down," to allow struggling homeowners keep their homes and make their payments. Current law only allows corporations to "cram-down" their debts in the bankruptcy process.

The banking sector successfully lobbied to eliminate a "cram-down" provision from a home home loan modification law passed in 2009. Since that time, between 4 and 5 million homes have faced foreclosure action, and, industry experts believe, millions more remain "under water."

Homeowners wishing to learn more or to avoid fraudulent schemes related to home loans should visit the "avoiding foreclosure" page at HUD.gov.

Photo by JacobRuff, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0

Should Soy Products Be Labeled Milk?

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:34:00 +0000

EarthTalk®
From the Editors of E/The Environmental Magazine

Dear EarthTalk: Is the dairy industry really trying to stop soy milk makers from calling their products “milk?” They must feel very threatened by the preponderance of soy milks now available in supermarkets. -- Gina Storzen, Weymouth, MA

Indeed, just this past April the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), a trade group representing dairy farms, petitioned the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to crack down on what it calls “the misappropriation of dairy terminology on imitation milk products.” NMPF has been asking for such a ruling for a decade, and argues that the soy industry’s “false and misleading” labeling is now more common than ever.

According to NMPF president and CEO, Jerry Kozak, the FDA has let the issue slide so that the meaning of ‘milk’ and even ‘cheese’ has been “watered down to the point where many products that use the term have never seen the inside of a barn.”

Furthermore, Kozak adds, the use of “dairy terminology” on non-dairy products can lead people to think they are eating healthier than they really are, especially because non-dairy products “can vary wildly in their composition and are inferior to the nutrient profile of those from dairy milk.”

The website FoodNavigator-USA.com reports that on the other side of the Atlantic, the European Dairy Association (EDA) has also called for the term ‘soy milk’ to be replaced with ‘soy drink’. EDA also suggests other options including ‘soy beverage’, ‘soy preparation’ and ‘soy-based liquid’. It’s no wonder the soy industry isn’t quick to give up the milk moniker, given how catchy the alternatives could be!

Jen Phillips of Mother Jones magazine takes issue with the dairy industry’s sense of ownership when it comes to terms like ‘milk’, ‘cheese’ and ‘dairy’. “The word ‘milk’ has lots of uses and has been used for non-dairy milks like coconut for a long time,” she reports, adding that consumers already know that soy milk isn’t dairy milk. “Instead,” she writes, “the move to ban ‘milk’ from non-dairy products is a transparent ploy by the NMPF to hurt the soybean industry that, thanks to increasingly health-conscious consumers and ethanol production quotas, is growing stronger every year.”

She also disagrees with Kozak’s claim that dairy milk is healthier than soy: “Actually, soy milk and dairy aren’t that different nutritionally, except for that milk is fattier,” she says, explaining that a cup of vanilla soy milk has 30 fewer calories than a cup of two percent cow’s milk. And while dairy does have twice the protein, soy milk has 10 percent more calcium. “It’s a bit of a toss-up nutritionally, but I'm lactose-intolerant so I’ll choose the ‘milk’ that doesn't make me gassy and crampy.”

Phillips adds that, since 90-100 percent of Asians and 50 percent of Hispanics—two of the fastest growing immigrant populations in the U.S.—are lactose intolerant, “NMPF might want to think less about fighting soy and more about how they’re going to deal with people who can’t drink milk to begin with.”

CONTACTS: NMPF, www.nmpf.org; FDA, www.fda.gov; FoodNavigator-USA.com, www.foodnavigator-usa.com; EDA, www.euromilk.org; Mother Jones, www.motherjones.com.

SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk®, c/o E – The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. E is a nonprofit publication. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe; Request a Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.

Photo: Though soy products are generally healthier compared to milk, should they be labeled as milk? (Photo by Timothy Valentine, courtesy Flickr)

Trumka Slams GOP Candidates for Killing Jobs in California

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:29:00 +0000

Remarks by AFL-CIO President Richard L. Trumka Paychecks Pay the Bills Rally for Jobs Los Angeles, California
August 13, 2010

Thank you, Maria Elena [Durazo], for that introduction.

Sisters and brothers, I want to know one thing: Do you want jobs? Do you want security? Do you want to rebuild America? Do you want to dig us out of this recession with good, honest work?

Good. And I'm glad we're in this fight together. We need everyone we can get -- working together. Standing together. Fighting together.

Okay. Look around. California's official unemployment rate is 12.3 percent. The real rate could be close to twice that. I see a lot of building trades workers here. You're some of the hardest hit by this recession.

In June, there were 747,000 people in Los Angeles looking for work. Three-quarters of a million people without jobs! Right here in L.A.

That's not acceptable. That's a crisis.

We've seen private-sector jobs destroyed, and now they're coming after the public employees. That's why all of us are fighting for jobs. We've got to keep pushing – it's about jobs. Jobs.

I see Letter Carriers here. I was just at their convention. The job-killers have a big push on to cut back mail service to five days a week. They don't care what that means to your mom's social security check or that prescription you're waiting for, but I'm telling you this -- we've got to keep letter carriers on their routes! Nobody, not the U.S. Postal Service -- nobody is going to cut their way to fiscal health in this recession. It doesn't work that way. All we'll be doing is cutting ourselves a deeper hole.

Some people see public employees as an island of privilege. The truth is you're the foundation for decent standards -- you're the only thing standing in the way of a Republican-driven, all-out race-to-the-bottom -- a deeper and deeper hole.

And that'll be the end of America's middle class.

When public employees, and union workers everywhere, negotiate decent pay and decent benefits, what we do is lift all boats. Every worker in America gets a chance at a better deal.

We need each other. We're strong together. Shoulder-to-shoulder, there's nothing we can't do.

No man, no woman, is an island. But you get enough of us together, and we can build an island! I think we're going to have to throw some opponents of working families off the island!

Last week every Senate Republican but two voted to keep tax loopholes for companies that send jobs overseas, instead of sending the money to California and other states to keep teachers in the classroom, cops on the beat and firefighters one phone call away! That's insane. And it's wrong.

How are we going to rebuild America? With jobs! Who's going to rebuild America? Working people with jobs!

When you listen to Republicans on the jobs issue, it sounds like they're talking about some make-work project that costs a lot of money and is gone in six months. That makes about as much sense as your Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate.

But I'm talking about real projects, like the LA Metro 30/10 Initiative. It's efficient, it's smart, it's strategic. It accelerates 12 key construction projects to complete a new, comprehensive, rider-friendly rail system in LA. It does it in 10 years instead of 30, and it gets started now.

We're talking about 166,000 jobs, and the federal dollars needed are minor, just enough to kick the process into gear.

And here's the best part. You start this investment in a new, environmentally friendly metro rail system, and it will create a virtuous cycle of innovation and creation. You'll see spin-off businesses, new investments. This is how you rebuild an economy.

What I'm talking about are real jobs for you, a future for your family. That's the foundation. Good jobs for you, for Los Angeles, for America. But to get there, we need the right people in Washington, and we need the right leaders in California.

In the political showdown between Wall Street and Main Street, California is Ground Zero. Nowhere else in the nation are voters' choices in November so stark. You have the third highest jobless rate in the country. A budget deficit of $21 billion. You need leaders who can create and save jobs, and deal with tough budget situations.

So in the elections for governor and senator, who do the Republicans throw at the problem? Two clueless CEOs: Meg Whitman, who was too shady even for the board of Goldman Sachs; and Carly Fiorina, who laid off 30,000 Hewlett Packard employees, shipped jobs overseas, got fired—with a $20-plus million golden parachute—and was labeled one of the worst CEOs of all time.

Sisters and brothers, this is crazy! Wall Street destroys our economy and robs us of millions of jobs. And the Republican response is: Great! How about more of the same?

We're done with that kind of deal for America.

Queen Meg? She's not what we need on the throne of the biggest state in the country.

And how about Carly Fiorina -- who calls offshoring jobs "right-shoring"? She actually said that. And she says the new Arizona immigration law promoting racial profiling is just fine. And—here's a classic—she says, and I quote: "There is no job that is America's God-given right anymore." So count on her—she doesn't even have the shame to hide her plan—count on her to keep pushing for tax breaks for companies that ship away our jobs, and for rich people just like her.

That's why we've got to fight for Barbara Boxer and Jerry Brown --- because together we can restore California and restore jobs.

So I'm asking you today: Sign up with your local union or CLC for Labor 2010. Volunteer for the phone banks; walk the neighborhood walks; talk to people at your worksite; convince people of what's at stake in California and in America, and that they cannot under any circumstances sit this one out.

And let me tell you why: Because if we win these elections on November 2, it'll strengthen us to fight on November 3, and the next day, and the day after that, for the jobs we need.

Nobody's going to hand them to us. And people who want better have to understand: If California and America are going to create new jobs with rising wages, stable benefits and promising futures, we've got to work for it.

If you believe that keeping jobs in this country matters, and in returning America to a country that makes things again, work for it.

If you believe that America must invest in transportation and technology, education and the environment, work for it.

If you believe that Wall Street got us into this mess and now must pay its fair share of the costs to get us out, work for it.

Work for it. Stand for it. Stand together. March together. Fight together. Win together. And don't let anyone—anyone—stand in our way.

Thank you. And God bless you all.

Insurers and HMOs Spent $769 Million to Block Health Reform

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:10:00 +0000

Companies Now Focus on Influencing State Insurance Commissioners

Original source: Health Care for America Now

Washington, DC – The HMO and insurance industries have spent a breathtaking $768,864,642 since 2007 on federal lobbying to influence public policy and elected officials, according to Health Care for America Now (HCAN), the 1,000-member coalition that led the successful fight for health reform. The pace of spending in 2010 hasn’t let up since last year’s national debate over health reform, as the insurance companies now are trying to undermine the health reform law with intense pressure on state officials to water down the federal provisions and interfere with their implementation. The lobbying spending data was collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.

“The insurance industry mounted a massive campaign to defeat health care reform and maintain their stranglehold on our health care,” said HCAN Executive Director Ethan Rome. “Now the insurance companies are trying to undermine the new law so they can continue profiteering and denying care while they keep giving their CEOs jaw-dropping pay packages.”

The top five health insurance companies reported a record $12.2 billion in net earnings last year, and the top executives at 10 for-profit health insurers have pocketed nearly $1 billion in compensation in the last decade. As a group they received a 167 percent pay raise in 2009 while average American workers saw wages grow about 2 percent.

Led by the Washington-based trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans, the $892 billion-a-year health insurance industry laundered $20 million through the U.S. Chamber of Commerce this year to blanket the airwaves with anti-reform TV ads. The Chamber has announced a $75 million campaign against pro-reform members of Congress running for re-election in November. Insurers also are reportedly considering spending another $20 million to create their own front group to attack reform supporters and elect pro-industry lawmakers. Now the insurance companies are coordinating a lobbying assault on regulators.

This weekend, more than 1,000 insurance lobbyists and executives are expected to converge in Seattle to pressure the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) to undercut important new rules intended to control costs and make health insurance more affordable for families and businesses. The new health reform law includes a provision (medical-loss ratio) that requires insurers to spend on patient care at least 80 percent of health plan premiums collected from individuals and small employers and 85 percent of premiums paid by large employers. The insurance companies are trying to protect their profits and divert premium dollars away from patient care by having non-medical costs, such as lobbying, profits, executive pay and administration, defined as “medical” under this new regulation.

In a letter to the NAIC president in July, Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, urged the insurance commissioners not to succumb to the pressure applied by the industry.

“It is clear that health insurance companies are sparing no expense to weaken this new law and the protection it promises to America’s consumers,” Rockefeller said. “Health insurance companies and their allies have been furiously lobbying the NAIC to write the medical-loss ratio definitions in a way that will allow them to continue doing business as they did before the passage of health reform. The resources health insurance companies are throwing into their effort to weaken the medical-loss ratio appear almost limitless.”

Unlike federal lobbying disclosure rules, health insurers aren’t required to reveal what they are spending to influence state insurance commissioners, but the numbers are high. In New York alone, health insurers have spent $10,602,387 on lobbying since 2007, according to an HCAN review of data maintained by the New York State Commission on Public Integrity. No figures are readily available on how much money health insurers spend on lobbying in 49 other state capitals.

This gap in reporting is troubling because this category of state officials—insurance commissioners—has never been subjected to a nationally coordinated pressure campaign to use their state authority to block implementation of consumer protections enacted by Congress. The NAIC is due to make its recommendations soon—perhaps even this weekend—to the U.S. Health and Human Services Department.

“The insurance companies are spending an unprecedented amount of money to stampede regulators into gutting critical consumer protections before they even take effect,” said Rome. “These massive lobbying expenditures must be disclosed. The public has a right to know how much the insurance companies are spending to protect their excessive profits and outrageous CEO pay.”

The health insurance industry wants to expand the definition of allowable medical expenses to include costs that are not directly related to the delivery of care and have not historically been classified as medical. Instead of reducing costs and improving the efficiency of their operations, they simply want to change how certain expenses are classified so they don’t really have to alter their business practices to make their products more valuable. Already, WellPoint, the nation’s largest private health insurer by enrollment and operator of Blue Cross plans in 14 states, has reclassified $500 million in administrative costs as medical expenses in their communications with investors—a unilateral move to create a new status quo. The stakes in this battle are huge. If the new law had been on the books in 2009, the six largest for-profit health insurance companies would have been required to give $1.9 billion back to health plan members for that year alone under the rebate rules enacted by Congress.

“The MLR standards in the Affordable Care Act are critical to curbing the worst of the health insurance industry’s consumer abuses, controlling rising premium costs, increasing the value of premiums paid by private and public customers, and reining in the profiteering of health insurance companies,” Rome said. “If the lobbyists are thwarted and rules governing medical-loss ratios, rate review and other consumer protections are implemented as intended, the health reform law will hold accountable an industry that abuses millions of customers when they need health benefits the most.”

Photo by AFL-CIO, courtesy Flickr, cc by 2.0