Justice Rising: Corporate Power or the Common Good?

Due out in October, the final issue of Justice Rising's series on "Money in Politics" will look at who runs US government. Is it the American people looking out for our common good or a corporate elite exerting control over public policy to benefit their private ends? Taking historic research by Gustavus Meyers, Thortstein Veblen and C. Wright Mills, this issue of Justice Rising will apply their analysis of "money power" to the twenty-first century. It will lay bare the disaster of a public policy driven by corporate allies in a time when the externalities of their market-driven rationales are causing extreme climate change as well as species and resource depletion-threatening life as we know it.

This important issue of Justice Rising will expose how the revolving door between corporate America and our government's top decision makers facilitates the monied elite's domination over Supreme Court decisions, our imperial foreign policy, and the daily workings of the regulatory system. It will also illuminate how our legislatures have been turned into training camps for corporate lobbyists.

In the tradition of Justice Rising, this issue will also promote the growing drive of the American people to exert democratic control over corporate power. From ending corporate personhood to creating a public service corps solidly loyal to the common good of the people, citizens are uniting to guarantee a future of liberty and justice for all.

A subscription to Justice Rising is free with Alliance for Democracy membership. For a free copy of this issue, email us in the Alliance office. Back issues of Justice Rising are available online, both as complete issues and individual articles.

Read more...

Tuesday, October 4: A national call-in to Congress may be our last chance to make our voices heard on FTAs

Right after we sent this out to our email list, we learned that all three FTAs have been sent to Congress. It's time to call now!

Tell your representative and senators that you’ve had enough of "free trade" deals. Now is the time to say “NO” to the Colombia, Panama and South Korea FTAs. Call 1-800-718-1008 today!

• Don’t give corporations more power to attack US federal and state labor, health and environmental laws. Technical Barriers to Trade clauses are undemocratic and favor corporate profits over people and nature. All three FTAs contain investor protection clauses that allow corporations to sue to overturn democratically-enacted laws.

• With 25 million Americans searching for full-time jobs, we can’t afford trade agreements that off-shore jobs, out-source services and manufacturing, and hurt workers and working families. We need jobs here at home.

There's a lot wrong with these FTAs:

• The South Korea FTA is the biggest deal since NAFTA and will displace an estimated 159,000 jobs. In every state, manufacturing, high tech, and green sector jobs will be at risk. The South Korea FTA allows goods to be protected as "Made in South Korea,” even if most of the manufacturing takes place in other countries, for instance, sweatshops in Burma or North Korea—countries notorious for their human rights abuses.

• Colombia is the trade unionist murder capitol of the world, including 55 murdered in 2010. In 2011, 22 have been killed to date, despite promises from the Colombian government to stop these killings.

• Panama has become a haven for foreign tax evaders and money-laundering, but the Panama FTA would make it tougher for the US government to investigate and prosecute those who hide their money there. Don't we need these lost tax dollars to support job creation and to rebuild our failing infrastructure?

Don't believe the hype coming from big business lobbyists like the US Chamber of Commerce, or from Congress members ready to vote for the corporations who fund their campaigns rather than the people of their districts or states.

These agreements won't create jobs or rebuild the economy—but they will benefit the well-off and well-connected few at the expense of communities, democracy and working people here and overseas.

We need fair trade policies that promote workplace rights and safety and build sustainable local economies. The first step toward those goals is to stop these bad deals now. Make the calls and speak out. And thanks for all you do for democracy!

In Alliance,
Nancy Price, David e. Delk, Ruth Caplan and Barbara Clancy

Need contact info?

See this page for Senate contact information, and this page for House members. A phone call carries much more weight than an on-line comment, so we ask you to please take a few minutes on Tuesday, October 4 – National Call-In Day and contact these offices directly. Let us know what response you receive! Email afd@thealliancefordemocracy, or call 781-894-1179.

Read more...

Today's news and views

● A group of more than 80 business groups have told President Obama to "abandon" a draft executive order requiring federal contractors to disclose political contributions. Groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Petroleum Institute, the National Retail Federation and the National Association of Manufacturers claimed the disclosure requirement would "chill their free speech rights" according to The Hill.

● Federal contributions are down 30 percent to the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and Clean Water State Revolving Fund, the two federal programs that offer no- or low-cost loans to upgrade municipal drinking water systems, and small towns are feeling the pinch.

● Five Republican Senators—Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Pat Roberts (Kan.) John Cornyn (Texas), John Thune (S.D.) and Richard Burr (N.C.)—have signed on to a letter to IRS commissioner Douglas H. Shulman asking why the agency has begun investigating potential tax liability in large donations to 501(c)4 groups after decades of looking the other way, and asking whether following the rules represents a violation of donors' constitutional rights.

● Scott McLarty looks for a language to describe a radical ideology for the 21st century.

Read more...

Tax Day for us, Tax Holiday for them... unless we say no way!

Another tax season closes and the media is once again full of stories about how major corporations and the few who profit the most from them are ducking their obligation to pay their fair share of taxes.

Between tax shelters and loopholes, creative accounting and squadrons of lawyers, the most wealthy and the corporate elite have made sure that the costs of sustaining "the richest nation in the world" will fall most heavily on the majority--middle and working class Americans, the working poor, and the unemployed.

And to keep us from going broke, despite all that wealth out there, its the poor, elders, the sick, and youth who'll give up the most in cuts to social programs, health care, support for students, and job creation programs.

It’s time for us to raise our voices and our signs. When we pay, and the corporations don’t, it shows how the elite 1% are steering economic and tax policy in a way that benefits private fortunes at the expense of our common wealth. How? By using personhood "rights" to corrupt our candidates and office-holders with big-money donations.

This tax day, have your say. Join an action--there are more than 80 nationwide--starting Friday, April 15 and continuing through the federal tax deadline on Monday April 18. Join with our allies in the Coffee Party in saying that "trickle-down" economics has got to stop. Join with US Uncut http://www.usuncut.org/ in calling for an end to cutbacks until the rich and "corporate persons" pay their fair share.

If you're participating in tax-day protests or actions, or you just want to help spread the word, print out some of these signs. The original pdfs can be copied on ledger size paper or reduced by 61% for letter size home printers.

• "Tax Day for the People, Tax Holiday for the Corporations
• "Tax Corporate Profits"
• "We Won't Pay for Crony Corporate Giveaways"

And check out these organizing materials, for more on the link between corporate personhood, political bribery and a dysfunctional and non-representative government.

Read more...

Congressional progressives propose "The People's Budget"

The Paul Ryan budget got the most attention, but the Congressional Progressive Caucus has developed "The People's Budget"--you can find out more online here. The CPC budget features a jobs program, protection for social safety net programs, ends the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and shoots for a budget surplus within ten years.

Jeffrey Sachs wrote this op-end endorsing the People's budget.

Read more...

July 26-28: National call-in days to oppose war funding

A coalition of peace, political, labor, and faith groups are asking constituents to make a call to their representatives over the next three days to ask that they oppose a White House request for an addition $33.5 billion in funding for the war in Afghanistan. For more info, see the UFPJ website.

The toll-free call-in number is 1-888-493-5443.

The latest funding request comes without a time-table for withdrawal or a coherent strategy for success. Meanwhile, leaked war logs (best reporting here), detail the costs on the ground, to civilians and military personnel alike, shattering the illusion of "a good war" and an easy victory.

We're gaining ground in getting Congress to change its view on the war, as well. Three weeks ago, 162 House members supported a time table for withdrawal, and 100 members supported Rep. Barbara Lee's amendment to use war funds for security only and to begin troop withdrawal. If your rep was one of the supporters, a call is a good time to say thanks, and urge him or her to hold the line through the upcoming election season.

Be part of the mobilization. Make the call, turn up the volume, and end the war.

Read more...

AfD joins in opposing Korean FTA

Alliance for Democracy has joined more than 110 organizations in signing a letter to President Obama urging renegotiation of the Korean Free Trade Act.

The letter campaign was organized by Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, and encourages Obama to consider the TRADE Act (Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment Act). You can read the letter by clicking on the "read more" link below.

Dear President Obama:

We, the undersigned faith, family farm, environmental, labor, consumer protection and civil society organizations, are among the many that support your campaign commitments to create a new American trade agreement model that works for more people, and strongly oppose the Bush-negotiated Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA).

Signed by President Bush over three years ago, the Korea FTA represents a throwback to a failed trade policy, not the promised change. Our members strongly oppose more of these same job-killing, community destroying trade policies.

We urge you to renegotiate the Korea FTA text. Doing so offers an opportunity to begin to unify Americans in favor of new trade rules that create American jobs.

This Korea FTA, signed before the financial crisis, includes financial service deregulation terms that typify Bush's FTAs, but contradict efforts to restore stability to the global economy. The pact's labor chapter includes the Bush administration's explicit ban on reference to the International Labor Organization's core Conventions. Yet the Conventions and related jurisprudence are the fundamental platform of international labor rights. This limitation was imposed by the previous administration in 2007 when various FTAs' labor chapters were being modified.

This FTA also includes extreme foreign investor rights and their private investor-state enforcement that you rightly criticized during the campaign. These terms pose special threats because there are many Korean firms operating here that would be newly empowered to attack U.S. environmental, financial, health and other policies in foreign tribunals. Canadian firms have used NAFTA, the only other pact with a major capital exporting country that includes these terms, to bring a series of cases which have cost millions in government legal costs even when we successfully defend against the attacks. Implementing the Korea FTA as written would newly expose the U.S. government and taxpayers to expansive financial liabilities related to compensation demands in foreign tribunals from Korean firms operating within our borders.

These are problems of equal importance to the barriers to the Korean market that were left unaddressed with respect to numerous U.S. industries such as the auto and beef sectors. As you recall, the International Trade Commission's 2007 study of the Korea FTA concluded that it would result in the growth of the U.S. global trade deficit, an outcome that would undermine the goal of creating two million new American jobs through export expansion.

Both the problems with the FTA's rules and with meaningful market access for U.S. exports must be addressed in a manner that incorporates needed improvements into the agreement's legally-binding, enforceable terms.

Moving forward with another job-killing FTA is contrary to what our organizations' millions of members want, and, as polling demonstrates, what the overwhelming majority of Americans want. Public demand for a new American trade model was high even before millions of Americans lost their jobs to the worst economic debacle since the Great Depression. Now, given the level of unemployment and economic insecurity plaguing many Americans, implementing another NAFTA-style trade pact is especially unwise.

As a roadmap for renegotiating the most problematic provisions of the Korea FTA text, we encourage you to consider the Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment (TRADE) Act, which has the support of over 150 members of Congress, including a majority of House Democrats.

We strongly agree with your statements that America needs a new trade agreement model that works for the majority, not just the special interests. We cannot support outdated trade agreements, such as Bush's Korea FTA, that benefit serial offshoring multinational corporations at the expense of America's small businesses, workers and farmers and the environmental, health and public interest laws on which all Americans rely. We hope that you will renegotiate the most damaging aspects of the Korea FTA. If it is brought before Congress without the needed changes, we will work to defeat it.

Sincerely,

Read more...

How much should you tip your Congressperson?

Find out which oil and gas companies are giving to which Congress members at Oil Change International's "Follow the Oil Money" site. There are "relationship maps" for the House and Senate showing what entities are giving what to whom, and you can search for top donors and recipients--info comes from research done by OpenSecrets.org.

Read more...

Gulf shrimper arrested for pouring oil on herself in Senate energy hearing, protesting Sen. Murkowski's refusal to make BP pay

(from the press release by action organizers Code Pink)
Diane Wilson, a fourth generation shrimper from the Gulf, poured oil on herself at todays Senate Energy Committee hearing to protest Senator Lisa Murkowski's refusal to make BP pay for the disaster that has devastating Wilson's shrimping community. Republican Lisa Murkowski, ranking member of the Senate Energy Committee, blocked the bill that would have lifted the oil companies' liability cap (the Big Oil Bailout Prevention Act). Wilson was removed from the hearing and arrested.

Wilson traveled from Texas, where her livelihood and those of her fellow shrimpers has been ruined. She had this to say:

My name is Diane Wilson. I am a fourth generation shrimper from the Gulf. With this BP disaster, I am seeing the destruction of my community and I am outraged. I am also seeing elected representatives like Senator Lisa Murkowski blocking BP from being legally responsible to pay for this catastrophe. She stopped the Big Oil Bailout Prevention Act and wants to keep the liability cap at a pitiful $75 million. This is outrageous. How dare she side with big oil over the American people who have been so devastated by this manmade disaster.

"We want people to call Senator Murkowskis office and tell her to stop supporting big oil and support a healthy environment and American livelihoods instead," said CODEPINK co-founder Medea Benjamin, who was with Wilson at the hearing. "Our members from across the country have sent Murkowski thousands of emails already. We also want the Senator to call for Diane Wilson to be exonerated. BP CEO Tony Hayward should be in jail, not a distraught shrimper!"

Wilson has been working for decades fighting the polluting of the Gulf. She wrote the book An Unreasonable Woman: A True Story of Shrimpers, Politicos, Polluters, and the Fight for Seadrift, Texas detailing her years long fight against oil and chemical companies in her community. She went on to say, "I have seen the oil and chemical companies destroying our air, water, our wildlife--and the government going along with it. Politicians like Murkowski take campaign money from big oil and then get in bed with the same oil and chemical corporations. This must stop. Enough is enough."

Wilson is also a co-founder of the organization CODEPINK Women for Peace. She was in front of BP HQ in Houston, Texas two weeks ago to protest the oilspill and draw attention to BPs legacy of negligence. Read her most recent article, "The BP oil gusher is just the latest in a long line of assaults on the Gulf of Mexico," published on Grist.org.

For more info contact Medea Benjamin/CODEPINK at medea@globalexchange.org or call 415-235-6517.

Read more...

Action on Campaign Finance: Call Congress for the DISCLOSE Act

As you probably know, AfD is working as part of the Move to Amend coalition to build support for a 28th Amendment banning corporate personhood and stripping corporations of constitutional rights, including First Amendment political “free” speech rights.

Now that corporate CEOS can give all they want in election campaigns, they and their lobbyists are gearing up to make certain the corporate person is hidden behind the curtain--so we don’t know who is trying to influence whom and for what.

What can you do? Today, we’re asking you to make a call on behalf of the DISCLOSE Act—legislation introduced by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), which would require major special-interest donors to identify themselves on the campaign ads they produce to support—or attack—candidates.

In the House, the DISCLOSE Act has 114 co-sponsors—you can check to see if your member of Congress is one here. If he or she isn't on the list, call and demand that they sign on. On the Senate side, cosponsors are here.

Background: Special interest money has long warped politics and policy development, but the kind of electioneering the DISCLOSE act takes aim at is new, thanks to the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United. Corporations and unions now have the right to fund campaigns for candidates, independent of the candidates' own election committees. What this means is not, as the Court claims, enhanced freedom of speech, but simply more corporate money corrupting our political system.

The DISCLOSE Act is far from the perfect fix. It doesn't attack the root of the problem: the fact that years of corporate-friendly court decisions have conflated free speech with the ability to buy the biggest megaphone.

But even this legislative bandage is under attack, as the US Chamber of Commerce, the National Rifle Association, and other special interest groups pressure Congress to water down this commonsense initiative with amendments that could make it nothing more than lipstick on the corporate cash cow. Make a call today to tell Congress to stand firm!

Read more...

1,400 with ties to Congress now lobbying for financial industry

A study by Public Citizen and the Center for Responsive Politics has found more than 1,400 former Congress members, ex-federal employees, and Capitol Hill aides registered as financial services industry lobbyists since 2009. Heavy hitters include former Senators Robert J. Dole and Trent Lott, and ex-Reps Richard K. Armey, Dick Gephardt, and J. Dennis Hastert.

For every sitting member of Congress, says the study, there are three former colleagues or government staffers lobbying for banks.

Today's Washington Post quoted David Arkush, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch division, saying "Wall Street hires former members of Congress and their staff for a reason," especially at a time when lawmakers are debating a historic overhaul of the way Wall Street does business. "These people are influential because they have personal relationships with current members and staff," Arkush said. "It's hard to say no to your friends, but that's what Congress needs to do."

What do we need to do? Push for passage of the Fair Elections Now Act, for one. Public funding for a necessary public work--election of a representative government--undercuts the ability of a corporate elite to bribe our legislators with donations--or bully them with the threat of funding an opponent. And a 28th Amendment banning corporate personhood would get the toxic notion that money is speech out of our political system as well.

Read more...

Rep. Alan Grayson introduces the "War Is Making You Poor" act

Another well-named and commonsense idea to keep private wealth and public investment where they will do the most good for the greatest number.

By Joshua Holland. Posted on Alternet May 23


Last week, as Congress prepared to pass yet another "emergency" spending bill to cover America's costly operations in Iraq and Afghanistan -- to the tune of $159 billion this time around -- Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Florida, introduced a bill that would force the Pentagon to pick up the tab out of its ample regular budget.

The War Is Making You Poor Act is elegant in its simplicity. Instead of financing these longstanding conflicts outside of the regular budgeting process, where they’re not factored into deficit projections, Grayson's bill would make the DoD work within its means, and the money would instead be used for an across-the-board tax cut that would make the first $35,000 each American earns tax-free.

"The purpose of this bill,” wrote Grayson last week, "is to connect the dots, and to
show people in a real and concrete way the cost of these endless wars." It's not
just the costs of active shooting wars; with hundreds of bases overseas, as far as
the defense budget is concerned Americans have been on a permanent wartime footing,
to varying degrees, since Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1941. "War is a permanent
feature of our societal landscape," wrote Grayson, "so much so that no one notices
it anymore."

The bill already has several co-sponsors, including at least two Republicans (albeit
maverick GOPers Ron Paul of Texas and Walter Jones of South Carolina). But since the
Pentagon would have to take money out of its regular budget -- largely from the
budget for newfangled hardware -- the DoD and influential defense contractors will
no doubt fight it tooth-and-nail.

But the War Is Making You Poor Act might have a major impact on our national
dialogue regardless. It highlights in a visceral way what Americans lose by
privileging money for guns over butter. "The costs of the war have been rendered
invisible," wrote Grayson. "There's no draft. Instead, we take the most vulnerable
elements of our population, and give them a choice between unemployment and missile
fodder. Government deficits conceal the need to pay in cash for the war." Grayson’s
measure might just shine a bright light on those "opportunity costs."

Budgeting is all about priorities, and the bill can raise public awareness of that
fact. The Right has done a remarkable job convincing the American public that tax
dollars used for programs that help the middle class or the poor are dollars "taken
out of your pocket," but no such consideration is given to the trillions spent on
financing our military operations.

Read more...

Amendment overturning Citizens United decision introduced by NH Congressman in honor of Doris "Granny D" Haddock

A press release from Rep. Paul Hodes, (D-NH), who has introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United decision, named in honor of Doris "Granny D" Haddock. You can read the amendment here.

Washington, DC--Today, Paul Hodes unveiled a constitutional amendment to protect New Hampshire citizens from corporate interests funneling unlimited money into federal elections. In response to the outrageous Citizens United v. FEC Supreme Court decision, Paul Hodes has introduced a constitutional amendment named after activist Doris “Granny D” Haddock which would stop corporations from using virtually unlimited spending to influence the outcome of U.S. elections.
“The people deserve to decide our own elections, instead of having corporations dump millions of dollars into buying our democracy out from under us,” said Hodes. “An activist court wrongly allowed foreign corporations to infiltrate and pollute one of our most sacred American rights. And, after discussing this issue with my fellow Granite Staters, I feel that this amendment is the only way to truly guarantee that the mistakes of the court are fully overturned. New Hampshire elections should be decided by New Hampshire people, not big corporations.”

The amendment, named by Hodes after the campaign finance reform activist and New Hampshire native Doris “Granny D” Haddock, would allow state and federal elected representatives to pass laws to stop corporations from spending their almost unlimited resources on political campaigns. In a recent 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court repealed years of campaign finance reform laws by permitting corporations – both foreign and domestic – to engage in overt political spending and advertising.

Read more...

This week: Call in for consumer financial protection and Wall Street accountability

This week we're joining with groups across the country to ask you to call your Senators to demand creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency and stronger regulatory reform of the financial industry--it's time to hold Wall Street accountable for the damage they've done to the economy, including $11 trillion in lost family wealth, $14 trillion in bailouts, and more than 8 million jobs.

Join a National Call-In Week, today through March 4, and speak out now. Find contact information here or dial this toll-free number provided by SEIU: 866-544-7573 (note--as of yesterday this number asked you for a zip code and then connected you automatically with one of your senators--to reach the other you'll have to dial directly).

The first senators to consider reform legislation, including the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency, are those that sit on the Banking and Agriculture Committee: Sen. Lincoln (AR), Sen. Bennet (CO), Sen. Dodd (CT), Sen. Bayh (IN), Sen. Tester (MT), Sen. Menendez (NJ), Sen. Schumer & Sen. Gillibrand (NY), Sen. Reed (RI), Sen. Johnson (SD), and Sen. Warner (VA).

But even if your senator isn't on this list, make the call--we need a groundswell from across the country in favor of strong reform. In the first nine months of 2009, the financial services industry spent over $344 million on lobbying, while the US Chamber of Commerce spent $2 million on advertising, including ads attacking the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency. As Paul Krugman points out, the House already passed a fairly strong reform bill, but Senate Republicans are blocking further movement, and Democrats are wavering. That's why you need to call this week. Money talks--we need to speak out too!

Tell your Senators:

• To vote for financial reform that creates an independent consumer protection agency--not just a new department under an existing regulator
• To empower the agency to rein in the kind of financial products--deceptive mortgages and exorbitant overdraft fees--that are enriching banks at the expense of struggling families
• That creation of an independent CFPA will streamline federal regulation, increase industry accountability, and reduce the profitability of the kind of high-risk, high-consumer-cost products that precipitated the foreclosure crisis.

For more background, see this report by Demos Foundation. And thanks for calling!

Read more...

Two quick clicks and a call...

Follow the links and support single payer and the global rights and welfare of women (and the people who depend on them!)

First, in advance of Thursday's health care summit, please sign an online fax/petition in support of single payer health care here, and put a note on the calendar to call Congress on the 25th.

Petition organizers are hoping to get 100,000 signatures from the public, standing up for an "everybody in, nobody out" health care system, rather than the White House's repackaging of the weak Senate reform bill.

By now, we know the arguments for single payer, and the statistics attesting to the terrible insufficiencies of both our present health care system and of the proposed fixes. There's not much more to say, so the petition says it as simply as possible:

Why Are You Still Refusing To Even Consider Single Payer Health Care?!
Any health care "reform" bill that does not provide a Single Payer option is NO real reform at all.

That's it. Short and sweet.

There's no better time to weigh in than now. Sign the petition online here. You'll have the opportunity to personalize your message, submit it to the comments page at whitehouse.gov, and send it to a local newspaper as a letter to the editor as well.

Then, on Thursday, February 25, join in a national call in day to Congress on behalf of single payer health care, organized by the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care in association with Healthcare-Now!'s "sidewalk summit" in Washington, DC. As Progressive Democrats of America points out, reports of the continuing malfeasance on Wall Street should make Congress rethink putting our nation's health care system in the hands of publicly-traded health care corporations.

Next...
Support a United Nations 5th World Conference on Women

Join with author and activist Dr. Jean Shinoda Bolen in her drive to get 10,000 signatures to take to the UN in March in support of a 5th World Conference on the Status of Women. This global gathering of women may prove to be what Jean calls the "tipping point" of humanity in the direction of creating greater well-being for all peoples everywhere.

Join with more than 6,500 in signing the petition here.

Thank you!

Read more...

20 senators and counting...

Now 20 senators have signed on to the Bennet letter to Harry Reid asking that a public option be passed in the Senate through reconciliation. On Thursday, Sen. Bernie Sanders talked to Rachel Maddow about the process.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read more...

Four senators defend public option health care, but Medicare for All is still on the people's table

Four Democratic senators have asked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to push for a public option through reconciliation, which would require a simple majority of 51 votes. An additional five senators had signed on by today, and a letter from 119 House Democrats has also gone to Reid supporting this proposal.

The senators, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jeff Merkley of Oregon, cited lower costs, public support, the need for competition from an entity outside the insurance industry--which is exempt from anti-trust regulation--and precedents for using reconciliation to pass legislation as reasons for proceeding with the process to put a public option in the health care reform bill. The Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Medicare Advantage, and the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) were all enacted under reconciliation.

Interestingly, both Bennet and Gillibrand are newcomers to the Senate and facing competitive re-election campaigns. Rather than move toward a 'non-partisan' center, they're taking a leadership stand on the health care issue, banking that the chagrin that sent Republican Scott Brown to the Senate in January is directed at the weaker Senate bill, and not the idea of a public option.

While some groups are encouraging constituent calls to senators to get more support for a public option through reconciliation, single payer proponents are still pushing for a more comprehensive fix to the nation's health care crisis.

On February 25th, the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care will be holding a "Sidewalk Summit for Improved Medicare for All" outside the Blair House in Washington, DC before the Democrats and Republicans have their session. If you are able to be in Washington, DC meet them at 9 AM at the White House. Specific meet up details will be announced as the event gets closer, and we'll post them here.

You can also organize an event in your area, or distribute these talking points from Healthcare Now! Your own "sidewalk summit" can feature presenters speaking briefly on the political, or personal, struggle to get decent and affordable care. Healthcare-Now suggests videotaping your event, and holding it at an appropriate federal building or other landmark. They can also help with talking points, press lists, and publicity. For more info, email info@healthcare-now.org.

Read more...

Good Read: Two-thirds of Americans unhappy about Citizens United ruling

A new poll shows overwhelming dissatisfaction with the Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, especially among independent voters.

by Evan McMorris-Santoro. Posted February 8 on Talking Points Memo

Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito may not have wanted to hear it during the State Of The Union address, but a new poll shows the majority of Americans agree with President Obama's take on the Citizens United ruling. More than 60 percent of respondents say it was a bad idea.

The opposition was found across party lines, and according to the pollsters was especially common among independents -- the group both parties have desperately fought over for a decade now. The pollsters said that result suggests that the parties would be well-served to take on the ruling and reinstate campaign finance regulations canceled out by the ruling with new law.

The poll was conducted by a bipartisan pairing of Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg and Republican strategist Mark McKinnon. The sponsors were several groups opposed to the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, which they say will open the door to unheard of corporate influence in American politics. The results of the survey show that the general public overwhelmingly agrees. Sixty-four percent of respondents were opposed to ruling, while just 27% said they favored it.

"The results are pretty striking," Greeberg said on a conference call with reporters this morning. He said that the current anti-establishment fervor in the electorate suggests that incumbents should get as far away from the Citizens United ruling as they can. "The last thing people want to see in this environment is corporations having more influence on politicians."

That's especially true among independents, as data from the poll shows.

More than 80% of independents said new limits should be placed on campaign spending. Seventy-four percent of independents agreed with the statement that "special interests have too much influence in Washington."
Though the results are good news for campaign finance reform fans, they're not so good for the party in power at the moment. Independents did not give positive reviews on how Democrats have dealt with the problem of special interest influence in Washington. Just 30% said President Obama has reduced the power of lobbyists in Washington, while 50% said special interests have gained more power in the city since he took office.

Read more...

Massachusetts' special election fallout

Was it fair?

A Brad Blog follow-up on the integrity of the elections noted that Democrat Martha Coakley conceded early in the night, despite votes being left uncounted and reports of some voters being handed ballots "pre-marked" for her opponent, Scott Brown. Brad reports that

...a group of election integrity experts, after having posted an "Orange Alert" yesterday about the serious e-voting concerns in today's election, have sent an open letter to Sec. of State Bill Galvin, along with a public records request PDF, calling for the retention of all election materials, such as voted, spoiled, and unvoted ballots, as well as all of the easily-tampered-with memory cards and electronic databases, etc., to ensure they are all secured and available for inspection by the public after the close of polls.

Meanwhile, progressives feel used and frustrated. The state's democratic activists are having a hard time coming up with a contender for 2012.

And what about health care reform? Brown was elected on a "stop the bill" platform, but the House could pass the Senate's version of the reform bill without a peep from the 41st senator. This is only a step in the wrong direction if single payer activists take it as a defeat and stop working toward systemic change that will guarantee care for all. Here's a good guess: while many voters were wary of the cost of the health care bill, very few of them know that a single payer system will offer more care for less cost. We have our work cut out for us.

Read more...

Tell your senator to protect consumer finance regulation! Don't kill the Consumer Financial Protection Agency!

Last month, the House of Representatives narrowly passed legislation to create a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency. This agency would police bank practices on credit cards and mortgages and establishes new regulations for derivative trading and for credit rating--both of which, when left to the banks to mis-manage, helped precipitate last year's economic collapse and bank bailout.

The bill is not a cure-all. After the financial industry spent $5 billion over the last ten years playing politics to dismantle regulation and oversight, it would be unrealistic to expect that this bill is anything more than the first step in the right direction.

But even this first step toward controlling the casino economy is now in danger, as the banking lobby takes aim at the bill in the Senate.

Today banking industry lobbyists and the US Chamber of Commerce will be visiting senators to encourage them to kill the bill.

Please call your senators today and tell them to support the Consumer Financial Protection agency. This is a bread-and-butter issue that they should stand behind--if they're representing their constituents and not the banks.

Remember, a call carries more weight than an email, but if you can't call, please click here--edit your email to reflect your views-- and make your voice heard!

Read more...