Come to the Earth Democracy Conference at the Democracy Convention, August 7-11, in Madison

National and international policies based on neoliberal economics, corporate globalization, and "free" trade which aim to commodify, privatize and profit from almost every aspect of nature are destroying local communities and cultures, and the ecosystems on which all life depends. Earth Democracy is juxtaposed to this system and is grounded in the inherent rights of living beings and Mother Earth.

The Earth Democracy Conference will be one of several tracks at this year's Democracy Convention, to be held August 7 through 11 at Madison College, Madison Wisconsin. Earth Democracy  builds on the declaration adopted by the Ecojustice People's Movement Assembly at the 2010 US Social Forum which states: "We support the conclusion that only by 'living well', in harmony with each other and with Mother Earth, rather than 'living better,' based on an economic system of unlimited growth, dominance and exploitation, will the people of this planet not only survive but thrive."

The Earth Democracy Conference will bring together people who are working on the frontlines of the ecojustice movement to:

• democratize the electric grid and finance local renewable energy
• expose the corporatization of the "green" economy agenda
• recognize water as a fundamental right of people and nature
• combat global warming through creative action
• overcome corporate influence on school curricula and pursue earth-friendly curricula

Sessions include (full descriptions coming soon!): 
Thursday, August 8th- Sunday, August 11th
Awakening the Dreamer Symposium with The Pachamama Alliance Community

Action Tool Kit for Earth Democracy with Randa Solick and Ellen Murtha, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom

Guardianship of Future Generations & Rights and Responsibilities of Present Generations/Writing Earth Rights into Law with Carolyn Raffensperger, Science and Environmental Health Network and Linda Sheehan, Earth Law Center Energy

Injustice & Environmental Racism: How Dirty Energy Impacts Communities with Mike Ewall Energy Justice Network

Teaching Earth Democracy with Erica Krug, Dan Walkner, and Susan Friess, Madison Public School Teachers

Powering up for People, Peace and the Planet: Re-envisioning the Climate Movement: Building Resistance, Collaboration, Transformation with Victor Wallis, writer on ecology and politics, Sherri Mitchell, Land Peace Foundation (Maine), Stephanie Kimball, 350.org-Madison, and Jill Stein

The Climate of Justice: Asserting our Human, Civil and Earth Rights with Lauren Regan, Civil Liberties Defense Center, Sherri Mitchell, and Jill Stein

Activist Training: Know Your Rights with Lauren Regan

Big Extraction/Big Pollution/Bigger Resistance with representatives from frontline Indigenous and local communities fighting the XL and Enbridge pipelines, sand pits, Penokee Hills Taconite Mine, Rio Tinto Eagle Mine and high capacity water pumping and David Cobb on community rights vs. corporate rights

Re-Envisioning the Climate Movement: Building Resistance, Collaboration, Transformation with Victor Wallis, Sherri Mitchell, and Jill Stein

Water for Life: Local Ordinances to Protect Water, Springs and Rivers with Jane Goddard Center for Earth Jurisprudence and Linda Sheehan

Contours of an Ecologically Sound Economy with Chris Wallace, writer on the ecological crisis and the commons, Rachel Smolker Biofuelwatch, and Mike Ewall

Stop the World’s Largest Trade Agreement’s Harm to the Earth, Agriculture and Food Systems with Jim Goodman, Family Farm Defenders, George Naylor, National Family Farm Coalition and others to be announced

Next Stage: Building the Movement for People, Peace and the Planet – From #Fearless Summer to Fearless All Year Round – dynamic group participant discussion

Alliance for Democracy, Green Action, and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom thare the principal conveners of the Earth Democracy Conference. Contact Nancy Price at nancytprice39@gmail.com for more info.

Read more...

Thom Hartmann on "Populist Dialogues"

This week's show features Thom Hartmann, progressive political commentator and author of many books, including Unequal Protection, Screwed: the Undeclared War Against the Middle Class and What We Can Do About It, and Rebooting the American Dream. Thom recently spoke at the First Unitarian Church in Portland, OR. In his talk, he addresses the need for a 28th constitutional amendment to end the legal fictions that artificial entities are people and that money is speech.  He calls America's governing structure a "constitutional monarchy," and relates how the US Supreme Court's use of judicial review undermines democracy, and how we can regain the power of the people from the court's and corporate dominance.

Read more...

Earth Democracy at the Democracy Convention!

Alliance for Democracy is convening the Earth Democracy Conference at this year's Democracy Convention, and you're invited!

The Earth Democracy Conference is one of nine conferences taking place at this year's Democracy Convention, August 7-11 in Madison, Wisconsin.

 Registration is open now, and early registration is a great way to get on the list for first news about convention logistics.


The Earth Democracy Conference builds on the declaration adopted by the Ecojustice People's Movement Assembly at the 2010 US Social Forum: "We support the conclusion that only by 'living well', in harmony with each other and with Mother Earth, rather than 'living better,' based on an economic system of unlimited growth, dominance and exploitation, will the people of this planet not only survive but thrive, and the ecosystems on which all life depends will flourish."



The Earth Democracy Conference is a place to discuss, debate and strategize to ensure that the growing US democracy movement includes those working on the frontlines of eco-justice. 

Join confirmed speakers at the Earth Democracy Conference who are working to make the declaration a reality:



• Arthur Stamoulis, Citizens Trade Campaign
• 
Michael Vickerman, Renew Wisconsin

• David Newby, Pres. Emeritus, Wisconsin State AFL-CIO and Pres. Wisconsin Fair Trade Coalition

• Linda Sheehan, Earth Law Center

• Jane M. Goddard, Center for Earth Jurisprudence, Barry School of Law

• Carolyn Raffensperger, Science and Environmental Health Network

• Jill Stein, Green Party Presidential Candidate

• The Pachamama Alliance
• 
John Peck, Family Farm Defenders

• Speakers from Indigenous tribal and local communities on the front lines of resistance to Big Energy, Industry and Ag, and from the Sierra Club John Muir Chapter (Madison)
• others to be announced as confirmed.



These are just some of our planned workshops and sessions:

• Climate and Planet Earth Emergency: Big Energy and Industry/ Big Pollution/Big Resistance: learn the issues and non violent resistance strategies from Indigenous tribal and local communities on the front lines in the fights against the XL Pipeline, fracking sand pits, the Penokee Hills Taconite Mine, and high-capacity water pumping.
• The Pachamama’s Alliance Awakening the Dreamer Symposium: a transformational educational workshop to “change the dream of the modern world" and empower participants to investigate their unique role in transforming humanity’s future.


• Earth Democracy Workshop: Teach-In/Teach-Back: interactive discussion of  community initiatives to protect public health and ecosystems: the Precautionary Principle, rights of nature, guardianship, and more. 
• 

Bees, Butterflies and GMO Crops: Say No to Monsanto and Dow Chemical: challenging corporate-controlled agriculture/creating healthy farmer-controlled food systems, including ordinances to protect local food. 
• 

Hands off Mother Earth: Writing Earth Rights into Law: local, national, and international movements and success stories. Local initiatives to protect springs and rivers.
• 

Declare your Community a TPP-Free Zone to establish local democracy and nature’s rights.  The Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement will accelerate plunder of the earth and seriously harm the health of all beings. Learn the TPP basics; how the TPP protects corporate wealth and property, and why the TPP must be stopped.

In our plenary session we'll debunk carbon markets and the neo-liberal “green” economy and discuss how to create a true green economy grounded in climate and environmental justice for all.

Special activities include a food fair featuring produce and products from local farmers, an urban agriculture bike tour, act activism for children, and more.

About the 2013 Democracy Convention
If you want to strengthen democracy where it matters to you… in your community, school, workplace, economy, military, government, media or the Constitution… you will find inspiration in Madison this August at the second national Democracy Convention.
 
The Democracy Convention houses at least nine conferences under one roof, recognizing the importance of each of these separate struggles, as well as the need to unite them all in a common, deeply rooted, broad based democracy movement.

Please register, sign up your organization, business or union as a sponsor, and spread the word by sharing this post on social media and posting this convention button on your website.

Thank you, and see you in Madison!
Nancy Price, Co-Chair
Alliance for Democracy

Read more...

Corporate personhood: don't regulate, eliminate!

Bonnie Preston, one of the Alliance's vice co-chairs, was one of the resource speakers at a recent teach-in at the University of Maine-Orono. Bonnie has been an active organizer for local food and self-governance ordinances in her part of Maine. She spoke alongside BJ McAllister, of Maine Clean Elections. Maine's governor is no fan of the state's clean election system, and has attempted to defund it. 

Here's what Bonnie said to the group:

Good afternoon! My name is Bonnie Preston, and I am a member of the Alliance for Democracy, which believes that the overarching task of our time is to get our democratic republic out of the hands of the mega-corporations and back into the hands of We the People.

Money in politics is not just about elections and how they are financed. More insidiously, it is about the two arms of the revolving door--lobbying and corporate capture of the agencies of government. It’s hard to pin down the number of lobbyists in Washington DC right now, but it is certainly dozens for each of our elected representatives in Congress. Many of these are former elected officials. For example, Billy Tauzin led the fight to pass a Medicare prescription drug plan that forbade negotiating prices with the drug manufacturers. After that signature achievement, he went to work for Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturing of America (PhRMA), the lobbying arm of the drug industry, where he became the highest paid health-law lobbyist in the country.

The flip side of people leaving government for lobbying is leaving the private sector to work for a government agency, temporarily of course. Exhibit A is Michael Taylor, who has moved back and forth from Monsanto to either the FDA or USDA for decades. He is now in charge of writing the regulations that will support the Food Safety Modernization Act, now in final draft form. If implemented, these rules could put an end to small farms in the US.

These two forces are driving the complete take-over of government by the private sector, and no campaign finance reform will touch this.

So what can we do to get the government back in our hands? The Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court galvanized people so dramatically that it has opened a door to a possibility that many of us who have worked for years on this issue have seen as a distant hope, if not a pipe dream. Since 1886, the Supreme Court has granted corporations more and more specific constitutional rights; corporations have used these to increase their political power.

The founders kept corporations under control. Corporate charters, required to show how the corporation would serve the public interest, had to be approved by state legislatures. They were limited in time and scope, had to be extended if desired by the legislatures, and could be revoked if the corporation failed to serve the public. A corporation could not buy another corporation, so they must stay small and competitive.

Today, monopolistic corporations, which include the too-big-to-fail Wall Street banks, are preventing progress on everything we need to do if we are going to continue to live on this planet. The rights we have given them are even being enshrined in international law through the World Trade Organization and the NAFTA-style trade agreements. This trade regime is culminating in the Trans Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement with all the powers of NAFTA, but with a significant difference. Once in place, countries will not have to negotiate a trade deal; they will simply sign on to the TPP. The multi-national corporations, with the enforcement powers of the trade organizations backed by the military might of supposedly democratic governments, are growing into a force that will totally destroy our ability to govern ourselves in a humane and environmentally sound way.

We must directly confront corporations and the concept of corporate personhood. A Constitutional amendment that ends corporate personhood as well as the concept that money is not speech is necessary. Abraham Lincoln did not try to regulate slavery, or end it in steps, or disclose its evils. He backed the 13th amendment, which freed the slaves. We are still cleaning up the mess created by slavery, and we will have a lot of work to do to clean up the messes that corporations have made as well, but a Constitution that says that corporations are not persons with constitutional rights will provide the solid ground we can stand on as we do that work. AfD, a founding partner of the Move to Amend coalition, is committed to this type of systemic change.

Read more...

Catching up with Populist Dialogues: Oregon as a center for fuel and water export

What are the latest plans for Cascade Locks, coal terminals, LNG pipelines, and fracking in Oregon?  David Delk talks with Bethany Cotton of Greenpeace and FLOW, and Julia DeGraw of Food and Water Watch.

Bethany discusses plans to turn the Pacific Northwest into a fossil fuel export epicenter, with national and multinational corporations lining up to build coal and liquified natural gas (LNG) export terminals in both Oregon and Washington. She details some of the environmental and economic consequences of these plans, as well the shape of local resistance.

Julia gives an update on Nestlé's planned bottled water plant in Cascade Locks, and asks who has the right to water--a private corporation, or the people of Oregon?

Read more...

Updating the end of year update!

Did you recently read our end-of-year 2012 report? It’s already time for an update! In the last few weeks...

• Our Defending Water in Maine campaign has held four “Stop the East/West Corridor” presenter trainings and raised the alert on using this eastern route to send tar-sands oil to the coast for export.
• Vice Co-chair Bonnie Preston presented a workshop at the Pennsylvania Women in Agriculture conference on using local ordinances to protect farm-to-table sales, traditional foodways and local economies from pro-corporate federal regulations, as successfully done in Maine.
• The Populist Dialogues team has produced new shows on wage theft and workers’ rights, access to public transit as a social justice issue, and money in Oregon politics.
• Co-chair Nancy Price met with other members of the Move to Amend executive committee to shape coalition policy for the upcoming year.
• Members continued to lay the groundwork for public banking in Washington DC and Massachusetts.
• In Portland, OR, chapter members and allies scheduled a hearing on a county resolution calling for our Congressional delegation to send a constitutional amendment to the states to end the twin doctrines of corporate personhood and money equals speech.
• In California, Mendocino chapter members and their allies are discussing an ambitious plan to qualify a state ballot initiative to end corporate personhood and money equals speech. Monterey County members are also laying the groundwork for a county-level resolution.

These are reasons to celebrate. An even better reason is that there's more good work coming in 2013. We hope you'll join with us. We also wish you and your communities a happy, peaceful, and fruitful New Year.

Read more...

AfD Portland marches against TPP

Alliance for Democracy Oregon members traveled by bus to the Peace Arch in Blaine WA on Dec 3, 2012 for a rally and summit with others opposing the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) from Washington state and from Canada.  They joined friends from the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign and many unions in Oregon to make the trip. Here's AfD members Greg Magolis, David Delk (who is also chapter president and AfD's national co-chair) and Barbara Council. And yes, that is a giant posterior-shaped balloon hoisting a slogan into the air.

All kidding aside, summit participants decided to get at least 1,000 organization sign-ons to a tri-party statement opposing the TPP. Negotiations for this deal have been carried on in secret, with even Congress locked out of the process. Lack of transparency is only one concern with the TPP--it has the potential to undermine democratically-determined laws on public health, "Buy American" compacts, and the environment.

For more rally pictures (and a view of the Portland chapter in action this year) see this page on their website.

Read more...

Ellen Brown on "Populist Dialogues"

Ellen Hodgson Brown,
author of The Web of Debt

Ellen Hodgson Brown, founder of the Public Banking Institute and author of The Web of Debt, visited Portland, OR recently, and was a guest on the Portland chapter's "Populist Dialogues" show. The program is now online on the show's YouTube channel here.

In her talk with host David Delk, Ellen discusses the advantages of public banking in the United States and around the world. She reviews how money is created, how the Federal Reserve was created, various types of public banks and how they're structured, why some nations have escaped the Great Recession, how America could save its postal service, and how public banking institutions could be used as a land bank to address the under-water property and foreclosure problems.

While in Portland, Ellen did a presentation at the 1st Unitarian Church, attended by close to 100 people, despite short notice and Amy Goodman speaking elsewhere in town on the same night. That presentation was recorded by Portland AfD ally Jim Lockhart, and it is also available online here.

Read more...

Are you a Maine resident? Tell the Public Utilities Commission "no deals with Nestlé in Fryeburg"

Ruth Caplan and Chris Buchanan of Defending Water in Maine report: 
We’ve just learned that the private Fryeburg Water Company wants to seal a deal with Nestlé/Poland Spring to guarantee that Nestlé buys at least 75 million gallons of spring water per year for the next 25 years with the option to extend for up to four additional five-year terms – a total of 45 years.

According to a news story in the Conway Daily Sun on Friday, “The two companies have had a state-approved agreement since 2008, but the proposed changes mean the agreement will need to be reviewed by the Maine Public Utilities Commission.”

The newspaper reports: “The PUC announced it is currently accepting public comment on the proposal. The comment period is open through Sept. 4.”

There are many reasons to oppose a private contract requiring Nestlé to buy "at least 75 million gallons per year." But the first step is to call for an extension of time for public comment and for a public hearing.

ACT TODAY! 

Call PUC Attorney Matthew Kaply (207) 287-1368 who is in charge of this case and demand that the public comment period be extended at least to the end of September. Also call for a public hearing.

You can also sign in as a registered public user on the PUC website and post specific comments which will go to the staff and Commissioners.

Here are a few talking points.
• The public comment period must be extended at least to the end of September. The original period of two weeks during peak vacation time and over Labor Day weekend is totally unacceptable.

• The issues need to be aired in a public hearing, not just hidden away on the PUC website.

• PUC Chairman Thomas Welch and Commissioner Littell should recuse themselves from this case due to their past association with Pierce, Atwood which has a long history of representing Nestlé. Commissioner Littell was an attorney at Pierce, Atwood from 1992-2003, the last four years as a partner.

• Water is a fundamental right for people and nature. Nestlé’s profit should not come before these fundamental rights.

• Only the Fryeburg Water Company will get to decide if there is a water shortage in Fryeburg allowing less water to be sold to Nestlé, not the local residents or businesses. Then only for 60 days! FWC has a financial interest in denying there is any shortage. Town residents and local businesses will suffer while Nestlé will have its guaranteed 75 million gallons per year to bottle and ship around the country.

• This proposed 25-year contract would set a precedent for the state. Nestlé could refer to this in future cases anywhere in the state.

• The PUC must reject this proposed agreement. Here is the pdf of the filed agreement.

Thanks! Ruth and Chris

Read more...

AfD organizer to speak on participatory budgeting, development, racial inequality, and public banks

Ruth Caplan, AfD vice co-chair and head of our Defending Water for Life campaign, will be part of a panel discussion on participatory budgeting, racial inequality and local development this month in New York, as part of an international conference on participatory budgeting in the US and Canada.

She'll be joining panelists Mike Menser of the Participatory Budgeting Project and Brooklyn College, Jessica Gordon Nembhard of John Jay College, and Kenneth Edusei of Brooklyn College.

The panelists will focus on coop history in the urban black US, and potential for participatory budgeting in Flatbush, and connections with public banking in the US as a route to more sustainable communities. We hope there's video--we'll try to get it and post it after the event. For more info on the conference, check out the website, here.

Read more...

"A Declaration of Indignation" and a local action for democracy in Pennsylvania

AfD council member emeritus Lou Hammann writes that activists in Gettysburg, PA will be placing the following ad in their local newspaper on January 18 and 21, and will be demonstrating in the Gettysburg town square on the 21st in solidarity with Occupy the Courts.

A DECLARATION OF INDIGNATION

We hold these truths to be 

self-evident:

A corporation is not a person

AND

Money is not speech

Therefore:

We here and now DISAVOW the validity

 of whatsoever authority undertakes to deny 

these self-evident truths!

Read more...

AfD Co-chair on "Occupy the Courts" January 20

AfD co-chair and Portland (OR) president David Delk supports Occupy the Courts on January 20. Be a part of this action. See the Move to Amend website for links to demonstrations in more than 90 cities, as well as talking points, fliers, and info on permitting. Check out the Alliance for Democracy Occupy the Courts page for links to all our organizing material. If you're planning an event, let us know before and after--send notices, pictures, and links to video to afd@thealliancefordemocracy.org.

Read more...

Our support letter to the LA City Council

AfD Co-chairs Nancy Price and David Delk wrote the following resolution support letter to the LA City Council:

December 5, 2011

Honorable Los Angeles City Council Members
Los Angeles City Hall
200 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
RE: Resolution 11-0002-S123 - Corporate Activities in Electoral Processes

Dear Los Angeles City Council Members,

We write on behalf of the Alliance for Democracy in support of Los Angeles City Council resolution 11-0002-S123 - Corporate Activities in Electoral Processes which calls for a Constitutional Amendment and other legislative actions to establish that only living human beings, not corporations, have inalienable Constitutional rights and that money should not be protected as a form of free speech.

The Alliance for Democracy is a national organization that has members and Branches in California and is also a member of the Move to Amend coalition.

The pernicious doctrine of "corporate personhood" promulgated by the courts has meant that the rights originally intended for natural persons and to protect American citizens from the potentially oppressive powers of our government now belong as well to the corporation, an artificial entity.

Corporations claim these constitutional rights in Federal court to overturn, weaken, or by-pass laws designed to protect the environment, worker safety, public health and a myriad of other laws, including campaign finance laws, of which the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is the most recent and egregious example.

A recent poll by ABC News/Washington Post reveals that over 80% of the American public already
oppose the concept of “corporate personhood’ and that this opposition cuts across the political
spectrum.

We urge the City of Los Angeles to join in the movement to reverse the doctrine of corporate personhood and that money is equal to speech and on December 6th we ask for your “Aye” vote on this vitally important resolution.

Read more...

Sunday's DC action against KeystoneXL

Saying no to the Keystone XL oil pipeline, protesters, including AfD vice co-chair and Defending Water for Life campaign coordinator Ruth Caplan, surrounded the White House on Sunday. More photos from Ruth are here.

Meanwhile, Brad Johnson of ThinkProgress debunks the idea that the KeystoneXL project will create jobs in this article. Pipeline proponents throw out all kinds of figures here, from "13,000 union jobs" in the Wall Street Journal (one imagines the "union" part came out through gritted teeth) to “more than 250,000 permanent jobs," according to the US Chamber of Commerce.

But according to Johnson,

these tremendous-seeming jobs claims are based entirely on a report by the Perryman Group, commissioned by the pipeline’s owner TransCanada, whose results have been described as “dead wrong” and “meaningless” by Council on Foreign Relations fellow Michael Levi and environmental economist Andrew Leach, neither of whom oppose the construction of the pipeline.

Instead, "the only independent analysis conducted of the American job-creation potential of the Keystone XL pipeline finds that between 500 and 1400 temporary construction jobs will be created, with a negative long-term economic impact as gas prices rise in the Midwest and environmental costs are borne," Johnson writes.

Read more...

"The occupation is not self-preoccupied"

AfD national council members Lou and Pat Hammann recently took part in the Occupy Wall Street action in Zuccotti Park. Here's Lou's take on the scene, the participants, and what radical new social forms can grow out of this movement.

by Lou Hammann

Patricia and I visited the “Occupation of Wall Street,” October 17th and 18. We were not especially interested in getting a head count as we were in getting in on the conversations. However many bodies were in Zuccotti Park, as we ambled through the crowd, the most conspicuous experience was the courtesy that everyone showed to everyone. There was a lot of necessary jostling and casual nudging but the sense of being part of a community of like-minded folks was quite conspicuous. Then, when we took some time to engage strangers in conversation, what was clear was the friendliness, optimism and sincerity of the talk. And people knew what they were talking about. The conversations were both knowledgeable and personal.

One of our motives for the trip to Zuccotti Park was to show our white/gray hair in a conspicuously youthful crowd. Oh, there were other elders besides us, but no one seemed especially interested in the age distribution. The focus of concern was money: its unfair distribution and its bullying intrusion into the political process at every level. There was, of course, interest in the healthcare crisis, global warming, the cost of education and the other worries that currently affect most citizens. The people in the Park had a consistently broad vision of what kind of world they are NOT living in, and the personal/human responsibility that we all need to take on.

The media were conspicuously present, gathered together and sharing observations and information. These folks, however, were not representing the “corporate media” so much as smaller operations and free-lancers. And they were as willing to talk as to listen. In short this was a futuristic snap shot of the kind of world the folks, young and old, are hoping for—a time when a sense of community will define our world.

If you want verification of the cliché that “Everybody has a story,” this was the place to be. Still, the folks in Zuccotti Park were neither heroes nor idealists; somewhat naïve occasionally, but not idle dreamers. The “battle” has just begun and how long this movement can keep its momentum is uncertain. But the theme is, sooner or later, there must come a fairer, more honest distribution of the society’s resources. To put is simply: Money must be redefined and wealth redistributed. Not only money, of course, but also power must be redistributed so human community becomes the “life style” of the immediate and the long-term future.

It is also encouraging how some of the celebrity pundits at least try to take the side of the “Occupation.” If some such folks can set aside their reflex skepticism, the movement may continue indefinitely. This is not simply a repetition of Woodstock. The “Occupation” is not only an effort to redefine popular culture. The stakes are much higher, the motives more sophisticated, having to do with human rights and the economy. The values played out at Zuccotti Park are communal not selfish. If on-lookers suspect that there are no well-defined goals or strategies, they may be right. But what we will see if we look for it is a new perspective on personal existence and our national life emerging. Is it possible that Darwin is actually watching a stage in human evolution, when the Law of the Jungle is giving way to the Law of the Commons?

I remember a cartoon in a recent New Yorker: Two plutocrats sitting next to each other in a private jet; one says to the other, “I’d be willing to pay higher taxes if some one would make me.” The visionaries of the “Occupation” are perhaps getting ready to do just that. How remains to be seen.

Read more...

Defending Water for Life coordinator testifies against Keystone XL Pipeline

Here's Ruth Caplan's statement at the State Department Hearing on Keystone XL Pipeline, which was held October 7.

Ruth was arrested earlier this month protesting the pipeline project. She spoke as a past chair of the Sierra Club's National Energy Committee, as well as National Coordinator of the Alliance's Defending Water for Life Campaign. Video of the full four hours of public testimony is here.

Ruth quotes an op-ed by Daphne Wysham, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and is the founder and co-director of the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network (SEEN), which was also excerpted by the New York Times.

I’m not here today to argue about pounds per square inch or parts per million.

I’m not here today to say move the pipeline one mile east or west.

I’m not here today to say put inspectors along the pipeline every 10 miles or even every one mile.

I am here today to speak for my godson, and for my grandson, and for Malia and Sasha and for Chelsea.

And so I will read to you part of what my godson’s mother (Daphne Wysham) wrote after being arrested in front of the White House, a few days before I too was arrested protesting the pipeline.

In Daphne’s words....
“As I stood before the White House gates ... listening to the police issue their warnings of our impending arrests to our group of over 100 demonstrators, I thought of what I would say as they carted me away – what cry I wanted the president to hear.

“And I recalled the day Obama stood before the American people, in those days and months as BP’s deepwater well billowed millions of barrels of oil from that horrifying wound in the Gulf of Mexico floor. I remembered him remarking that, yes, he was very concerned about the spill because, while he shaved one morning, his 11-year-old daughter Malia had asked him, ‘Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?’

“Children have a way of speaking to our hearts. And so, I mused, even if President Obama didn’t hear the songs and the chants of the more than 1,000 people who were arrested over the course of two weeks, even if the prayers of religious leaders and Native American elders went unanswered, even if he didn’t read the editorial opposing the Keystone XL pipeline in The New York Times, even if he ignored the advice of his very own EPA, perhaps, in this instance, Sasha or Malia might see us outside the White House gates and ask him, “Did you stop the pipeline yet, Daddy?”

“As the police handcuffed my hands behind me and led me off to a white school bus, I shouted: ‘For Sasha and Malia.’

“I don’t think Obama or his daughters heard me, I thought, as I watched my fellow protesters be cuffed, searched and photographed through the bus’s caged windows. But perhaps, if we keep this up, they will.”

And so I am here to keep this up.

Mr. President, do this for Malia and Sasha, not for Jeff Berman your former National Delegate Director and current lobbyist for the Keystone XL Pipeline.

Secretary Clinton, do this for Chelsea and her future children, your grandchildren, and not for Paul Elliott, who was the senior official for your Presidential bid and is now a lobbyist for the Keystone XL Pipeline.

Did you stop the pipeline yet Daddy?

Did you stop the pipeline yet Mom?

Our future is in your hands.

Read more...

Across the Great Divide

Is corporate personhood the unifying issue for the single payer, antiwar, environmental and Tea Party movement? This article was written for the Coos County (OR) Democrats Advocate by Alliance for Democracy national council member Rick Staggenborg, MD. What do you think?

by Rick Staggenborg, MD

The corporate media and the politicians who depend on it to get their message out would have us believe that Americans are sharply divided about the issues that are causing gridlock in the US Congress. Nothing could be further from the truth. Roughly 70% of citizens want out of Afghanistan, nearly everyone wants the debt limit raised, most Americans agree in principle that we should work to achieve universal health care in some form and a large majority wants no cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. The difference between what Americans want and need and what the corporate-driven Congress will give us is appropriately referred to as the “democracy gap."

What was quickly forgotten by the corporate media and largely by the “alternative” media is the fact that nearly 80% of both self-identified liberals and conservatives are opposed to the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United. Recognizing that giving corporations carte blanche to buy the politicians of their choice to serve their interests in Congress is a dagger aimed at the heart of democracy, Americans across the political spectrum were momentarily united in the common cause of defending the possibility of true representative democracy. Unfortunately, the point was lost to most as the story was quickly buried in the 24 hour infotainment cycle.

The significance of the Citizens United case is not just that it is an outrageous step closer to fascist control of the US government but lies in the possibility of using the nearly universal anger toward it to build a bridge across the artificial divide between those who regard themselves as liberals or conservatives, Democrats, Republicans or independents. We the People now have an historic opportunity to create a truly democratic Republic in which the interests of the citizens of the US take precedence over those of the corporate Puppetmasters of Congress. All we need to do is to heed the lessons of 1775 and come together to fight for liberty and justice for all.

There is a growing movement to abolish corporate personhood and overturn the Supreme Court in Citizens United by working together to get a constitutional amendment introduced and passed in Congress. Oregon’s own US Representative Kurt Schrader recently took an important first step in introducing an amendment that would give states the power to regulate corporate money in elections. While still falling short of the goal of eliminating all “rights” granted corporations by an Imperial Supreme Court, has the potential to lead to the end of corporate control of the US government. If enough in Congress are willing to step up and support it, the issue will finally get the attention it deserves in the so-called “alternative” media.

Imagine if Peter DeFazio were to support the Schrader amendment. It would shine a spotlight on the issue of where Robinson gets his campaign funding. Last year he came from nowhere to raise $1.3 million dollars, much of it as soon as he announced his run. That’s pretty good for an unknown. Apparently he is not unknown to the big money interests who supported him and other ostensible “Tea Party” candidates. As was pointed out by a member of Americans for Prosperity in the district, he cannot be both a Republican and a Tea Party candidate, since the Tea Party represents those to the Right of the Republican Party. Similarly, Sharon Angell challenged Harry Reid and almost beat him, Rand Paul was actually elected in Kentucky and other candidates who were marginal at best were elected with sophisticated and very expensive corporate-funded propaganda campaigns.



In 2008 DeFazio won with 82% of the vote. In 2010 he won with less than 54%. Despite his liberal voting record, he has historically been supported by conservatives in his purple district because of his staunch support of veterans and his principled stands with Republicans when the Democratic leadership is on the wrong side of issues such as the first bankster bailout. In 2010, amid wild charges of socialism by the Robinson camp, his re-election was seriously challenged for the first time in years. The corporate money behind Robinson financed a very successful propaganda campaign that convinced many self-described conservatives to place a false ideological principle ahead of their own interests and that of the people of Oregon.



Interestingly, when I asked Robinson in Roseburg at one of his mock “debates” why he referred to a government that funneled taxpayer money to corporations “socialism,” he had a momentary lapse into reason. He shouted “You’re right! It’s fascism!” Then he expounded on the point for a full five minutes while I listened in amazement. Of course, by the time he got to the real debate in Coos Bay he had returned to the script written for him by his corporate Puppetmasters. If even Art Robinson recognizes that allowing corporations to buy Congress and dictate legislation and policy amounts to fascism, why don’t more Democrats capitalize on the fact when running for Congress? Neither Defazio nor Merkley take dirty money. Making their support of a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood would not only be principled but would tap into the truly independent voters who want to see something done about our system of corporate welfare.

Some time ago I wrote an editorial for the Advocate in which I argued that the key to saving the Republic is to get Tea Party supporters to join the effort to abolish corporate personhood through a constitutional amendment. Many of my friends scoffed at the idea. What they seem to have forgotten is that these people are more highly educated than the general public. They are not stupid, just misinformed and thus unable to see that the solution to our woes is not fighting the imaginary specter of “socialism” but in fighting creeping fascism. It is our job to educate them of this fact. They value democracy as much as the rest of us do. I spoke to Jeff Kropf, former state director of Americans for Prosperity about this. He was intrigued by the idea of working together to restore our democratic Republic through the process of constitutional amendment. He also confirmed my impression that although the Koch brothers initially provided funding for Tea Party events, the state organization is now self-funded.

Tea Party supporters are actually ahead of the political curve in one respect: They have rejected both Republican and Democratic politics as usual and are seeking to create the change America must see to save itself from economic, social and moral destruction. While I remain convinced that they are going about it in entirely the wrong way, they will be key allies in the fight to end corporate rule in America once they understand what Robinson in a rare moment of honesty admitted: Fascism is the enemy, not our fellow Americans. Partisan Democrats can take a lesson from the Tea Party. If they learn to put America before the Democratic Party, they can join in common cause with the Tea Party to rid Congress of the corporate tools who are destroying the American experiment in democracy.

Read more...

AfD National Council member on war, health care, and the central issue of corporate personhood

AfD national council member Rick Staggenborg, MD, who is also founder of Soldiers for Peace International, speaks to Dan Shea, of Veterans for Peace chapter 72 in Portland, OR, about corporate personhood and the sorry state of democracy, especially as it affects veterans.

Rick has formed a new national work group for Veterans for Peace on the abolition of corporate personhood and will ask to introduce a resolution at this year's VFP national convention in Portland, OR calling for an amendment to restore constitutional rights to people. Chapter 72 has scheduled discussion of the issue and the work group at their next meeting.

Read more...

What you can do to protect renewable energy development in Oregon

Thanks to strong citizen advocacy and progressive political leadership, Oregon is deservedly known as a national leader in the response to climate change and the transition away from fossil fuels for electricity generation.

All that is now at risk due to proposed state budget cuts, cuts that will drastically impact Oregon's Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency funding. But with your help, we can stop these short-sighted cuts to our renewable energy programs.

Oregonians for Renewable Energy Policy (OREP) is working to preserve this funding. Join with OREP's efforts from now through the end of the legislative session in mid-June to continue Oregon's progress toward a sustainable energy future. And support OREP today with a donation, to keep its advocacy strong.

How bad are the cuts? The Tax Credit Subcommittee of Ways and Means and Senate and House leadership want to put a $10 million cap on all types of tax credits. They plan to:

• Cut the available Residential Energy Tax Credit by 97%, from $34 million to $1 million.
• Cut the Business Energy Tax Credit more than 99% (from $300 million for renewables alone in 2009-11 to $2 million to cover both renewables and conservation in 2011-13).

To find out more, read "BETC Facing Massive Cutbacks" here.

Our elected officials need to hear from us NOW!

Short term savings on renewable energy tax credits will cost Oregonians and their economy more in the long term:

• more for oil--including the costs of military actions to secure overseas supplies
• more for public health damaged by air pollution and climate change
• more for climate-related damage to our environment, agriculture, fishing, and forests
• more job loss in our growing green jobs sector

It's time to let your legislators know that support for clean energy is a priority, not a luxury. Fossil fuel is not our future, and the "innovative" extractive projects now underway, like the Alberta Tar Sands, create far more pollution, corruption, and destruction.

OREP has long advocated for a more stable and cost-effective financing method for renewable energy and conservation programs. They still do. It is the same funding tool Germany so successfully used to become the world’s leader in solar energy and is the reason why it can now confidently declare it will shut all its nuclear plants by 2022. Ontario, Canada is also using the guaranteed pricing structure tool (aka feed-in tariff) to shut down all its coal plants by 2014. Use of this policy tool has also created hundreds of thousands of good jobs.

Maintaining a reasonable level of maintenance funding until we have an alternative in place will preserve our prior investment. So severely de-funding the programs that built Oregon’s reputation sends the wrong message to Oregon’s citizens, to our children and the entire nation, who look to Oregon for leadership.

Responsible leadership requires a measured transition to a more stable financing mechanism while not losing our prior public investment.


What you can do!

• Write letters and follow up with phone calls to your state senator and representative asking them to preserve Oregon's commitment to a clean energy future. Also contact House Co-Speakers Arnie Roblan and Bruce Hanna, Senate President Peter Courtney, Senate Majority Leader Diane Rosenbaum and Minority Leader Ted Ferrioli. Address: 900 Court St. NE, Salem, OR 97301 PH: 503-986-1000.
• Call Governor Kitzhaber and ask him to play an active role in the State Legislature to retain Oregon's leadership position on clean energy (Comment line: 503-378-4582 )
• Become a Facebook friend to OREP and share these action items with your network
• Support OREP’s work with as generous a donation as you can. OREP’s groundbreaking work on the state’s Feed-In Tariff program has led to real progress in development of local, small-scale solar electric production—“democratizing the grid” to ensure a cleaner, and fairer, energy future. For more information on OREP, please visit their website, OregonRenewables.com

Only the voice of Oregon's citizens demanding responsible leadership will preserve our clean energy future. Please take action now to keep Oregon's renewable energy programs a model for the nation, and to preserve our environment, our economy, and our public health.

Thank you,
Nancy Price, AfD Co-chair
David e. Delk, AfD Co-chair

Read more...

Forget the FTA fix, just say no

by David Delk, co-chair, Alliance for Democracy
I have written on the Korea Free Trade Agreement before and likely will again. This Bush negotiated agreement will be presented to Congress following the November election with President Obama’s hope that it will be approved by both Congress and the Korea parliament before the end of the year.

Three things on this:
1. There will be a teach-in on the Korea Trade Agreement on Thursday, Oct 7th starting at 7PM at the Jobs with Justice office at 6025 E Burnside (Portland, Oregon). Learn all about this Bush negotiated agreement and what we can do about it together.

2. Call Senator Wyden’s office at 503.326.7525 and tell him that you oppose this agreement. Senator Wyden is chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Trade, a very important role in determining how the agreement fairs in congress. You could ask for Jayme White, Senator Wyden’s staff person for trade issues. Or email him at jayme_white@wyden.senate.gov

3. Read the article at the "Read More" link written by Christine Ahn and Martin Hart-Landsberg. Martin is an economics professor at Lewis and Clark College and has been doing educational work on these so-called free trade agreement since before the WTO demonstrations in Seattle in 1999. The acticle goes into many more of the effects of this agreement and free trade agreements in general than is usually talked about. Christine and Martin say that we should not just ask that this agreement be reviewed and renegotiated but rather that it should be flat out be rejected.

Published on Friday, October 1, 2010 by Foreign Policy in Focus

Forget the FTA Fix, Just Say No
by Christine Ahn and Martin Hart-Landsberg

The free trade push has begun again. Both U.S. President Barack Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak are calling for ratification of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, which was signed by the two countries’ trade representatives in April 2007 but has yet to be approved by either the U.S. Congress or the South Korean parliament. Aware of how unpopular the agreement remains, President Obama wants the U.S. Congress to delay the approval vote until after the mid-term elections in early November but before the mid-November G-20 meeting in Seoul.

The Great Recession has left the U.S. economy in a mess. Slowly but surely people are coming to understand that we are in this mess because of a number of inter-related trends [1], all driven by increasingly unchecked corporate power: wage suppression, deregulation and globalization of production, and financialization.

It is therefore dismaying to hear President Obama announce [2] that the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, which is designed to further enhance corporate power, will somehow “create new jobs and opportunity for people in both our countries.”

There’s Nothing Free about “Free” Trade
Not surprisingly—after all, it’s called a “free trade agreement”–media and popular attention have focused on the agreement’s potential impact on trade. If implemented, the agreement will eliminate most industrial and non-industrial tariffs and also encourage greater trade in services. In broad brush, this deal represents a trade in interests: Korean manufacturers want greater access to the U.S. market and they are willing to sacrifice their country’s agricultural and (financial and health) service sectors to get it. U.S. agricultural and service sector businesses see it the same way and are content with the deal. No wonder the U.S. auto industry is largely alone in the corporate community (joined only by the beef industry) yelling for renegotiation.

This trade-off holds no promise for workers or small farmers in either the United States or South Korea, and this doesn’t change even if the auto and beef industry succeeds in forcing a renegotiation of the agreement. Opening markets only mean more intense competition and downward pressure on worker wages. The experience of past decades of trade liberalization should be proof enough. A case in point [3]: both U.S. and Chinese workers have seen their working and living conditions deteriorate while dominant transnational corporations and their national allies in both countries have gained enormous profits.

The U.S. auto industry is fighting for whatever it can get. But regardless of the outcome of their struggle, the leading auto makers are not going to radically rethink their respective long-term growth strategies, which involve pushing down auto wages and moving production to new plants in other countries. GM, for example, already sells cars in Korea [4]. Its joint venture with Daewoo produced some 900,000 cars in Korea and sold more than 100,000 of these cars to Korean customers in 2008.

The president claims that working people will benefit from the agreement. Beyond misguided confidence in the “magic of the market,” the only justification for this statement is the analysis of the FTA by the U.S. International Trade Commission, which concluded [5] that it would likely raise U.S. GDP by $10.1–$11.9 billion. This is basically a rounding error in an economy with a GDP of over $14 trillion. Moreover, believe it or not, this conclusion is based on modeling that assumes [6] full employment and balance-of-payments equilibrium in both economies, and no shifts in foreign investment from one to the other. This kind of work is not serious social science—it is ideological cover [7] for a corporate agenda.

More Than Trade At Stake
Although trade is getting all the attention, this agreement covers more than tariff levels. As in all U.S. free trade agreements, this one contains many chapters [8] dealing with labor, government procurement, services, investment, intellectual property rights, and dispute settlement. These chapters detail a number of complex regulations and restrictions that have one clear aim: weakening public power and strengthening corporate power. Here are some examples [9]:
The government procurement chapter would essentially limit the ability of any state entity to take into account “non-economic” factors in making spending or purchasing decisions. More specifically, governments would no longer be able to privilege companies that had exemplary labor or environmental records, or were locally owned or committed to using local labor.

The investment chapter would grant foreign investors important new rights. In particular, foreign corporations would be able to directly sue governments (local, state, or national) if they introduced new laws or regulations that, in their opinion, reduced their ability to profit from a pre-existing business opportunity.

And they could choose to have the suit heard in a foreign tribunal by experts without regard to existing national laws.

A number of interwoven mandates from several chapters take dead aim at the public provision of health care. This is especially threatening to South Koreans who currently have such a system. These mandates would also make it much harder to create such a system in the United States. [CA1] [10] Among other things, the FTA provides for the establishment of special economic zones in South Korea where private U.S. insurance companies could set up operations under favorable conditions, thereby undermining the universal coverage and viability of the existing national public insurance system.

Even more deadly, several chapters appear to have the potential to bust South Korea’s health cost-control system. Currently, South Korea has a positive drug list, which is a listing of generic, low-cost drugs that the government believes are medically effective and which its insurance will cover. The FTA provides U.S. pharmaceutical corporations with several avenues to demand that their higher priced drugs be placed on the list. Such an outcome would put a huge financial strain on the country’s health care budget, potentially leading the government to abandon its public commitment.

The agreement would also restrict South Korea’s existing laws limiting the import of GMO foods [11]. It would also likely ban any attempt to require the appropriate labeling of such foods.

The agreement also contains financial deregulation provisions that would restrict South Korea [12] as well as the United States from using capital controls to regulate “hot money” flows. While the U.S. government remains unwilling to consider such an option, the South Korean government currently employs such controls on the rapid movement of speculative capital. Do we really want to legally forbid their use, especially given our recent history of speculative excesses?

This is far from an exhaustive list of concerns. But even this brief list demonstrates that this agreement advances corporate power and profitability at the expense of public needs and capacities. It is far more than a commitment by two governments to reduce some tariffs.

Just Say No
Trade unions and other social groups in both South Korea and the United States have mounted a serious and sustained opposition to this agreement even before April 2007. That is one reason that its ratification has been delayed. Notably, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions and the AFL-CIO have forged a common bond in opposition to this agreement.But the governments of both countries, representing the interests of their respective leading corporations, are determined to ensure its passage.

Unfortunately, movements in both South Korea and the United States have often allowed their opposition to be shaped by the media’s presentation of this agreement. Thus, a lot of effort has been put into organizing around technical issues related to autos and beef. Instead what is needed is a strategy that helps working people see the true scope and aim of this and other free trade agreements and, even more importantly, how they are meant to reinforce the very trends that generated the current economic crisis.

Perhaps most disappointedly, many of the most active opponents of this agreement have settled on a strategy calling for its “review and renegotiation [13].”

Their sentiments are good, but the demand makes little sense even if we did have the power to review and renegotiate it. As we have tried to demonstrate here, this agreement is predicated on the principle that corporate interests should be privileged over all other things. There is no way to repair an agreement that is, by design, destructive of the public interest.

At this point, we need to build a movement in opposition to all free trade agreements. In the United States, that means opposing agreements with Korea, with Colombia and Panama (which President Obama also supports), and with any subsequent countries. And we should encourage our Korean allies to do the same, with this agreement and the one their government just negotiated with the European Union. Just say no.

Some argue that saying no is not enough, that we need to propose our own alternative trade program. We disagree.

Policies on foreign trade and investment need to flow out of a comprehensive understanding of both the roots of our crisis and the kinds of structural and social transformations necessary to solve it. If we want meaningful employment, community security and stability, well-financed and accountable social programs, environmentally responsive production, and solidaristic relations with other countries, we have no choice but to stop relying on market forces and the pursuit of private profit to direct economic activity.

Saying no to this and other free trade agreements will not bring an end to trade or hurtle the world economy into deeper recession, despite what political and business leaders say. These agreements are about power and privilege not economic efficiency or rationality. Rather, saying no to them is one way we can challenge the increasingly destructive domination of market imperatives over our lives and initiate the wider public debate required to put real economic change onto the public agenda.

The original work is licensed under Creative Commons.

Christine Ahn is a policy and research analyst with the Global Fund for Women and a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist. Martin Hart-Landsberg is an economist and China specialist.

Read more...