Safe Water Alliance sends letter in support of AB 635 to Governor Brown

Alliance for Democracy, through our Defending Water for Life campaign, has been working with California's Safe Water Alliance to pass the Human Right to Water Act, AB 635. Most recently, western campaign coordinator Nancy Price signed on to a letter to Governor Jerry Brown, asking him to sign the bill, which has now cleared the state legislature, into law.

From the letter:

The need for a statewide policy is illustrated by the 11.5 million people in California currently relying on water suppliers who faced at least one violation of state drinking water standards in 2007, the 8.5 million people in California who relied in one recent year on water supplies that experienced more than five violations of state drinking water standards, and the recent University of California, Davis report that found that 1 million people in California have been exposed to nitrate-contaminated groundwater. The fact that some of the communities in the latter category have struggled for years to address the contamination is a resounding indictment of the status quo.

Advocates hope to meet with Brown this week to deliver petitions in support of passage.

Read more...

Public comment period extended on potential Maine water deal; but a public hearing is needed too

Attention Maine residents... Yes, the good news is that the Maine Public Utility Commission has extended the comment period on the proposed new deal between Fryeburg Water Company and Nestlé/Poland Spring. The new deadline is September 24. You can read our previous alert here.

Thanks to everyone who took action to let the PUC know that the public has a right to more time to speak! We are pleased that the Public Advocate’s office called for an extension and give a special shout out to Nisha Swinton with Food and Water Watch who formally petitioned the PUC for an extension.

Now we have to demand a public hearing to force open the door and let the light shine on the backroom deal that the Fryeburg Water Company has struck with Nestlé/Poland Spring.  We know that a public hearing is not a part of the formal record used to decide the case, but neither are decisions made in a vacuum.  The PUC Commissioners need to know that there is widespread objection to this deal.

All three Commissioners have been far too cozy with Nestlé. In our first alert, we called out PUC Chairman Thomas Welch and Commissioner David Littell who both previously worked at Pierce, Atwood which has a long history of representing Nestlé. We should have also mentioned that the third commissioner, Mark Vannoy, worked as an Associate Vice President in the infrastructure and civil practice group at Wright Pierce where he had close associations with Nestlé.

Nestlé has no right to the water for the next 45 years. Fryeburg Water Company has no right to guaranteed profits from selling the spring water to Nestlé.

As a nun once said to a VP of NWNA when we were invited inside after protesting outside,  “Nestlé Water North America….who says the water belongs to you?  It belongs to God.”  Some might say the water belongs to all life.

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

ACT TODAY: Call PUC Attorney Matthew Kaply (207) 287-1368 who is in charge of this case. Thank him for the extension and insist on a public hearing.

You can also call or e-mail Karen Geraghty, PUC Administrative Director to whom formal requests are made.  Again, thank her for the extension and insist on a public hearing. Her phone number is  207-287-3831, or email karen.geraghty [at] maine.gov

As before, you can sign in as a registered public user on the PUC website and post specific comments which will go to the staff and Commissioners. http://www.maine.gov/mpuc/online/index.shtml   Put in Case No. 2008-00052

The pdf of the filed agreement is here.

Thanks for all you do!
Ruth Caplan and Chris Buchanan
Defending Water for Life in Maine

Read more...

It's been four long years, but we're almost there: the not-so-short history of AB 685, the Human Right to Water Act

This past week, the California Assembly passed AB 685, the Human Right to Water Act. Now we're just a signature away from ensuring law and policy that will bring safe, affordable water to all Californians.

What's the story behind the Human Right to Water Act? Getting this far has meant building a strong grassroots coalition with much community and member support. We hope that the history of this legislation inspires other water democracy and environmental justice activists to get going on their own version of AB 685.

AB 1242, the first Human Right to Water policy bill, was part a “water bill package” introduced in early 2009. After AB 1242 made it through all Assembly and Senate Committee hearings with some amendments and was passed by the Assembly 53-24 and the Senate 23-14, then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it. Schwarzenegger, however, did sign some of the other more “narrowly focused” bills in this 2009 package.

After this, the Safe Water Alliance, a coalition of faith-based, tribal, environmental, health, public-policy and community advocacy groups, including Alliance for Democracy, was formed and in February 2011 introduced AB 685, the Human Right to Water, as part of an ambitious six-bill package of to ensure clean drinking water for all Californians. In early spring, Catarina de Albuquerque, the United Nations Independent Expert on the human right to water made a fact-finding mission to the United States. In California she visited several Central Valley, CA communities in an area where for too many years residents have suffered the financial and health impacts of unsafe water at home and/or in schools.

In 2001, with Governor Brown in office, there was stronger opposition to AB 685 since it was anticipated he might sign this bill. The oppositions’ demands for amendments seemed meant to stop the bill and discourage the bill’s author Assembly Member Eng and Safe Water Alliance members. When it did not, and the bill made it through the Assembly in June, 2011 by 52-24, it was finally stopped by the last Senate Committee, Senate Appropriations that put the bill on the “suspense file” where bills are sent to die.

However, Governor Brown did sign several of the narrowly focused bills in the package, at the signing saying: "The bills I have signed today will help ensure that every Californian has access to clean and safe sources of water. Protecting the water we drink is an absolutely crucial duty of state government."

Meanwhile, with the key policy bill, AB 685, stuck in the Senate Appropriations Committee, members of the Safe Water Alliance met to formulate and implement a strong “inside the capitol” and “outside grassroots” strategy to get the bill to the Governor’s desk. This necessitated taking amendments to clarify this was a broad policy bill to direct State Agencies and Departments when making decisions about water policy to consider the impact on the human right to health and that doing so would not impose a fiscal liability on the state, a point the opposition kept raising.

Finally, at the last minute when the fate of all bills has to be decided, on August 16, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted 5-2 to send the bill to the Senate Floor. It was one of only 5 out of more than 200 bills that this Committee voted out and on August 23 it passed by 22-16. Because the bill was amended in the Senate, it has to go back to the Assembly for “concurrence.” On the morning of August 29, it passed by only 42 votes, 41 need for a majority…very close, but “every drop counts.” But by close of session that day, it had gained enough votes to pass 51-28.

Defending Water for Life organizers Nancy Price and Ruth Caplan thank all the Alliance's Californian members and supporters who responded to our action alerts over the years. Taking action is what turns our education into on-the-ground victory as we build the movement for the Human Right to Water and community rights in California. Watch for the launch of our new our website, focusing on California water issues, soon!

Read more...

Demand clean, safe drinking water for all California communities! Call to support SB244 today!

Note new phone number! 

Californians, urgent action is needed on SB 244, one of the four bills in the Human Right to Water package.

These four bills, seeking clean drinking water for all, have passed both houses of the California legislature, but Governor Brown is being pressured to veto SB 244, the bill that will require municipalities and other water service districts to make plans to serve low-income communities that have been “redlined” out of water and sanitation services. Often these communities are islands within a municipality whose residents have safe drinking water.

We need your help to let Governor Brown know that SB 244 is important. Call the Governor today at 916-445-2842 916-445-2841.

Script:  "I am calling to ask Governor Brown to sign SB 244 into law."

 Don’t be discouraged by a busy signal. Dial again. You will have to push through the automated system to record your support for SB 244. Be patient and persistent--you may initially get a busy signal and there will be buttons to push and an operator to speak to!  But continue and complete the process, so that your voice will be heard and your request recorded.

Thanks in advance from AfD's Defending Water for Life campaign!

Read more...

"Why I Studied Medicine in Cuba"

The documentary "Why I Studied Medicine in Cuba" will screen Tuesday August 24, 7:00 pm at the Ashland Public Library, Ashland, Massachusetts, as part of the documentary film series sponsored by Friends of the Ashland Public Library and organized by AfD supporter David Whitty.

The film focuses on Dr. Lillian Holloway, who grew up in a rough neighborhood in West Philadelphia and worked as a certified nursing assistant before deciding to study medicine in Cuba. In exchange for a free medical education from the Cuban government, she will return to her impoverished community to enter a residency training program preparing her either for family practice or emergency medicine.

Dr. Holloway spoke recently at the University of Maine about Cuban health care, her experiences and medical education in Cuba, and about opportunities for U.S. students to study at the Latin American School of Medicine. Presently 120 U.S. students are enrolled at the School. She shares the podium with Ellen Bernstein, Associate Director of Pastors for Peace, which recruits students for the Latin American School of Medicine and provides them with administrative support.

Cuban doctors represent their country's medical system in many of the most impoverished parts of the world. For ten years before the earthquake there was a brigade of 350 Cuban doctors dispensing free health care in Haiti. After the earthquake Cuba sent another 650 doctors. Cuba’s Latin American School of Medicine prepares new doctors at absolutely no cost to the students, beyond committing to use their skills in underserved communities when they return home. Some 10,000 students study there and 1,500 graduate every year. They come from 30 countries, including eight in Africa.

This 72-minute film will screen in the Community Room, followed by discussion.

Read more...

Oil toxicity in the gulf--Riki Ott discusses the potential for a public health disaster

Riki Ott of Ultimate Civics and Move To Amend speaks to Rachel Maddow about the toxicity of oil and the possibility of a public health disaster in the Gulf and the so-far inadequate information being provided by government to the people in the areas affected by the spill.

Good stuff at the beginning on the possible effect of oil on wetlands and the cluelessness of Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour re oil exposure.

Read more...

"NOW" on natural gas fracking and contamination of groundwater

PBS's NOW had a story this week on hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking", the practice of drilling into and then fracturing natural-gas-bearing rock with a combination of compressed water and chemicals in order to release gas deposits that can't be extracted through conventional drilling. Hydraulic fracturing is being touted as a way to access large amounts of a cleaner fossil fuel within continental US borders, and so reduce dependency on both foreign oil and domestic coal, but the health and environmental costs of this procedure are still unknown, with some disturbing patterns of illness and contamination being seen in regions where fracking wells have been drilled, including Montana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

Here's an interview with filmmaker Josh Fox, whose Sundance-honored film "Gasland" spotlights the downside to this supposedly cleaner fuel, including chronic illness, tapwater fireballs, and lack of regulatory oversight to protect groundwater and health. You can read more about the show on the NOW site or visit the film website here.

Read more...

Quick video explainer on why we need a government-run health care system

Thanks to Jerry Call for forwarding!

Read more...

AfD's Single Payer Home Page

Single Payer

We won't give up the fight for Single Payer!

• Read Alliance press releases here.
• Get active: Check out the latest action alerts here.
  
• Follow the real story in independent media, here.
• NEW! Watch video reports and commentary here.
• Justice Rising's issue on the healthcare crisis is available online here.
• Download material for tabling, outreach and education here.

What are you doing--locally, at the state level, nationally--to fix our healthcare system? Let us know at afd@thealliancefordemocracy.org!

Read more...

Water news from California

In Davis, Keeping Water Under Local Control
Two multi-million dollar projects to upgrade the wastewater treatment plant and build a pipeline from the Sacramento River to Davis are in the works. Local residents, including AfD members, have committed to ensure that despite the city’s budget crisis, these projects remain public and under local control. They're following the lead of Akron, OH and, most recently, Milwaukee, WI, where residents fought back long-term private lease agreements. (You can read about Akron here; scroll to the last item on page 2.

In Milwaukee, the Keep Public Our Water (KPOW) Coalition wants the Milwaukee Common Council to pass a resolution to permanently suspend the proposal to lease the city’s water system. Faced with budget pressures, the city had been considering leasing its water utility to a private corporation for 75-99 years in return for a one-time payment of up to $550 to $600 million with a hoped-for $30 million per year return to the city’s budget. The current financial melt-down means these deals and giving up local control and oversight to risky and undemocratic.

Human Right to Water Bill Moves Through the Legislature
AB 124, the Human Right to Water Act of 2009 was voted out of the Assembly on May 28 with 54 ayes and 25 nays; four Republicans voted yes. The Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee, chaired by longtime environmental leader and CA legislator Sen. Fran Pavley, hears the bill on June 23.

Find out if your State Senator is on this committee and call his/her office. Ask for the Legislative Assistant assigned to the bill and ask for support. Previously there was no registered opponents. Now, opposition is emerging from the the State Department of Public Health and some water agencies charged to carry out this mandate.

Read more...

California AfD'ers defend human right to water through support of AB 1242

The Alliance has joined with water justice, environmental, and religious groups as co-sponsor of AB 1242, the Human Right to Water Act sponsored by Assembly Member Ira Ruskin of the San Francisco area. This is the first bill to address the human right to water in any state or the country. It is in concert with the global people's water movement call that "water as human right" be recognized at the United Nations. For more on this effort at the UN, read "Water: A Human Right, Not a Commodity" on page 4 of our water tabloid, "Water Democracy in California: Community Rights not Corporate Control," at www.defendingwaterincalifornia.org

The bill was heard on April 28 by the Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee which voted along party lines in support. Nancy Price thanks all California AfDers who responded to the Action Alert on this bill.

AB 1242 now goes to the Appropriations Committee where it may meet with difficulty because the bill requires state agencies act to provide safe and affordable water to all Californians. Hopefully, the bill will get voted out of this committee and to the Assembly floor - when, again, we'll send out an action alert for all CA members to call their Assembly Member. And, if it gets approved in the Assembly, the process starts over in the Senate. Stay tuned, stay alert!

Read more...

Single payer advocates win seats at White House health summit

Here's a statement by PNHP president Dr. Oliver Fein, which he had hoped to make at yesterday's White House health care summit. Dr. Fein and Rep. John Conyers were the two single-payer advocates in attendance at that event, thanks to persistent requests by single payer activists nationwide.

According to PNHP, Dr. Fein will shortly be posting his impressions of the event to the group's blog.

Two leading advocates of single-payer health reform, sometimes characterized as an improved Medicare for All, received last-minute invitations to attend the White House health care summit being held today. The invitations were greeted as a victory by single-payer supporters.

Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), chief sponsor of the single-payer U.S. National Health Care Act, H.R. 676, was invited to attend the meeting late in the day on Tuesday, and Dr. Oliver Fein, president of Physicians for a National Health Program, was invited on Wednesday afternoon.

The White House invitations were extended to the two leaders after intense grassroots lobbying efforts by single-payer supporters, who were concerned that no single-payer voices would be present at the meeting. The efforts included an outpouring of phone calls and e-mail messages to the White House, along with a threatened demonstration outside the White House gates by doctors and other health professionals wearing their white coats. The demonstration was called off when word arrived that Rep. Conyers and Dr. Fein had been invited.

In his prepared remarks, the full text of which follows, Dr. Fein says, "We are pleased to be here today and appreciate the implicit recognition of the majority support for single payer in our country. We hope this is the beginning of a serious dialogue on how to enact single-payer health reform and we look forward to working with [President Obama] and the Congress toward this end."

Prepared remarks by Dr. Oliver Fein:
Mr. President, Physicians for a National Health Program agrees with your statement during your presidential campaign: health care should be a basic human right.

Physicians recommend an improved and expanded Medicare-for-All - that is, a single-payer national health insurance program, providing care that is publicly financed but largely privately delivered. This fundamental health reform - which enjoys solid majority support among physicians and the public - has become even more urgently needed in view of our severe economic recession.

Millions of people are losing their employer-sponsored health insurance, joining the 46 million who already lack coverage. Millions more, including those with insurance, are finding it harder to pay their co-pays and deductibles and are scrimping on their medications and doctor visits. Many go without care, risking their health and often their very lives.

Physicians find that private, for-profit health insurance companies add cost but no value to the health care system. The administrative waste associated with the private-insurance-based industry - enormous paperwork, marketing costs, and other costs that have nothing to do with delivering care - consumes 31 cents of every health care dollar.

As long as we rely on private health insurers, universal coverage will be unaffordable.

Mandates to buy private insurance are not the answer. Experience with mandate plans in Washington state (1993), Oregon (1992) and Massachusetts (1988 and today), shows they simply don't work, achieving neither universal health care nor cost containment.

Some of these plans offer a Medicare-like, public option that people could buy into, but experience with Medicare shows that the private plans refuse to compete on a level playing field. They cherry-pick healthier patients and insist on more than their share of payment.

In contrast, single payer guarantees everyone access to comprehensive, quality health care and choice of their own doctor and hospital.

Single-payer health reform, an improved Medicare for All, is the only reform model that offers $400 billion in annual savings in administrative costs. It is the only approach that contains effective cost-containment provisions such as bulk purchasing and global budgeting.

Such economies would allow for expanding health coverage to everyone - with no co-pays or deductibles - with no overall increase in health care spending. In other words, it's the only health reform proposal that pays for itself.

The single-payer model is the only fiscally prudent proposal available, an especially important consideration at a time of economic distress. And we know from our experience with Medicare and other single-payer systems that it will work.

With a single-payer national health insurance program we can assure lifelong, high quality, comprehensive and affordable coverage for everyone. Such a program will lift the heavy burden of crushing medical expenses off the shoulders of our population, expenses that often lead to personal bankruptcy. And we can save lives: the Institute of Medicine estimated in 2002 that more than 18,000 Americans die each year from lack of health insurance. That number is certainly higher today.

From the standpoint of what benefits our patients, single payer is the health policy model that best reflects their needs and values.

Support for single payer is extensive. In a peer-reviewed statistical study in the Annals of Internal Medicine, 59 percent of U.S. physicians said they would support government action to establish national health insurance. In a recent Associated Press poll, 65 percent of the respondents said, "The United State should adopt a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxes."

Single-payer health reform is embodied in the U.S. National Health Care Act, H.R. 676, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.). It had 93 co-sponsors in the 110th Congress, the most of any health reform legislation.

We are pleased to be here today and appreciate the implicit recognition of the majority support for single payer in our country. We hope this is the beginning of a serious dialogue on how to enact single-payer health reform and we look forward to working with you and the Congress toward this end.

A short biography of Dr. Fein is available here.

Read more...

Call the White House and tell President Obama to make room at the table for Single Payer!

UPDATE, March 5: Thanks to your calls and emails, the White House invited Rep. John Conyers and Dr. Oliver Fein, president of Physicians for a National Health Plan. Keep in the loop--we'll need to speak out again and again to build a movement for health care policy that cures people, not ailing corporations.

This Thursday, March 5, the White House will host a summit on how to reform the health care system.

The 120 invited guests include lobbyists for various interest groups, including the private-for-profit insurance industry (AHIP), some members of Congress including Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus who has already ruled single payer "off the table," and various others concerned with health care.

No single payer advocates have been invited to attend.

Please urge President Obama to fulfill his promise for transparency and openness in government. Call The White House (202) 456-1414 or (202) 456-1111 before the start of the summit on Thursday. Tell the president to listen to experts on single payer health care--the system favored by both a majority of Americans and a majority of physicians.

Let's get a place at the table for Single Payer!

Please forward this email widely, and ask your friends and family to forward it as well! We need a groundswell of support for real change on health care!

Read more...

Philadelphia City Council Votes to Support Single-Payer Healthcare

Good news from the Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and Allied Professionals (PASNAP), one of several groups working on behalf of single-payer health care in Pennsylvania--Philadelphia is now the 28th city to favor HR 676, the National Health Insurance Act!

Groups representing doctors, nurses, healthcare advocates and labor unions are applauding the Philadelphia City Council for voting in favor of single-payer healthcare. The resolution, sponsored by Councilman Greenlee and Councilwoman Tasco, makes Philadelphia the 28th city and 46th local government to pass a resolution in favor of HR 676, the National Health Insurance Act, sponsored by John Conyers (D-Ill). The resolution also calls for the enactment of the two single-payer state bills, SB 300 and HB 1660.

Nearly 40 people watched the city council pass the resolution. One audience member, Walter Tsou, MD, MPH, former Health Commissioner of Philadelphia, said of the resolution, "Single payer is a win win for Philadelphia. It not only would give 160,000 uninsured Philadelphians health insurance, but it would redirect hundreds of millions of city dollars toward other important priorities, like libraries and fire stations."

Jed Dodd, a Teamster Union official who represents railroad construction workers in the Northeast stated, "Single payer health plans ensure all people living in the United States access to quality health at a fair cost. Ninety-seven percent of the resources allocated to support these plans are spent on health care. All other plans waste 30% of these resources on insurance companies who provide no health care to anyone and ironically make more by limiting access to health care instead of making people well. We are heartened that the Philadelphia City Council has endorsed a health care plan for the people of America."

A fact sheet circulated to Council members demonstrates that if HR 676 were enacted, the city would save $539 million a year, enough to cover its budget shortfall of $2 billion over 5 years. In addition, the bills would guarantee access to comprehensive healthcare at less cost than what average families currently pay for care. Sabrina Nixon, a medical technologist at Temple University Hospital, and a member of PASNAP, said, "As a healthcare professional of 20 years and a parent, I see that HR 676 would not only fix the current healthcare crisis, but eliminate every parent's worry that their child will not have access to quality healthcare once they turn 18 or as they move between jobs. If HR 676 were passed, the dream of universal healthcare will become reality."

Groups that have signed on to a letter asking the Council to sign the resolution, many of which were present at the vote, include: Healthcare-NOW; Healthcare for All - Philadelphia; Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and Allied Professionals; United Steelworkers Local 10-1; International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees Local 3; Faculty and Staff Federation of Community College of Philadelphia, AFT 2026; Pennsylvania Federation of the Brotherhood of Maintenance and Way Employees - IBT; American Medical Students Association; Physicians for a National Health Program; Progressive Democrats of America; Philadelphia Chapter Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; Citizen Access; and Leadership of Neighborhood Networks.

PASNAP represent 5000 nurses and healthcare professionals throughout Pennsylvania, including most nurses in the Temple System. For more information, visit www.pennanurses.org.

Read more...

Op-Ed on Single Payer by Peter Mott

Peter Mott, doctor, author, and AfD secretary, wrote the following op-ed for the Rochester NY Democrat and Chronicle:

Change We Need – And Can Afford

Because of the current financial crisis many observers see no point in discussing an expansion of health care coverage this year – either federal or state. Indeed, it is true that the current crisis is adding greatly to our public debt. And it is true that total health costs in the US are already twice as high per person per year as those of any other nation and rising faster. If we were to start paying to insure our 50 million uninsured – plus an estimated 40 million Americans who are underinsured – costs would escalate hugely. This would be true with any of the recent proposals for insuring the population – except one.

Believe it or not, there is one proposal which could cover all Americans for all needed services and save money. And it is now – with funds getting shorter every day – that we must explore that proposal. In truth, we cannot afford not to. Careful studies have shown that national savings would amount to $350 billion per year.

At the national level this proposal is called Medicare for All, and it is embodied in Congress as Bill HR676. In New York State it is called Single Payer New York and it is one of the options now being studied by the Governor in Albany.

The propagandists call it "socialized medicine." But it is not – because most doctors and hospitals would be private and working in their own facilities.

How could covering more people decrease total expenditures? The difference is in "administrative costs." Private insurance companies have such costs totaling 15 - 30%. Blue Cross 11%. Medicaid 5%, and Medicare 1-2%. "Administrative costs" include advertising and shareholders' profits, as well as the billing and collecting costs of hospitals, doctors' offices, labs and x-ray facilities. These become a nightmare as patients change among a variety of insurers, or when they lose insurance by changing or losing their jobs.

HR676 is an expanded Medicare for All, and it is brief, simple, uncluttered: Everyone in the country is covered. Everyone has one card. Present costs disappear completely. The patient may go to any doctor or hospital. The entire health system is paid for by taxes on corporations and a progressive income tax. It is administered by a public or quasi-public body. Health providers do their jobs and receive a fee for service with the fee scales negotiated annually.

Do private insurance companies suffer? Yes. Their roles would be limited. That part is controversial, and that's where the fight begins. Many feel that it's impossible to beat the insurance industry. But, if this is truly a democracy, who should decide such a basic public policy as this? The people or the corporations?

My own opinion, after 40 years of organizing to change the health care system, is that the private insurers have had decades in control. They have had their chance, and they have left us in a mess: Ranked 37th in the world by the World Health Organization for health care delivery; 1/3 of our population un- or under-insured; costs higher than any other nation; many parts of our population with poor care; higher morbidity and mortality rates than any other developed nation. It’s time to fight!

President-elect Obama’s health proposal is not close to Medicare for All. But he is a good listener who encourages the grassroots to speak up.

Read more...

Rochester AfD takes action on single-payer health care

Rochester chapter organizer and Alliance council secretary Peter Mott writes:
A few years ago the Rochester Chapter formed a county-wide committee on health insurance for New York state. We have since merged with other local groups to become the Interfaith Health Care Coalition. That, in turn, became part of a state-wide campaign called Single Payer New York. Our goal is covering all New Yorkers with health insurance and from many good national and state studies it is clear that only a single payer system could actually save money over current total health costs. (Compromised plans--leaving insurance corporations alive--would greatly increase costs.

Single payer health care has been an AfD priority since our founding at Mo Ranch in Texas in 1996. At the 2007 AfD convention in Tucson we tried out a simple True/False exercise about single payer, and now have a slick version of it, "Health Care: Truths and Myths" in red, black and white, available by e-mail from afd@thealliancefordemocracy.org.

Of course the single payer system is a lethal threat to the insurance corporations, and they have more weight than we do --so far--in the State Senate and even with our Democratic Governor. We're next to Canada and visitors there see the truth about Canadian "Medicare": efficient, effective and with full experience and data since 1964. However, that doesn't prevent the corporate propagandists from bad-mouthing it. So we are now going door-to-door (with a pause for our election) to build support for a better plan for New York state.

Read more...

Deadline extended for comments on cell tower/antenna siting

The deadline for comments on new limitations to local authority to regulate cell tower and antenna citing has been extended to September 29.

If you didn't get a chance to comment please follow the links below to learn more about this industry-driven change, and weigh in with the Federal Communications Commission.

For background on this issue and links for talking points and updates, see a previous post on the Alliance e-news blog.

Then, take these actions before September 29:
Submit your comment electronically by clicking here: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi NOTE: In Box 1, for the "Proceeding" bar, type in 08-165. You can attach your comment as a PDF document, or you can type your comment directly into the box at the bottom of the page, but make a copy of it first, please!

Then send a copy of your comment to Citizens and Professionals for the Responsible Use of Electromagnetic Radiation at info@emrnetwork.org so they can track our collective effort, and do follow up. Or send them an email letting us know you've submitted a comment.

Read more...

Action: Comment now on revisions to cell-phone tower siting standards

Here's an action alert from Kati Winchell, one of the founders of the Alliance for Democracy, who has been active on this issue for many years. The effects of the Telecommunications Act on local democracy were covered in early issues of Alliance Alerts (now Justice Rising).

Citizens and Professionals for the Responsible Use of Electromagnetic Radiation are asking that you comment on proposed regulatory changes that would make it harder for communities to have a say in where telecommunications corporations locate their cell phone towers or antennas.

Comments are due by Monday, September 15--there's not much time to weigh in on this issue. So ask the Federal Communications Commission to turn down the proposed change. For info on how to email your comments, see the EMR etwork site, here. For talking points, visit this page on the EMR Network site.

Some background: On July 11, 2008, CTIA, the trade association of the cellular telephone industry, petitioned the FCC to declare new limitations on local zoning authority as it affects cell tower and antenna siting, which, if approved, would pre-empt local ordinances and state laws. You can read a notice of the petition here.

Specifically, CTIA requests the FCC to:

1. Force municipalities to act on wireless antenna or tower zoning applications within 45 or 75 days;
   Rule that applications are automatically "deemed granted" if a local government misses these deadlines;
   
2. Prevent municipalities from considering the presence of service by other carriers in evaluating an additional carrier's application for an antenna site; and
   
3. Preempt any local ordinance that would automatically require a variance for cell tower applications. (It appears that this would in effect preempt local wireless overlay districts, setbacks and height restrictions, thereby gutting existing local wireless bylaws.)

These proposed changes could lead to situations where wireless companies would be allowed to approach private individuals, including our neighbors, to site antennas on their property--without restriction. Given that these companies offer sizeable, yearly compensation for antenna space, many people would not be in a position to reject their offers. Property valuations would likely drop near such installations, and neighbor-to-neighbor acrimony would rise. Moreover, this would pave the way to increased exposure to microwave radiation where we live, work and play.

Exposure to electromagnetic radiation has been shown to cause biological disruption which can lead to a variety adverse health effects, including but not limited to childhood leukemia, adult brain tumors, childhood brain tumors, genotoxic effects (DNA damage and micronucleation), neurological effects and neurodegenerative disease, immune system disregulation, allergic and inflammatory responses, breast cancer in men and women, miscarriage and some cardiovascular effects.

This is not the first blow against local control of tower and antenna siting. Twelve years ago, the industry-driven 1996 Telecommunications Act (Section 704) struck a grave blow to local governing authority, resulting in the widespread build-out of the "seamless" network of cell phone towers and antennas nationwide that we see today. The '96 Telecom Act accomplished this by:

1. Forcing towns to do business with any comparable wireless carriers that submit applications; to do otherwise is considered to be "discriminatory" practice, with legal consequences.
2. Prohibiting towns and cities from banning wireless communication facilities (cell phone towers and antennas) in their communities; to do so is considered to be in violation of federal law.
3. Reducing local governing authority to the comparatively marginal area of regulating antenna and tower placement through such means as overlay districts, setbacks, and tower height restrictions, etc.

Following the '96 Telecom Act, many towns and cities, though not all, crafted tower and antenna siting bylaws within these severe strictures. But the curtailments didn't end there. No bylaw, according to the Telecom Act, could be based on environmental impact, which is interpreted by the telecom industry to include human health effects. Even so, these local bylaws have been the last line of defense that communities could look toward for protection of their health, environment, and properties. And now, even this last remnant of local authority may be pre-empted, if the CTIA's petition is approved!

Please send a letter to the FCC by September 15, 2008, urging it to deny the CTIA's petition. If possible, please send a copy to the following to maximize the impact of your letter:

• Your local governing boards - so they will notify their colleagues in other towns and cities
• Your state representative and senator
• Your Congressmen
• Your City and local papers
• The EMR Network --so we can track the effect of your letters. You can email your letter to info@emrnetwork.org

On August 22, Montgomery County, Maryland, and NATOA et al. filed motions to extend the comment deadlines. Check back at EMRnetwork.org for the latest on this issue.

Read more...

Online Petition: Erroneous act of the Supreme Court in Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker

We recently received an email from Kellie Kvasnikoff, a commercial fisherman forced into a career change by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, who is now Chief Information Technology Officer for the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe. In 2006 Kvasnikoff published Exxon Valdez 18 Years and Counting detailing the fight to get justice from Exxon after the economic, environmental and cultural disaster that the oil spill brought to Prince William Sound.

Now, following up on the Supreme Court decision to let the oil giant wriggle off the hook on punitive damages, an on-line petition asks that Congress open an investigation into Exxon and the court's decision. You can read and sign here.

Read more...

San Fernando Valley chapter members take part in Los Angeles Social Forum

Several members of the San Fernando Valley chapter tabled for single-payer health care and campaign finance reform at the Los Angeles Social Forum. The LA Social forum, which took place June 27 to June 29, brought Southern California activists together to share power, plans, and perspectives on peace and social justice work, with over 70 workshops, films and performances.

Read more...