“Manager’s Amendment” our last chance on health care‏

Posted on November 2nd, 2009 by DavidDelk

Hi, AfDers and friends,
 
Call congress (see details below) to support Single Payer Healthcare/Healthcare for All/Everybody in – Nobody Out. 

David e. Delk,  Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter 503 232 5495 www.afd-pdx.org

 

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:01:30 -0400
From: afd@thealliancefordemocracy.org
To: davidafd@msn.com
Subject: “Manager’s Amendment” our last chance on health care

 

Urgent: Read and take action!

October 29, 2009
Please forward widely!

Dear David ,Today, House leadership introduced its healthcare bill–and they threw us under the bus.

No Kucinich Amendment. This amendment would have eliminated a legal hurdle that currently can be used to prevent states from creating their own single payer systems. But this amendment is nowhere in the final bill.
And now the Weiner Amendment may never come to the floor for a vote, despite Nancy Pelosi’s July promise.
But there’s one last chance to fight back for both the Kucinich and Weiner Amendments.
For the Kucinich Amendment, House leaders can call for a “Manager’s Amendment” even when a bill–like this health reform bill–is closed to any other amendments. A Manager’s Amendment is a package of individual amendments agreed to by “the managers,” the majority and minority members of the House who manage their side’s debate on a bill.
Here are the House members to call, with Washington and district office numbers–demand that the Kucinich Amendment be included in the House bill. 

  • Speaker Nancy Pelosi: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-4965; San Francisco office (415) 556-4862
  • Majority Leader Steny Hoyer: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-4131; Greenbelt office (301) 474-0119; Waldorf office (301) 843-1577
  • Rep. Henry Waxman: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-3976; Los Angeles office (323) 651-1040
  • Rep. Charles Rangel: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-4365; New York office (212) 663-3900
  • Rep. George Miller: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-2095; Concord office (925) 602-1880; Richmond office (510) 262-6500; Vallejo office (707) 645-1888

And remind Nancy Pelosi to honor her word and allow the Weiner Amendment to go to a floor for debate and vote.
We’ve come a long way in this fight, and regardless of what happens in the next few weeks in Washington, it will continue–both on the state level for single payer and across the country as we continue to take back our government from corporate rule. We thank you for taking action and urge you to spread the word to friends, family and fellow activists: Make the call today for a Manager’s Amendment and for a vote on the Weiner Amendment. 



As a member or supporter of the Alliance for Democracy, you’ll receive a monthly e-mail newsletter to update you on our work and alert you to ways you can act to support it. We will also send you periodic “Action Alerts” that pertain to our campaigns and those of allied groups. If you’d like to unsubscribe from our e-mail newsletter or the Action Alerts, please reply to this e-mail with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line or click on the link below. Thanks for your ongoing interest and support of the Alliance! The Alliance for Democracy
PO Box 540115, Waltham, MA 02454 781-894-1179 * www.thealliancefordemocracy.org
Click here to unsubscribe 

 

 

Filed under: Health Care, Single Payer | No Comments »

Stop Hanford from becoming a National Radioactive Waste Dump – Hearings Starting‏

Posted on October 23rd, 2009 by DavidDelk

Hi AfDers and friends,
 
It is time to comment at a public hearing scheduled in Portland on Tuesday, Oct 27th (7 PM at the Double Tree Inn near Lloyd Center – 1000 NE Multnomah) or via email or written letter. 
 
Comments are needed on the proposed revisions to the Tri-party Agreement (TPA) setting out the schedule and conditions for the clean-up of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.  Read more »

Filed under: Environment, Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Tri-Party Agreement | No Comments »

Vote Yes for Tax Fairness/Vote Yes on 66/67

Posted on October 17th, 2009 by DavidDelk

Vote YES on 66/67 in January 2010
Vote YES for Tax Fairness

These two ballots were referred to the ballot by a business financed campaign of anti-tax forces.  Read more »

Filed under: Elections, Taxes | No Comments »

12 arrested in PDX for supporting Single Payer‏

Posted on October 16th, 2009 by DavidDelk

The action heated up on Thursday on national healthcare reform with the arrest of 54 protesters nationally using non-violence tactics to bring the single payer reform to the fore front of the national conversation.  This was a nationwide effort organized by HealthCare Now. Portland was one of the cities where these actions took place with 12 people being arrested for trespass at the doors of Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield.  Read more »

Filed under: Civil Disobedience, Health Care | No Comments »

New Role for the IMF/Large Art build for Dec 5 rally/march.‏

Posted on October 8th, 2009 by DavidDelk

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has performed the role of enforcer of the Neo-liberal economic model for several decades. In that role, it has imposed loans restrictions on third world countries which the United States (which effectively controls the IMF) does not impose on the United States. Those restrictions include cutting of social services and cutting regulation of economies in order to facilitate first world profit making.
 
While Mark Weisbrot suggests in the following that the IMF could serve a different agenda, he also cautions that as long as the IMF is controlled by the “leading” economic powers, that the IMF missions as demonstrated via action, is going to serve up more of the same policies and we should not place too much world for an alternative vision in it.
 
Of course, the IMF is the sister of the World Bank.  As mentioned before in earlier emails, the tenth anniversary of the Battle of Seattle will soon be upon us.  Plans are being laid for a rally/march here in Portland to observe that great victory for the world’s people in that the World Bank has not had a successful round of talks or agreements since then.  So be sure that you leave Saturday December 5th open to participate.  Current plans call for a rally gathering under the Hawthorne bridge and then march up to Hoffman Hall on the PSU campus. The theme is “The Spirit of Seattle Lives!  Another World is Possible, Another Economy is Necessary“.  More details will be forthcoming or visit the official website at http://www.december5.org/. 
 
If you have some time this weekend, join the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign in a Large Art Build, to build puppets, signs etc for the Dec 5 march/rally.  Details on that are at the end of this message.

David e. Delk, Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter 503 232 5495 www.afd-pdx.org

A New Role For the IMF?

By Mark Weisbrot

This column was published by The Guardian Unlimited on October 8, 2009. If anyone wants to reprint it, please include a link to the original.


Rescued from a state of near-irrelevance by the world recession and an infusion of hundreds of billions of dollars (mostly from the U.S., Europe, and Japan), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is now thinking of expanding its role into previously uncharted territory. In Istanbul for the fall meetings of the IMF, Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said:  “Given the costs associated with reserves accumulation, there is clearly a need for reliable emergency financing and hence for a global lender of last resort. The fund has the potential to serve as an effective and reliable provider of such insurance.” 

Strauss-Kahn is correct to point out that developing countries pay a substantial price for accumulating foreign exchange reserves in order to “self-insure” against a financial crisis. But can the IMF play this role of the world’s central banker? Contrary to much news reporting, the IMF has not historically played the role that a national central bank plays as lender of last resort. The Federal Reserve, for example, provides liquidity to the financial system in a time of crisis, in order to prevent a more generalized collapse – as it did with hundreds of billions of dollars in a series of interventions after the collapse of Lehman Brothers last year. But the IMF did not play this role in the major developing country financial crises that preceded this most recent one: e.g. the East Asian financial crises of 1997-98, or the Argentine crisis of 2001-2002. More often it has tried to assist foreign creditors in collecting their debt, as in the above mentioned crises, as well as attaching various, often unpopular and sometimes harmful conditions to its lending.

To its credit, the Fund has this year made available for borrowing some $283 billion dollars to all member countries. While most of this is allocated to the rich countries who will not need or use it, a substantial part will go to developing countries, with some $20 billion to low income countries (although most of the latter cannot really afford to take on more debt). But this move is unprecedented in IMF history, since the loans are without conditions, and it does bring the IMF closer to the central bank function of lender of last resort, providing liquidity during a deep world recession.

But the problem remains that most of the IMF’s lending is not of this type. My colleagues and I looked at 41 countries that have current loan agreements with the IMF. We found that in 31 of the 41 countries, the agreements had imposed what economists call pro-cyclical macroeconomic policies. That is, as these countries’ economies were slowing sharply or falling into recession, the agreements called for tightening fiscal policy (e.g. cutting spending) or tightening monetary policy (raising interest rates or curtailing money supply growth). These are policies that we in the United States or other rich countries would not adopt in a downturn (witness the 11.2 percent of GDP budget deficit in the U.S. and near-zero policy interest rates). Nor does the IMF recommend such policies in the high-income countries.

In a number of countries the IMF made such recommendations on the basis of projections that underestimated the impact of the world recession on developing country economies, and in some cases the recommendations were subsequently changed. Still, there was damage done, and if it was just based on forecasting errors then there were way too many of them.

IMF spokesperson Bill Murray reacted angrily to the criticism: “The main point of this report is that growth forecasts were too optimistic when programs were designed, leading to excessively tight fiscal and monetary policies. Reality is quite the opposite.”

While there may be some room for disagreement on a particular country’s policies, it is hard to see what he gains by denying the Fund’s forecasting errors, which are a matter of public record and documented with links in the paper.

The Fund has privately told others that its policies should be judged not on whether they made the downturn worse in borrowing countries, but on whether these countries would have been even worse off if they didn’t get any aid at all. This seems too low a bar. If you go to a doctor with a badly infected foot, and he saves your life by amputating it, you are better off as a result of the treatment. But if you could have been cured by available antibiotics, this is not competent medicine.

And in some countries, for example Latvia – where the IMF projects a GDP decline of 18 percent this year – the people probably would have been better off refusing aid and allowing the currency to devalue. Current policy, supported by the IMF and EU, is dedicated to maintaining the country’s fixed, overvalued exchange rate. This is very important to Western European creditor banks who have loaned enormous amounts in Euros to Latvia and other Central and Eastern European countries. Maintaining the exchange rate means that the country’s current account deficit must be adjusted through shrinking the economy (and therefore imports) and real wages. This is the same mistake that the Fund supported in Argentina in its deep recession from 1999-2002. After the peso collapsed and Argentina defaulted on most of its foreign debt, the economy contracted for just three months before entering a six-year period of rapid (more than 60 percent) growth.

The IMF now also hopes to play a greater role in monitoring the economic policies of all countries – high income as well as low- and middle-income — and this is something that is more likely to materialize in the near future.  But the Fund missed the two biggest asset bubbles in world history – the U.S. stock market bubble of the late 1990s and the more recent housing bubble, both of which caused recessions when they burst (the latter being our worst recession since the Great Depression).  Given this track record and the long, continuing history of imposing inappropriate macroeconomic policies on developing countries, should the IMF be given more power – as is currently being proposed – to help decide when governments should reverse their current expansionary policies and shift to tighter macroeconomic policies as the world economy recovers?

Macroeconomic policy is just one area where the IMF influences growth and development in low-and-middle income countries, through its loan agreements and more importantly through its role as gate-keeper for other sources of credit. It also influences policy in the areas of trade, financial liberalization, privatization of state-owned enterprises, the size and role of the public sector, and more. Does anyone think that South Korea – which was as poor as Ghana in 1960 but now has living standards on a par with some Western European countries – would have succeeded if it had been under IMF/ World Bank tutelage during these decades?

To be fair, the IMF is controlled by the governments of the rich countries, with the U.S. Treasury Department as its most important overseer. But that is exactly the problem: these governments are just beginning to acknowledge some of the failures of neoliberal policies in their own countries, although they are still quite far from reforming them. They have not even recognized the failure of their policies in the rest of the world, despite the long-term growth and development failure in the vast majority of low- and middle-income countries. Concentrated, unaccountable power is generally bad; it’s even worse when it is also misguided.

LARGE ART BUILD
Masks, Puppets and Street Theater
Saturday, October 10th
1pm – 6pm
Martin Luther King Jr. Worker Center
240 NE MLK Jr. Blvd.

Join the D5 Coalition for a weekend skill-share and large art build. Come learn how to build big puppets and large-scale protest art. 
 
Together we will learn how to make giant masks and the basics of puppet construction.  Individuals, activists, community members and organizations are welcome to attend. No experience necessary. English/Spanish translation provided. We have lots of supplies but can always use donations of cardboard, paint and other useful things – see below for list of supplies you can bring if you have them.

Individuals are welcome to come on their own.  Organizations are encouraged to bring a team of people (at least 3) to create a useful, interesting, beautiful and/or hilarious prop, puppet, costume or game.  You will be able to use this for your current campaigns — as well as bring the piece to the D5 action and celebration (www.december5.org).
There will be knowledgeable people on hand to walk teams through the creative process, train you on a variety of prop-building techniques and help turn your ideas into reality.

PLEASE RSVP. Email andrea@december5.org or call the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign at 503-736-9777.

Check Out Photos from the last LARGE ART BUILD: 
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=106842508787 
http://picasaweb.google.com/chriscdem/ArtAndRevolutionD5_1?authkey=Gv1sRgCIqilvWvo8Sb4AE&feat=email#  
 
Supplies we can always use more of:  Paint, paint brushes, fabric or cloth, cardboard, wood or plastic pipe, masking tape, duct tape, permanent markers, pencils, wire, screws, bolts, hinges and assorted tools, including cordless drills, hammers, saws, measuring tapes, etc.

What is “D5″?

A broad coalition of labor, environmental, faith, human rights and community activists is calling on people across Oregon to celebrate the 10- year anniversary of the Seattle WTO protests and speak out for change during a march and indoor rally in Portland on Saturday, December 5, 2009.

Today, we find ourselves in the midst of the worst economic and environmental crises in generations.  The same corporate interests activists confronted in Seattle are attempting to exploit these crises in order to concentrate their own power.  Amazingly, they even have the gall to have scheduled a new WTO ministerial meeting in Geneva on the exact 10-year anniversary of the Seattle shutdown.

D5 is a celebration of our victories from Seattle and a convergence of modern social movements under the umbrella: “The Spirit of Seattle Lives!  Another World is Possible, Another Economy is Necessary”

Filed under: Fair Trade and Globalization | No Comments »

PGE’s Boardman plant: Bad air, worse energy policy

Posted on October 4th, 2009 by DavidDelk

The Oregonian’s Steve Duin gets the story right again;this time on PGE’s proposal for continued use of the coal-fired power plant at Boardman.  As Steve notes, PGE has proposed spending (that is to say, having PGE ratepayers spend) $560 million to install scrubbers to reduce the amount of haze producing emissions.  And that will allow it to continue operating Boardman for at least 30 years. So if PGE spends that money and then we are successful in closing the plant down due to new federal carbon emission regulations, say within 10 years, the ratepayers will continue paying for scrubbers no longer in use. 
 
The other important point is that cutting haze, as important as that may be for the Columbia Scenic Area, does not cut carbon.  And it is carbon that is the major factor in global warming.  If the DEQ approves the PGE proposal, PGE will continue to operate the largest producer of carbon pollution in the state and we, the citizens of Oregon, will be part of the problem for not having challenged this proposal.
 
If Oregon DEQ is really concerned with the haze issue, which they are mandated to be reduce, the best way to achieve the necessary reduction is to require that Boardman close.  Most likely, new federal regulations regarding carbon will require the closing of Boardman anyway, so why not do it now before ratepayers are forced to pay $560 million for scrubbers and new boilers.
 
I hope that this is enough information for you to comment on the PGE Boardman proposal.  COMMENTS ARE DUE ON MONDAY, OCT 5TH. Sorry for the late notice.  Comments should be sent to Brian Huehn, Manager, IRP, PGE, 121 SW Salmon St, 3WTC 030, Portland OR 97204.  Because of the shortness of time, please email your comments to Brian at brian.kuehne@pgn.com

David e. Delk, Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter 503 232 5495 www.afd-pdx.org 

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2009/10/pges_boardman_plant_bad_air_wo.html

PGE’s Boardman plant: Bad air, worse energy policy

By Steve Duin, The Oregonian

October 03, 2009, 10:10AM

Help me with this:

When Portland General Electric built its Boardman coal-fired power plant in the late 1970s, why did it seek an exemption from the Clean Air Act?

And why is the utility now fighting attempts by the Sierra Club and other environmental groups to hold it accountable to the act’s standards?

I understand why a business struggling to get by would try to cut corners on the environmental front, especially if it can’t pass on the cost of running a clean, green operation to its customers.

PGE doesn’t have that problem. PGE makes a guaranteed profit. PGE lives so high on the hog it stuffed $4.5 million into CEO Peggy Fowler’s pocket on her way out the door.

And by the grace of God and Oregon’s Public Utility Commission, PGE passes all its business costs along to the ratepayers, most of whom clearly do care about clean-air standards.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Ancer L. Haggerty swatted away most of the utility’s objections to the Sierra Club lawsuit, allowing the legal case to proceed.

In his 30-page opinion, Haggerty reminded us that Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality permitted the Boardman plant “with an understanding that the plant would be subject” to the 1974 dictates of the Clean Air Act.

Subsequently, Haggerty notes, the utility asked the EPA in May 1975 if the Boardman plant was subject to those 1974 regulations, given PGE’s argument that “construction” had already begun.

The EPA decided the plant was not. “The decision,” PGE’s Gail Baker noted via e-mail, “meant that PGE did not have to delay construction of the plant to obtain new permits for construction.”

The Boardman plant, by the way, began operations in August 1980, more than five years after the effective date of the Clean Air standards.

Baker further argues, “PGE has complied with all regulations associated with the plant throughout Boardman’s 35-year history.”

“Obviously, we’ve brought suit because we disagree with that,” said Aubrey Baldwin, lead attorney for the plaintiffs. “Essentially, that’s the question before the court.”

At the heart of the suit is the Sierra Club’s argument that PGE has made major modifications to Boardman — the largest stationary source of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides in the state, and second to Ash Grove Cement in mercury spewing — that required permitting and review.

PGE didn’t seek permits, however, and DEQ didn’t care. The agency, Baldwin said, has been painfully inconsistent in “trying to reconcile how they continue to allow PGE to operate Boardman without making it go through new source review, and install (pollution) controls.

“To put it charitably, DEQ has demonstrated over the last decade that they’re open to coming up with creative solutions when industry asks them to.”

PGE is not oblivious to the benefits of appearing green in Oregon, going so far as to propose spending $560 million in pollution controls to keep Boardman in operation for another 30 years.

Those controls, however, would not reduce the plant’s carbon dioxide emissions. The infatuation with keeping Boardman operating, Baldwin said, “is based on the fundamental belief at PGE that coal is part of our future. It’s almost an ideology. It’s irrational.

“PGE can’t identify anyone who would be upset if they cleaned up or phased out Boardman,” she added.

Except, of course, those booster groups for asthma, heart disease and perpetual haze in the gorge.

– Steve Duin

Filed under: Boardman, Carbon, Environment, PGE | No Comments »

Tuesday 9/29: Call Senate FinCom members for public option

Posted on September 28th, 2009 by DavidDelk

National Alliance for Democracy Action Alert follows asking that we contact the Senate Finance Committee to support a public option to Sen. Baucus’s Health Care bill.  As noted even though we support Single Payer, a public option is needed in this bill to support our efforts.  Please make the call right away.

David e. Delk, Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter 503 232 5495 www.afd-pdx.org
 

Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:26:01 -0400
From: afd@thealliancefordemocracy.org
To: davidafd@msn.com
Subject: Tuesday 9/29: Call Senate FinCom members for public option!

Please forward widely!
Call the Senate Finance Committee:
Public option a step on the road to single payer!
The Senate Finance Committee is expected to vote on amendments to add a choice of a public health insurance option to Max Baucus’s bill tomorrow, Tuesday September 29. If your senator serves on the Finance Committee, please call him or her on Tuesday morning and ask for a vote for a public health insurance option.Please take this action even if you are a single payer supporter–as we are! Remember that if a health reform bill gets out of the Senate Finance Committee–the most conservative committee in the more conservative house of Congress–with a public option included, it will show all our legislators that there is strong popular support for health care reform, and help build momentum for single payer. Remind your senator that single-payer is your first choice, too.
       
Please make the call on Tuesday morning!

Senate Finance Committee
Democrats

  • MAX BAUCUS, MT
  • JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, WV
  • KENT CONRAD, ND
  • JEFF BINGAMAN, NM
  • JOHN F. KERRY, MA
  • BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, AR
  • RON WYDEN, OR
  • CHARLES E. SCHUMER, NY
  • DEBBIE STABENOW, MI
  • MARIA CANTWELL, WA
  • BILL NELSON, FL
  • ROBERT MENENDEZ, NJ
  • THOMAS CARPER, DE


Republicans

  • CHUCK GRASSLEY, IA
  • ORRIN G. HATCH, UT
  • OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, ME
  • JON KYL, AZ
  • JIM BUNNING, KY
  • MIKE CRAPO, ID
  • PAT ROBERTS, KS
  • JOHN ENSIGN, NV
  • MIKE ENZI, WY
  • JOHN CORNYN, TX


Go to www.Senate.gov and look up phone numbers of each member or just call 202-224-3121  and ask to be connected to your Senator.

 

 

 

Filed under: Health Care | No Comments »

The fight for tax fairness begins today!‏

Posted on September 26th, 2009 by DavidDelk

The anti-tax zealots in Oregon have been successful in referring the two tax fairness bills passed by the Oregon legislature to the voters.  One bill increased the corporate minimum tax from $10 to $150 with a sliding scale above that.  The other bill increased the personel income tax to be imposed on the wealthiest of the wealthy. 
 
These two measure would enact a measure of tax fairness in Oregon.  The history of tax reform in Oregon in the past has usually resulted in lower taxes on the rich with the poor and middle classes paying more.  Yet the amount of income going to those same people has climbed during the same time.
 
A recent report from the Oregon Center for Public Policy (OCPP) titled Labor Day Woes and Wishes, Reviewing recession’s impact on workers and policies for greater shared prosperity documents the extent to which this is true.  To quote the report:
 

In 2007, the average adjusted gross income of the wealthiest 1 percent of Oregon households surpassed the $1 million mark. That meant that these wealthiest households had tripled their inflation-adjusted income compared to 1979.  By contrast, the typical, or median, Oregon household income remained at around $31,000, about what it was in 1979 in inflation-adjusted dollars. 
 
The income gains of the top one-tenth of 1 percent – a select group of about 1,600 households- were even more impressive. Between 1980 and 2007, this group’s average income grew to $3.2 million.  In 2007 alone, the top one-tenth of 1 percent reported a total of $5.2 billion in income.  that equals the total income reported by the lowest-earning 506,000 households in the state in 2007, about 30 percent of Oregon taxpayers.
 
Not Surprisingly, income has become increasingly concentrated in  the hands of the richest Oregonians, particularly the wealthiest 1 percent.  In 1980, 7 percent of all income in Oregon went to the richest 1 percent of households. By 2007, on the eve of the recession, the top 1 percent collected 18 percent of all income.

 
Looking at this same question nationally, according to figures from the Congressional Budget Office, in 1980 the top 1% received 7.5% of after-tax income.  By 2006, that percentage had increased to 16.3.  Looking at a slightly different grouping, we see that the top 20% received 42.8% of after tax income in 1980 but increased that percentage to 52.1% by 2006.
 
So I think the wealthy can pay a little more.  It is only fair.
 
And naturally it almost goes without saying that corporations have been paying a lower percent of state revenues for the past several decades.
And it continues to decrease.   According to the OCPP, corporations paid 6.3 percent in income tax revenue in the 2007-09 budget cycle that ended in June, but nowhere near the 18 percent share that corporations paid in the 1973-75 biennium. 
 
So I think that corporations can afford to pay a bit more in terms of an increase in the corporate minimum tax.
 
Please read the following email alert from our friends at Tax Fairness Oregon and pledge to Vote NO on the two tax referral measures when you vote. This will save you from receiving mailings from the Yes campaign (yes, you will want to vote Yes to continue funding for state services and for schools) and save the campaign money. 
 
Also, consider volunteering for the Yes campaign. Go to www.defendoregon.org to connect up with the campaign.

David e. Delk, Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter 503 232 5495 www.afd-pdx.org 

Pledge to Vote YES for Tax Fairness!

Oregon can no longer afford to allow most corporations to pay just $10 a year in income taxes.

take action
Take Action

Dear David,

Today, a well-funded group led by tobacco lobbyist Mark Nelson appears to have turned in enough signatures to force an election this January on the important tax fairness bills passed by the legislature earlier this year.1
The effort to undo these reforms was spearheaded by large corporations – big oil, big pharmaceuticals, big banks, and big developers.
They have now given over $1 million so that Oregon’s corporations can still take advantage of the 1931 loophole that allows them to avoid paying their fair share.2
We need you to fight back. In order to uphold these measures and preserve Oregon’s critical services, now is the time to get involved in the Vote YES for Tax Fairness campaign. 
DON’T BE FOOLED:
As a former kindergarten teacher, I know something about the importance of making things easy to understand. 
When it comes to taxes in Oregon, big corporations are going to spend a lot of money trying to make this issue complicated, but it is so simple I could teach the issue to a room full of five-year-olds: corporations should pay more than $10 a year in income tax.
Please pledge to vote YES for Tax Fairness so that we can close the shameful loophole that allows two-thirds of corporations in Oregon to pay just $10 a year in income taxes.
For too long, rich CEOs, highly paid lobbyists, and corporate lawyers have gotten away with not paying their fair share; while middle-class Oregonians have seen their services cut, and their state fees (such as tuition) have increased.
In this time of economic crisis, Oregon can no longer afford to let big business not pay their fair share.
Can we count on you to vote YES for Tax Fairness this January?
If you take the pledge we will add your name to our side’s do-not-mail list. This will save our allies crucial resources and cut down on environmentally wasteful mailings.
This is going to be a tough fight, but I know with your continued support we will win.
Sincerely,

Jody Wiser
Tax Fairness Oregon
P.S. Are you on Facebook? Please join our Tax Fairness Oregon fan page!
Sources:
1. “Activists file for ballot measure to repeal new taxes,” KGW, September 25, 2009
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_092509_news_anti_tax_measures.1b5e4d2f7.html
2. Oregon Secretary of State, https://secure.sos.state.or.us/eim/publicAccountSummary.do?filerId=13851

Filed under: Taxes | No Comments »

All test pond fish killed on 1st day due to equipment malfunction: Nestle’s Cascade Locks proposal‏

Posted on September 13th, 2009 by DavidDelk

This post is written by Joe Miller.

On the first day of an intended year-long test to see if Cascade Locks well water was suitable for raising fish, well water pumped into a test pond contained chlorine due to an equipment malfunction, and all of the privately purchased rainbow trout fry in the pond were killed. Nestle says (see below) it is working to “ensure there are adequate protections to avoid this, or other potential problems, in the future.”

The loss of the fish on the first day and Nestle’s subsequent commitment to only “ADEQUATE [my emphasis] protections … in the future” are very revealing, especially when considered in the context provided by their behavior in other communities across the country (see my Sept. 2 post below for documentation and action suggestions).

Oppose this project now, and support other projects to create sustainable jobs and options in Cascade Locks and other communities.

Best,

Joe

=====

Further Fish-Raising Tests Postponed
Friday, September 4, 2009

The City of Cascade Locks and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) are investigating a water exchange that would enable the hatchery to use city well water in addition to spring water for its operations at the Oxbow site. In return, the city would have spring water to sell to Nestlé Waters North America (NWNA) for bottling purposes.

As part of the due diligence, ODFW has asked NWNA to demonstrate that the city well water is suitable for raising fish. A year-long test was designed, and began yesterday, September 3. Water from a city well was piped into a test pond with rainbow trout fry purchased from a private hatchery. Unfortunately, an ineffective check valve from the city’s chlorination system accidentally allowed chlorinated water to be pumped into the test pond. As a result, all the fish perished. Chlorine, often used as a disinfectant in public water systems, is fatal to fish in very small quantities.

NWNA is working closely with ODFW and private consultants to conduct a complete assessment of the pumping equipment and system to ensure there are adequate protections to avoid this, or other potential problems, in the future.

Both NWNA and ODFW agree that additional testing will not be completed until both are confident it can be safely implemented. At this point, we don’t know when that will be. Please check back at this site for updates.

Nestle Waters in the Pacific Northwest – Project Updates
http://www.nestlewaterspnw.com/projectUpdates.aspx

=====

Sent: Wed, 2 Sep 2009
Subject: Public Meeting on Nestle’s Cascade Locks Proposal, Action Suggestions, Resources

All,

In mid-June, The Oregonian reported that Nestle Waters North America is proposing a $50 million water bottling plant in Cascade Locks in the Columbia Gorge 45 miles east of Portland. Nestle proposes to tap some (100 million gallons per year) of the spring water that gushes from the ground and supplies an Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife salmon and steelhead hatchery, and replace it with water drawn from the wells that supply Cascade Locks. Nestle proposes to then bottle, ship and sell the spring water as Arrowhead and Pure Life water.
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/06/nestle_eyes_columbia_gorge_spr.html

In late June, OPB’s Think Out Loud hosted a revealing program on the current situation in Cascade Locks and Nestle’s
proposal. Below find an excerpt from the Think Out Loud website on the program:
http://www.opb.org/thinkoutloud/shows/bottling-it-cascade-locks/

… “Cascade Locks is a town of roughly 1,075 people that has been losing jobs for decades and closed its high school earlier this month. The $50 million Nestle facility would bring with it an estimated 45 new jobs and would almost double the town’s property tax revenue.

Opponents of this proposal say that the Nestle jobs won’t go to current Cascade Locks residents, and that Nestle’s presence will drive away tourists who would otherwise come to visit the beautiful scenery. The facility would also bring a continuous stream of truck traffic to the town, and some residents worry about negative consequences for the environment.

Nestle Waters has faced similar opposition before from communities around the country, fighting legal battles in several states. Nestle last year canceled a contract to build a water bottling plant in the town of McCloud, California, after years of vocal opposition from many in that community.” …

Guests on the program included:

* Katelin Stuart: Cascade Locks resident
* Brad Lorang: Mayor of Cascade Locks
* Debra Anderson: President of the McCloud Watershed Council
* Dave Palais: Natural resource manager for Nestle Waters
* Mark Schlosberg: Western regional director for Food & Water Watch

NESTLE SPONSORED PUBLIC MEETING – WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 7 – 9 PM, CASCADE LOCKS

On Wednesday, September 9th, Nestle will sponsor a public meeting from 7 to 9 pm at the Port Pavilion, 355 Wanapa, in Cascade Locks. Information on this Nestle coordinated event is available at the link below. According to Nancy Matela and David Delk of the Alliance for Democracy, a representative from from both the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Oregon Water Resources Department will also participate in the meeting and Q & A.
http://www.nestlewaterspnw.com/projectUpdates.aspx

RESOURCES ON NESTLE’S BEHAVIOR IN OTHER COMMUNITIES, AND THE BOTTLING AND COMMODIFICATION OF WATER

Below find a number of resources on the threats created by Nestle’s proposal, Nestle’s behavior in other communities, and the issues raised on many levels by the bottling and commodification of water.

Nestlé fact sheet: “Undermining Local Control of Water” 2009
http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/sites/default/files/Nestle%20Fact%20Sheet%202009%20FINAL.pdf

Alternet article archives on Nestle
http://www.alternet.org/tags/nestle/

Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestle Waters North America, Inc.
http://www.justice4michigan.org/files/hfp_nestle_case.pdf
http://www.savemiwater.org/

Bottled Water – Food & Water Watch
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/bottled

Alternet article archives on bottled water
http://www.alternet.org/tags/bottled%20water/

Think Outside the Bottle – Corporate Accountability International
http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/content/think-outside-bottle
http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/content/communities-think-outside-bottle
http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/water-news

The conclusions emerging from the above evidence — to me, at least — are clear and leave no doubt that Nestle’s Cascade Locks proposal should be strongly opposed. My only regret is that this strong opposition won’t necessarily be coupled with the strong promotion of the sustainable job and community enhancing options that Cascade Locks, like many other communities, sorely needs. But those promotional activities will have to proceed on a separate track — Nestle’s proposal affects much more than just Cascade Locks and needs to be defeated.

WAYS TO DEFEAT NESTLE’S PROPOSAL INCLUDE:

1. Attend the Nestle sponsored event on September 9 in Cascade Locks and raise the important questions with Cascade Locks officials, Nestle, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Oregon Water Resources Department.
2. Share your views in writing, over the phone, or via email with all of the above.
3. Review the evidence in the resources above, and write a concise, powerful letter to the editor.
4. Sign-on to the “Keep Nestle Out of the Gorge” online petition sponsored by Food & Water Watch at:
http://action.foodandwaterwatch.org/t/741/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=2071

Best,

Joe

ADDENDUM: WILL THIS BE CASCADE LOCKS SEVERAL YEARS DOWN THE ROAD?

Excerpt*:

“It’s been nine years now since Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation first went to court to stop Nestle from pumping millions of gallons from a rural Michigan wildlife preserve….

The case could have been over in 2003, when a judge determined that Nestle’s withdrawal of 400 gallons of water a minute was having a negative impact on several local streams and ponds, and called a halt to the pumping. But the pumping never stopped. Nestle appealed and hired its own scientists to produce studies that validated its operations. To counter Nestle’s efforts, the community has had to continue to hire lawyers and experts and the fees are piling up. Nestle has run the community dry in more ways than one.”

*David v. Goliath: Help Michigan Citizens Protect Their Water from Nestle’s Bottling Operations – Leslie Samuelrich – Corporate Accountability International 7/1/09
http://www.alternet.org/story/141052/

Filed under: Water | No Comments »

No More Code Words: Racism is Public Again‏

Posted on September 13th, 2009 by DavidDelk

Mark Karlin is the founder and editor of BuzzFlash.com and his recent column is copied below.  The important thing to get from this piece is that we are witnessing the bigot’s backlash to having elected a black man president and that Obama must stop trying to placate these bigots because he cannot.  Further, that his model is, and should be, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who won impressive advances equal human rights for African Americans (and all of the various other human rights movements to follow) by standing for his beliefs and enlisting the active support of “we, the People.”  So, there are two questions. Will Obama stop trying to placate the rightwing bigots who are stirred up by corporate financed rightwing hate media and call for a mass populist movement?  The second question is, will you respond?

His healthcare speech suggests that he will not.  In his healthcare address to Congress last week, he said that single payer healthcare (which removes the for-profit health insurance companies from their all powerful position) would not be considered and he said that he supports forcing all Americans to buy insurance. A token few, maybe 5% by his estimate, could use the public option.
 
Note that then a day or so later House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate leader Harry Reid said that they were no longer tied to a public option at all.  It was no longer a deal breaker.  Teddy Partridge as well as David Sirota then revealed that on the same day, United Healthcare’s, one of the largest health insurance companies in America, chief lobbyist announced that it would hold a fund raising event for her – $2400 plate for individuals, $5000 plate for PACs.  I am sure there is no connection between the two events. 
 
I am attaching a pdf of the salaries of executives of the major American health insurance companies.  Wouldn’t it be nice if we didn’t have to pay for these bloated CEOs?  Let’s keep calling our representatives and senator to support Rep. Anthony Weiner’s in his attempt to replace all the language of HR3200 with the Conyers bill  (HR676) for Single Payer Healthcare, improved Medicare for All.  Also, while calling, support Rep. Kucinich’s proposal to allow states the right to implement their own single payer plan.  Remember that is how Canada got single payer, one province enacted it and then the rest of the nation followed. 

David e. Delk, Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter 503 232 5495 www.afd-pdx.org

Published on BuzzFlash.org (http://blog.buzzflash.com)No More Code Words: Racism is Public AgainBy mark karlinCreated 09/13/2009 – 8:01am

Whatever you think of Maureen Dowd’s snarkiness, she cuts to the chase in her September 13th column [1] about the racism behind the summer of bizarre rolling protests against Barack Obama: white racists will not accept a “black boy” as their boss, particularly one who is smarter than they are.
Anyone who has regularly read BuzzFlash over nearly 10 years knows that this is a regular theme of ours: the South and whites who need blacks as scapegoats have never conceded the Civil War. Heck, they haven’t even accepted the Civil Rights laws of the ’60s.
It’s important to remember that a little more than 50 years ago, segregation was still the reality of Southern life, and that our military was only desegregated in the Korean War.
As we’ve said on BuzzFlash many a time, much20of the right wing juggernaut of four decades was driven by a backlash to the Civil Rights movement (and the ensuing women’s rights and gay rights movements).
There is no greater and unjust privilege in the world than claiming power and authority merely because one is born a certain skin color.  For whites who have seen their incomes decline and jobs lost because of global corporations shifting jobs to below-poverty wage nations, the Siren song of right wing hate radio — financed by the very corporations fleecing the economically stretched white person of limited education and means — is alluring.
If the corporations can scapegoat blacks and immigrants as the cause of the plight of whites on the economic brink, then they are off the hook, as they are.  Their tactic of inciting racism to a boiling point through their ubiquitous media outlets and talk shows and obsessive news coverage of the diverting spectacle they keep creating has been successful.
The great irony is that President Obama keeps conceding ground to the very same corporations, as he has in the so-called “healthcare reform” bill.  If his character has learned how to be a “non-threatening” black, it doesn’t matter. Big money is going to use racist pawns to come after him anyway. 
Barack Obama’s clear emotional core is closest to the words and mission of Dr. Martin Luther King.  But King knew that words weren’t enough.  We don’t have Civil Rights Laws because of political parties, we have them because King led a movement of civil disobedience in which people were arrested, lynched, murdered and assassinated, as was King.
Sheltered as he grew up, accomodating to the endless list of demands of corporate America, biracial by background, Obama wrote in his memoir that he chose to be of the black community, although among racists he had no choice. He would always be a “boy” to them, and one too smart for undereducated whites who only have hate as justification for feeling “chosen” and superior to non-whites.
The Civil Rights Movement succeeded in becoming Civil Rights Laws because blacks and whites of good will and dreamers of equality put themselves physically on the line to move the nation into action. It wasn’t a victory of Democrats (who were still transitioning from being segregationists in the South at the time) or Republicans (remember which party Lincoln belonged too).
It was a victory of mass mobilization, protest and outrage — and people who got off their butts and faced down the likes of George Wallace and Bull Connor.
Appeasement will not work with the corporatists and their racist pawns.  It’s a test of Obama’s ability to grow — which he has been able to do in the past — to see if he can start packing a punch as well as he can inspire us with eloquent and passionate rhetoric. 
Martin Luther King triumphed because he fought for his ideals; he didn’t compromise t hem away in lobbyist meetings in the White House. He didn’t flinch and fire people everytime the racists complained about something. He stuck to pursuing his dream, and he made it a reality.
It was feet on the ground, not words in the air that realized the goal of legal racial equality more than a hundred years after the Civil War ended.
But the perfect storm resulted when corporatist Republicans harnassed the hard-wired racism of Southern and Appalachian — and some of the urban working class who resented busing and the like — (add Wasilla, Alaska now) whites into frenzied hate and resentment — and now with an African-American president they have given us a string of rag-tag but heated protests that basically are nothing more than bitter resentment at having a duly elected black president.
Meanwhile, the corporations are succeeding at drowning our Obama’s message and forcing concessions from him.
President Obama, we need to hit the streets as part of a movement and give you the support you need.
In turn, you need to start matching your fighting words with your fight.
Stop worrying about whether everyone likes you; these people never will.  And the corporatists you are playing footsy with are pulling their strings and are not friends to you or the American people.
Racism is pernicious, as you know.
You can’t ignore it as Frank Rich points out today [2]; you need to knock it out of the ring. We’ll have your back, but you have to lead with more than words.

Unless otherwise noted, all original content and headlines are © BuzzFlash. Contact BuzzFlash for reprint rights. Source URL: http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/9406

Links:
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/opinion/13dowd.html?bl&ex=1252987200&en=294d3085ac11979c&ei=5087
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/opinion/13rich.html
[3] http://technorati.com/tag/EditorBlog
[4] http://technorati.com/tag/Racism
[5] http://technorati.com/tag/Obama

< /div>

Filed under: Health Care, Racism | No Comments »

Next Page »