The Articles They Don't Want You to See

Booze and Biofuels Meet: Making Whiskey and Fuel Side by Side

2012-01-25T20:26:00.000-08:00

Now this is the kind of entrepreneural spirit of innovation that I wish we had more of in America. But it falls to Scotland to start the process. A Scottish company is setting up to use the waste products from the whiskey industry to make a biofuel that can be used in existing car engines with a far smaller carbon footprint than using petroleum based gasoline. Good for the environment, good for energy independence, good for the economy, and it creates jobs as well (see, THAT'S how it's done!). From BBC News:

A new company has been formed to commercialise a process for producing biofuel made from whisky by-products.

Edinburgh Napier University's Celtic Renewables Ltd will initially focus on Scotland's £4bn malt whisky industry to develop biobutanol and other chemicals.

The company said biobutanol could be used as a direct substitute for fossil-derived fuel...

Celtic Renewables is now working with Scottish Enterprise to produce the biofuel from sustainable resources on an industrial scale.

Its fermentation process uses the two main by-products of whisky production - 'pot ale', which is the residue left in copper stills, and 'draff', the spent grains...

Research has suggested biobutanol provides 25% more power output than the traditional bioethanol.

Hear that? Why aren't we doing this in America? You don't even have to have specially modified engines to use the stuff. It can directly substitute for the stuff OPEC and their Republican allies have addicted us to. The article does include a small dig at the rest of the world:

Mr Ewing said: "Turning our whisky industry's by-products into raw materials for sustainable biofuels which can be used to power ordinary family cars is an example of the sort of innovative thinking Scotland excels in."

Yep...I really think America, led by the anti-education, anti-science, anti-small business Republicans, has lost the innovative spirit it had through most oft he 20th century. Republicans just want us to keep on being addicted to oil and want most of the profit to go into the pockets of the 1%. And they are willing to cut education and science to do it.

But maybe Jack Daniels wants to sign up to be next in line. They can help the planet and create local jobs in Tennessee. I'd certainly drink to that!

Return to Mole's Consumer Advice Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

The Lesson South Carolina Taught Us

2012-01-22T06:07:00.001-08:00

Newt "traditional values, nudge nudge, wink wink" Gingrich's success in the South Carolina Republican Primary taught us that Southern Republicans hate traditional marriage. I expect them to finally endorse same sex marriage very soon.

Either that or this whole Republican lip service to "traditional values" is nothing but a load of hypocritical bullshit. Then again their claims of "fiscal responsibility" are about as credible as Newt's support for "traditional values."

Why would ANYONE trust a Republican anymore?

THE Key NY Race of 2012: Lew Fidler for State Senate

2012-01-18T14:34:00.001-08:00

Lew Fidler has finally officially announced his bid for the March 20 special election to replace the corrupt Carl Kruger. And let this be my official endorsement of Fidler and my call for my fellow reform and progressive Democrats to give him a hand.

Current City Councilmemer and candidate for State Senate Lew Fidler has intrigued me for some time. He and I are often on the opposite side of some of the divides in the Brooklyn Democratic Party, but his ability at times to bridge those divides and at times be a better spokesperson for the reform side than I am has impressed me. At two County Committee meetings in a row he was one of the strongest reform voices and the one most critical of the machine despite his machine ties. Of course it put at risk his machine ties, but he had no fear of that risk and preferred standing on principle rather than take the easy route. Not sure he ALWAYS does that, but it is clear that he has little fear and does not care too much about the easy route.

And the key thing for me was that he stood up to the machine, right in its face, several times and though this pissed off party boss Vito Lopez, Lew is too strong and too much of a fighter for Vito Lopez to take on. And I think that really is key: Lew Fidler doesn’t fear Vito Lopez and, if Vito fears anything after all he has been through, he may feel just a twinge of it when faced with Lew. I see Fidler as the only person who just might be able to bring Vito down (it would be a tough fight!) and Vito knows it, too. If nothing else, Lew has made clear to Vito’s face that Lew can and will stand up to a challenge from Vito. That is someone I want around.

Here, thanks to my friend Raul Rothblatt, is footage of Lew reaming the machine he is often allied with for going too far:

And I would love to see Lew Fidler go up against Republicans with that same lack of fear and make them feel the slight twinge that Vito may feel in Lew’s presence these days. Make no mistake, even though Fidler is far from as progressive as I would like and is certainly a moderate, Republicans do NOT want to face him in the State Senate. I’d say between Diane Savino and Lew Fidler speaking their minds with no fear, with intelligence and with no nonsense, Republicans would have many a bad day in the State Senate. Well and good and the best reason to support Lew.

But Lew Fidler has also always been open to discussing my criticisms and we have had many good discussions by email. Far more than many politicians he answers my emails and takes the time to discuss important issues. He doesn’t only listen to people who agree with him and THAT is also a quality I like.

I went to Lew Fidler’s official announcement for State Senate to replace the disgraced and disgraceful Carl Kruger, who I think should have been ousted LONG ago. In discussions with Lew long before it was clear he would run once Kruger was out, but it is good to see it official. I could have done without his opening act and some of his supporting cast, but those are people I am rather infamous for opposing sometimes quite vocally to their face. Lew is much better than some of the supporters who showed up at the announcement, and there were a few prominent folks I respect. Again, since Lew and I have often been on opposite sides of the reform-machine divide, it can be expected I may find myself nauseated by some of his creepier supporters (Marty Markowitz, disgraced judge Seddio and Dominic Recchia to name the three hardest to stand near), it is clear to me that they are there on Lew’s terms, not the other way around.

And for the record, here are my wife and me going up against disgraced judge Seddio of the Vito Lopez machine at the same meeting that Fidler did his thing in the video above:

Yeah...ain't my wife wonderful! AND she is a Karate teacher! So don't mess with me or she'll come after you!

Lew Fidler’s opponent is Soviet born Republican David Storobin, who represents some of the worst the Republican Party has to offer. Besides being typical of Republican support of the richest 1% over middle class and working class Americans (hell, name ONE Republican who isn’t??), Storobin seems frighteningly sympathetic to white supremacists, specifically the Afrikaner Independence Movement. My wife wonders why a Russian Brooklynite would wind up so tied to the Afrikaner Independence Movement (and is rather surprised there could even BE something so lame and pathetic as an Afrikaner Independence Movement), and it does suggest that Storobin has gone somewhat out of his way to forge such a link. And many white supremacist groups (e.g. Stormfront) love Storobin, so any qualms I might have of a few of Lew Fidler’s supporters pales massively in comparison to the disgust I feel at many of Storobin’s supporters.

Gatemouth has been the main person highlighting the links between Storobin and white supremacists, a sadly all too common link in the modern Republican Party (and that 100 years ago may be have more common among Democrats). See for example:

http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/gatemouth_lays_down_the_gauntlet_a_challenge_for_david_storobin.html

http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/david_stormfront_storobin_whitewashes_immigrant_bashers.html

http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/the_lost_literary_legacy_of_david_storobin.html

Many are comparing the special election to replace the disgraced and disgraceful Carl Kruger to the special election to replace the rather foolish Andrew Weiner. And the comparisons are worth looking at partly as a warning (so far unheeded!) to Democrats and to look at the key differences.

The race to replace Anthony “step away from the keyboard” Weiner pitted Democrat David "Dry White Toast" Weprin (or should that be Dry Challah toast?) against Teabagger Bob “I never met a Billionaire I didn’t like” Turner. The race was a tough one because the district was trending fairly strongly Republican. Weprin was a weak candidate and fundamentally that is why he lost. But to outline the key reasons why Weprin lost and Weiner is replaced with a Teabagger are:

1. Weprin was a weak candidate
2. Progressives and reformers did almost nothing to help beat a Teabagger
3. The Vito Lopez machine did almost nothing to actually do their job and defeat a Republican
4. Religious Jews in the district betrayed Weprin (an Orthodox Jew) because they (ignoring huge volumes of Jewish History) put their own homophobic bigotry before even their own self interest
5. Weprin was a weak candidate.

Sadly, progressives and reformers in Brooklyn (and I consider myself part of both!) all too often get stuck in their own fantasies of finding the best progressive or reformer and will only too late realize that the consequences of their inaction mean another Teabagger screwing the 99% for the benefit of billionaires. That's what happened in last year's congressional race and I fear it will be a factor this year in the NY SD27 race.

Sadly the supposedly "Democratic" (if very undemocratic) Vito Lopez machine puts its own self interest and desire for power and patronage over defeating Republicans.

And also sadly, religious Jews often know more Torah than they do history and forget that when bigotry between minority groups divides those minotity groups, both groups wind up getting screwed. To borrow a phrase my wife often uses about Democrats, the religious Jews allowed themselves to be divided and conquered by the far more bigoted Republicans. I should note the one time I got troll rated to all hell was when I referred to this foolishness by religious Jews in their betrayal of Weprin, and it was largely my fault for various reasons. But the fact remains the religious Jewish community and their bigotries and their gradual shift to the right is something Democrats have been too long ignoring and we LOST A CONGRESSIONAL SEAT LAST YEAR because we were ignoring it.

Overcoming any one, let alone all, of these requires a strong candidate. And therein is the massive difference between the race to replace Weiner and the race to replace Kruger.

Lew Fidler is far from a weak candidate. Already the machine has shown they are not sitting this one out (despite Fidler's standing up to Vito Lopez to his face), so already Democratic turnout will be higher than for Weprin. Fidler also has been better able to navigate the Byzantine relationships within the highly divided and divisive religious Jewish community in Brooklyn than Weprin was, and so looks to do very well in the main group that defeated Weprin. I wonder if the reform and progressive Democrats will learn from last year's fiasco, but already most of the reasons why Weprin lost are swept aside by Fidler.

Storobin’s main source of support (Afrikaner separatists aside) is the Russian community, which is strong. But whereas Weprin seemed either willing to cede territory to his opponent or unable to contest it whether willing or not, Fidler on day one fearlessly heads straight into enemy territory by challenging Storobin for the Russian votes. Fidler doesn’t have to WIN the Russian votes, just make it a lot harder for Storobin to lock it up and Fidler has already succeeded at least part way in doing that.

I am by no means saying Fidler WILL win. On paper Fidler has an even tougher time than Weprin. But never underestimate the value of a strong candidate or the disadvantage of a weak candidate. Democrats tend to lose even against overwhelmingly good odds when they field weak candidates. They tend to win even against overwhelmingly bad odds when they field strong candidates. So I think this will be a hard fought race and Fidler is no shoe in, but my money is on Fidler. I supported Weprin (because honestly he would have made a good Congressman) but never thought he had a strong chance. With Fidler I think we have a good shot.

And maybe I can look forward to a combined Diane Savino/Lew Fidler assault putting the fear of G_d into State Senate Republicans and maybe some backbone into the Democrats.

Return to I Had a Thought

BACK TO PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT NEWSLETTER MAIN PAGE

2011 New York City Council Human Rights Report Card

2012-01-11T13:22:00.000-08:00

I found this buried in an email Rock Hackshaw sent around. This score card is from the Human Rights Project. The score card (in PDF form) can be found here.

The scorecard is VERY detailed and I can't do it justice in a short post. They cover homeless issues, race issues, gender issues including LGBT issues, poverty, etc.

Among the WORST rated council members is Chirstine Quinn. She gets a miserable 12% rating. Keep in mind this is the person who wants to be Tsarina...er, I mean MAYOR of NYC. She gets zero ratings for workers' rights, criminal/juvenile justice, disabled rights and voting rights and a very low score for housing rights. Is THIS what we want for mayor? Someone who is bad for workers, justice, disabled people, housing and voting rights?

In fairness, I want to look into the past records of former city council members who are competing with Quinn for mayor. Both Bill de Blasio and John Liu moved on from the City Council in 2009, both having refused to participate in Bloomberg's Third Term Power Grab the way Lap Dog Quinn did. So de Blasio and Liu BOTH are already better than Quinn on that issue alone to me. But let's compare Quinn, de Blasio and Liu in the 2008 and 2009 score card: (ranking system presented a bit differently each year it seems)

Christine Quinn: a mediocre 45% average score in 2008 and got a "C" for 2009.

Bill de Blasio: a mediocre 58% average score in 2008 (ranked 11th highest scoring council member) and a 2009 rating of "B" (8th highest scoring council member so made the top 10 list that year).

John Liu: an 61% score in 2008 (8th highest scoring council member so on the top ten list) and a 2009 rating of "A" (4th highest scoring council member, so also on the top ten list).

So Quinn is clearly the WRONG candidate for Human Rights. John Liu does BEST with Bill de Blasio coming in second. Note that Borough Presidents would not be rated on these score cards so I can't compare them.

The top scoring City Council members in 2011 are:

Melissa Mark-Viverito. Manhattan Council District # 8 – Democrat (Score: 90%)

Helen D. Foster. Bronx Council District # 16 – Democrat (Score: 88%)

Letitia James. Brooklyn Council District # 35 – Democrat (Score: 88%)

Jumaane D. Williams. Brooklyn Council District # 45 – Democrat (Score: 86%)

Charles Barron. Brooklyn Council District # 42 – Democrat (Score: 80%)

Brad Lander. Brooklyn Council District # 39 – Democrat (Score: 74%)

Gale Brewer. Manhattan Council District # 6 – Democrat (Score: 73%)

G. Oliver Koppell. Manhattan Council District #11- Democrat (Score 65%)

Jimmy Van Bramer. Queens Council District #26- Democrat (Score 65%)

I want to note that included on this list are council members I have agreed with and ones that I have disagreed with in the past. I will say that I am happy that Tish James is among the top, and congrats to Brad Lander, who I have had many a run in with, for making the top.

Let me emphasize a few things. First, one of the best parts of the score card is its analysis of the City Council process itself. It shows that basically a bill has little shot of even having a hearing let alone being voted on if it doesn't have either the support of the mayor or the speaker. This emphasizes something I have said MANY times: NYC has one of the weakest City Councils I have seen, almost 100% dominated by the mayor and his lap dog speaker, Quinn (hat tip to the attendees of my Eating Liberally group last night who used "Bloomberg's lap dog" to discuss Quinn). NYC is possibly the least democratic of cities. Now I have only seen it under Republicans like Giuliani and Bloomberg, so a don't know if it was different under a Democratic administration, but I somehow doubt it. Certainly it is clear Quinn, a Democrat, would be just as dictatorial as Tsar Bloomberg.

Second I want to emphasize that this scorecard doesn't cover ALL important issues, so I would not use this as my only way to judge a council member, but it does cover some extremely important issues, particularly ones taken up by Occupy Wall Street, so politicians who got a low score should look to their record a bit.

In particular I found myself checking up on politicians I endorsed or who are running for other offices soon. I also checked some of the folks I generally have not liked to see how my choices fare.

Margaret Chin, who I endorsed, got a 54% rating...not as high as I would have liked to see! Daniel Dromm is another one I endorsed (and recently saw at a fundraiser for John Liu) and he also got a not bad but not great 56%. I also endorsed Diana Reyna, and she gets a mediocre 30%. Debra Rose, who I endorsed but admit I came late to that race and was only weakly involved in her race, gets a 53%. Jimmy van Bramer I believe I at least initially endorsed gets a good 65% rating. Al Vann who I have criticized gets 59%.

Mathieu Eugene, who was a mediocre, hand picked successor to Yvette Clarke best known for finding it very difficult to prove his claims to having an MD degree, gets a low 24%. Sadly, Lew Fidler, who I have gotten to know and like, got a low 26%, mainly doing poorly on Voting Rights and Workers' Rights. My own city council member Steve Levin got a mediocre 28%. Again Voting Rights was one of his weakest points but so was criminal/juvenile justice. Peter Vallone, jr. gets a miserable 12%, competing with Quinn for worst city council members on human rights.

The horribly corrupt and nasty Dominic Recchia gets a mediocre 25% rating. Particularly bad on criminal/juvenile justice, voting rights and disabled rights.

Peter Koo, a Republican who took over a previously Democratic seat in Queens, got a miserable 16% rating. He was particularly bad on disabled rights, voting rights, workers' rights and criminal/juvenile justice. In general the handful of Republicans on the City Council scored very poorly. The highest was only 22% (Halloran) and most were in the 10-15% range. To be fair, though there are no highly rated Republicans on the council, there are plenty of Democrats who score as poorly, Quinn herself being a prime example.

These ratings aren't the only way we should judge candidates, but when someone gets consistently bad ratings (like Quinn, Recchia, etc) there is no way they deserve our support. Consistently good ratings (like John Liu and Tish James) should be taken into account when choosing candidates to support.

BACKGROUND

The Human Rights Project's mission is:

The Human Rights Project (HRP) works to improve the lives of New Yorkers living in poverty with a particular focus on women and people of color. We do this by monitoring and advocating for government compliance with universal human rights standards, especially the human rights to employment, housing, health, food, education and other economic and social rights.

HRP has been at the forefront of the U.S. human rights “movement” for the past several years, demonstrating new models of applying human rights in the U.S., and in particular in New York City, to effectively advocate for the City’s most vulnerable across a range of issues. The U.S. constitution falls short in guaranteeing the right to health, housing, education, standard of living and other rights necessary to live in dignity. In combination with a legacy of structural discrimination, particularly through race and gender, and limits on rights that are protected, those most vulnerable in society have little recourse. The human rights framework and tools bring new possibilities in the face of limited remedies, and hope where there is despair.

Return to I Had a Thought

Return to Mole's Progressive Democrat

Silly Christian Brawls, History and the Crimean War

2012-01-03T05:36:00.000-08:00

When my wife and I traveled through Greece, Turkey and Israel, we visited the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. This is one of the holiest places in Christianity, supposedly the site of Golgotha where Jesus was crucified. There is even a supposed post-hole where the cross was thought to be placed.

We were told an odd story about this church. It seems that several Christian sects cooperate, if that is the right word to describe the rivalries that result, to take care of the church. We were told that these various sects actually sometimes get into physical fights over who gets to sweep what parts of the church. I always assumed this was an exaggeration, but it seems it is literal, since the exact same kind of rivalry, this time between the Greek and Armenian Orthodox churches, erupted into a very silly brawl this very Christmas season, 2011, and was caught on film. From the church where Jesus was supposed to have been born in Bethlehem:

This isn't the first time, by ANY means that this has happened. From 2007:

Let me just say that this is the kind of thing that makes me so skeptical about organized religion...is THIS what Jesus was all about? Let me emphasize that THIS kind of crap makes organized religion (and it isn't just Christianity...brawls between Mitnagdim and Hasidic Jewish groups in the old country in the 19th Century were no different!) look outright stupid.

But these stupid, broom battles between Christian clergy have at times been part of international struggles leading to outright war. Specifically, it strikes me that this kind of stupid broom battle is a distant echo of some of the issues that led to the Crimean War. The Crimean War represents an early stage to the lead up to WW I and is one of the first instances of Britain and France acting as allies rather than enemies, something that became critical for WW I and WW II. Prior to the Crimean War, France and Britain were rivals or outright enemies for centuries, with only occasional moments of cooperation. The Crimean War, partly sparked by these kinds of stupid broom battles between clergy in the "holy" land, was the moment where France and Britain became firm allies, initially against Russia, and later along with Russia against Prussia/Germany and Austria.

The Crimean War was the result of the slow, steady decline of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire was one of the longest living superpower of all history, spanning roughly 600 years. But that 600 years included about 250 years of strong, dominant expansion, some 100+ years of tenuous holding on to prestige as Europe caught up and surpassed the Turks, and then another 100+ years of clear decline. During the declining years of the Ottoman Empire, they were often kept alive by the fact that the European powers, generally Britain, France, Russia, Austria and Prussia/Germany, couldn't decide how the spoils would be divided if the Ottoman Empire actually collapsed. So rather than fight it out over the spoils, the European powers, in the last 100 or so years of the Ottoman Empire, preferred to prop up that failing Empire. So although various territories (like Wallachia, Serbia, Greece, etc.) might be detached from the Ottoman Empire and made part of another empire or made an independent state, the European powers refused to allow the entire Empire to fail simply because it would lead to a world war among the dominant superpowers over the remnants of the Ottoman territories.

So at various times Austria and Russia, Germany and Russia, Britain and France, Britain and Russia, etc. discussed how the Ottoman Empire should be carved up, usually no solid agreement could be reached that would avoid war, so the Great Powers helped the Turks survive. This is not to say that the Turks themselves played no role in this diplomatic and military game. They at times were very skilled at playing the Great Powers against each other to secure their own existence. But there were times where they were unable to act effectively and were saved only by the actions of outsiders.

Russia had long had designs on Turkish territory. Russia envisioned itself the rightful ruler of the Balkans (in opposition to both Austria and the Ottomans), the rightful protector of ALL Orthodox Christian sects (many of whom hated eachother, as the broom battle video above illustrates today), AND the rightful heir of the Roman Empire and thus of Constantinople/Istanbul itself. Peter the Great and Catherine the Great particularly articulated these claims and tried to carry them out, with only limited success. The Ottoman Empire was already declining at these times, so both Peter and Catherine the Greats could enforce some of their claims. But by no means all because the Ottomans still had some fight in them and no one else wanted Russia to be so powerful.

Nicholas I was another Tsar who wanted to exert Russia's claims over the Balkans, over Orthodox Christians world wide, and over what was once the Byzantine Empire. He tried making deals with Britain (then ruled by Queen Victoria), his main ally against their mutual rival France (ruled by Napoleon III) to divide the slowly failing Ottoman Empire between them. Britain was not ready for this to happen, so no deal was made between these two Great Powers. Austria was another power that wanted to carve up the Ottoman Empire, but already at this time Russia and Austria were competing, in the name of Orthodox vs. Catholic, Slavic vs. Germanic rule, over who would dominated the Balkans. So Austria and Russia were already starting the collision course that would ultimately spark WW I. But where everyone else fell was not yet clear. France tended to side against Russia. Britain tended to side against France. Prussia tended to also side against France. So had WW I happened before the Crimean War, you might have had Britain, Russia and Prussia against France and Austria with Turkey and Italy falling where ever they had the temporary advantage. But in the 1850's this all began to change. Not that the alliances that fell into WW I were yet formed so early, but one key alliance was formed, first in opposition to Russia and in support of Turkey, that later became the key to WW I. France and Britain, whose rivalry formed the basis of most wars and diplomatic interactions up until then, started forming a firm alliance.

The rivalry between France and Britain was initially a Medieval issue, where rulers from both sides had claims on the same territories due to competing feudal claims. The British royal family were originally the Dukes of Normandy, so had claims in France. The French royals also had ties to key noble families in England who had claims to the throne. So for centuries France and Britain were at odds. It was one of the dominant themes in European politics from roughly 1066 until the 1850's. Roughly for 800 years the British-French rivalry was THE key theme in Europe and beyond. Even the American Revolution was a sideshow of this rivalry and our independence is due to the intervention of France against Britain in their long rivalry.

Tsar Nicholas I, whose main rival was France and whose main ally was Britain and whose main enemies were Austria and the Turks, tried to arrange with Britain a division of Turkey behind everyone else's backs. It was from this discussion that the famous term "Sick Man of Europe" was coined to describe the Ottoman Empire. Britain and Russia disagreed on what was needed. Russia felt that Turkey needed a surgeon to carve it up and Britain felt that it needed a physician to cure it. Russia's insistence on carving up Russia ultimately drove a wedge between it and the rest of Europe, and that wedge started to form the alliances that would lead to WW I even though those alliances evolved over the years between the Crimean War and WW I.

The Russian view was that the end of the Ottoman Empire was inevitable, so why not plan in advance and carve it up. If Russia and Britain cooperated in this, then France and Austria could be excluded and Prussia would probably go along with the winners. This really was no different from what many other European leaders had seen for decades, including Napoleon I, Metternich, and many others. The decline of the Turks had gone on for a long time and the end was seen as inevitable for at least 100 years. So Russia was not unreasonable in their views, even if they were greedy. But no more greedy than Austria, Britain or France, all of whom wanted spoils from the Sick Man of Europe. Prussia was the only country that stayed SOMEWHAT peripheral to this interest in carving up the Ottoman Empire.

But Britain was not willing to see ANYONE get the upper hand in the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, not even their ally Russia, so they opted for a continuation of the Sick Man. Tsar Nicholas I was not willing to see that happen, so did everything he could to force war on Turkey on Russia's terms. Overplaying his hand, he slowly forced Britain into an alliance with their arch-rival France against Russia. That Anglo-French alliance, inconceivable in the early 1800's, has essentially persisted until today and was a key factor in the Crimean War, WW I and WW II as well as the Cold War. Tsar Nicholas I and his desire for Russia's traditional claims against Turkey established one of the enduring and dominant alliances of the 20th century.

But what was the main issue? France had traditionally claimed to protect, as a dominant Catholic force, the Christians within the Ottoman Empire. This was the basis of a long-standing alliance between the Ottoman Empire and France dating back to the expansionist days of Turkey. But Russia's very existence depended partly on its claim to be the protector of all Orthodox Christians in the world, particularly in the Ottoman domains. This claim had generally been at odds with what the Ottomans themselves thought as well as with the French claims. So when the Latin and Greek clergy in Bethlehem and Jerusalem got into a conflict over who had the right to sweep the floors and fix the facades of the Church of the Nativity and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, Russia used this as a way to exert its dominance in Ottoman territories. Needless to say the Ottomans objected. France, which had kind of ignored its claims of protection over Christians in the Ottoman Empire, awoke to the Russian threat and started preparing for war. So Russia and France were ready to go to war over sweeping rights, as it were, within Christian Holy sites within the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were desperately trying to claim sovereignty over their own territory despite their near collapse. And Britain was trying to preserve peace, prevent anyone from taking an unfair share of Ottoman territory, and so wanted to prop up the Ottoman Empire.

When Russia clearly became the most belligerent power, using its naval force against Turkey, Britain felt compelled, against tradition, to side with France to preserve Turkey. From this came the Crimean War that embarrassed Russia, preserved Turkey, and cemented an alliance between France and Britain that was to dominate politics for the next century. So far the other alliances that initiated WW I (Germany and Austria, Germany and Turkey, France and Russia, Britain and Serbia) had not formed. But the French-British alliance that was to be critical to WW I and WW II and beyond was forged in the lead up to the Crimean War, in vague support of a traditional claim of France to protect the Catholic right to sweep floors in the churches in Bethlehem and Jerusalem. So those broom wars helped forge this key alliance.

The fact that Russia's other key rival was Austria started to form the Central Powers of WW I. The Russia-Turkey and Russia-Austria rivalries, combined with the battles over who would dominate the Balkans (Austria, Turkey or Russia, with Serbia one of the main local players) set the stage for WW I. Between the Crimean War and WW I the French/Russian and the British/Serbian as well as the Prussian/Austrian alliances were yet to form. And it was only because Prussia was allying with Turkey against Russia that Austria accepted Turkey, its traditional enemy, as an ally in WWI. Russia, as a traditional supporter of the Serbs, was MORE of a threat to Austria than Turkey in its decline ever could be, so Austria sided with Germany and Turkey against Russia. The French-British alliance, forged initially AGAINST Russia in the Crimean War, sided with Serbia against Germany and Austria, formalizing the sides in WW I. Italy could have gone either way, siding with France and Britain almost last minute.

Those alliances were NOT the same as in WW II, but they did set that stage. The French-British alliance continued and strengthened its ties with Russia despite the fall of the Tsars. The German/Austrian alliance became a key event in the lead up to WW II when Germany claimed not just Austria itself, but also some of Austria's German speaking territories (e.g. Czechoslovakia) for its own Empire. British protection of former Ottoman territories led to its ties with Greece, where the first Allied victories over the Axis occurred when the Greeks, with British weapons and uniforms, soundly defeated the Italian and Albanian allies of Germany. That Albanian-Greek fighting was something that was already occurring when various Albanian and Greek warlords were fighting for dominance as Ottoman control faltered.

So the silly broom battles among rival Christian sects in churches in Bethlehem and Jerusalem were one of several conflicts (the rise of Balkan nationalism and the fights among Austria vs. Russia, Albanians vs. Greeks, Greeks vs Greeks, Russia vs. Turkey) that led directly from the lead up to the Crimean War to WW I and through WW I to WW II and the Cold War. The key alliance that linked them all turned out to be the unexpected and new alliance between once arch-rivals France and Britain.

Among the sources for this article are:

Return to Mole's History Page.

Return to Mole's Book Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

A Sad Note!

2011-12-29T22:54:00.001-08:00

One of my first and most brilliant readers has died and I want to honor her memory.

Margaret was a Culture Kitchen blogger for awhile and, while there, was one of our best bloggers. She moved on long ago, and I always missed her presence at CK. But she went on to what she considered bigger and better things. In her 80's she discovered her public voice and I am proud I was one of the people who encouraged and helped her find that voice.

This comes late because I mainly interacted with Margaret Bassett by email. So if I didn't hear from her, I didn't think much about it. But I knew she was over 80. She was a subscriber to my Progressive Democrat Newsletter from the beginning soon after the 2004 election. She had seen me as something of a hope for the future in messaging, something I think she overrated me on, but I was flattered and tried to live up to.

Today I sent out a message to my subscribers that my writing of the Progressive Democrat Newsletter had clearly been on hold for over a month and I wasn't sure if/when it would come back.

One email bounced. It was the first time Margaret's email bounced in all the time she read my stuff. So it caught my attention immediately. It sent a shiver down my spine. So I did a quick google search and discovered what I feared...Margaret had died, back in August, at the age of 89. I cried.

[NOTE: Damn! In the preview I realize that a lot of the old material I post has formatting problems, but it is midnight and I am sad at her passing, and I don't have the attention span to fix everything...Margaret's brilliance speaks for itself even with formatting errors!]

Margaret was an original FDR progressive just like my grandmother. She was about 20 years younger than my grandmother, but clearly they had experienced many of the same things and their political lives had been very similar. Margaret somehow connected with my blogging and for a brief period I was her connection (from where she lived in Red Tennessee) to liberal politics. She wrote me often and we had long discussions by email from which she drew inspiration and I learned a lot. I quoted her in my writing, seemingly to her surprise and pride. She forwarded my newsletter to others, to my surprise and pride.

Eventually her blogger presence developed beyond my newsletter, extending to MyLeftWing, Culture Kitchen and Political Cortex, and then to OpEdNews where she became something of a force of nature. Most of my writing that ended up at OpEdNews was thanks to her. And she sent me a lot of their stuff as well.

But my favorite material from her was on the blog Culture Kitchen. I recruited her for Culture Kitchen. She was on it for only a brief period, but she participated in some amazing discussions about race in America that blew everyone away. I am sorry I can't link to these amazing discussions because Culture Kitchen is currently in limbo because of a conflict between our wonderful publisher and the (evil?) site host, but trust me, people of ALL races were moved by Margaret's comments on the history of race in America.

She left Culture Kitchen, to our loss, when she became active with OpEdNews. From what I gather OpEdNews gained from our loss. From then on she would occasionally comment on my Progressive Democrat Newsletter, more occasionally post something from my newsletter to OpEdNEws, and also would send me info from OpEdNews. For some years if I didn't hear from her for awhile I would get worried. In fact she was one of two people I would worry about if I didn't hear from. Margaret I worried about because of her age, and another blogger I recruited for Culture Kitchen, Leo Igwe of Nigeria, I worried about because he was a Humanist activist fighting Christian and Muslim fanatics in Nigeria. Leo has been beaten, arrested, and generally attacked over the years I knew him, so I learned to check in with him from time to time. Margaret always seemed so alive and almost immortal, so I stopped worrying if I didn't hear from her.

So it didn't even register that I had lost touch with her. I guess it doesn't matter, since she seems to have been alert and emailing up to the day before her death, so it isn't like I missed that she was dying. But somehow I wish I had caught on SOME time between now and last August. But I didn't and so today I found out. It hit me like a punch in the stomach.

This is the last article Margaret shared with me in the very last email I got from her back in May: http://www.alternet.org/story/151101/how_our_government_has_merged_with_corporations

But previous to that she had particularly thanked me for the intro I did to a December 2010 issue of the Progressive Democrat. She just commented on how much she liked it. This was the intro she liked:

Last week this headline was overlooked by too many people:

Auto Industry Bailout Saved 1.4 Million Jobs

Remember, Republicans OPPOSED this! Democrats passed the Auto Industry Bailout over Republican objections and THANK GOD they did because that saved 1.4 million American jobs. Now we need a Green Energy Stimulus, because that could CREATE a large number of American jobs, but of course Republicans tend to oppose ANYTHING that creates American jobs and instead support policies that help foreign oil companies, offshore banks and multi-nationals who outsource American jobs...

We must never let the voters forget this fact.

Democracy for America recently reminded me, in our of their fundraising letters, of a VERY important fact for all Democrats to keep in mind:

Looking at Congressional races in 2010, 96% of the Progressive Caucus won re-election while only 47% of the Blue Dogs won.

I happen to like some Blue Dogs, but the basic fact is that as a caucus they have made the dismal mistake of becoming too much like Republicans and when Democrats start to look too much like Republicans they eventually lose. Democrats win by clearly differentiating themselves from Republicans. Which leads me to another reminder...

For those who have read this newsletter for some time you know that I have often plugged a book that in some ways should be required reading for ANY Democrat: Drew Westen's "The Political Brain." Simply put the book analyzes how people vote and why, and shows how Democrats too often campaign in away that does not appeal to most voters even when most voters agree with the Democrats more on issues. Republicans, even though they usually take unpopular stands that hurt middle class and working class Americans, can often win the voters over because they campaign in a way that works better at getting votes. Drew Westen then outlines how Democrats can better appeal to voters while still being true to their values. For any Democrat who wants to win, read this book...now more than ever. And pass the book on to any Democrat you know of running for office or working on a campaign.

We're going to miss this guy:

Alan Grayson was one of the VERY few Congressional Representatives who really was completely up front, honest and told it like it is. He didn't hide the truth even when it made him unpopular. As I recall Harry Truman was admired for the same quality, even though it hurt him politically. I am proud that it is usually Democrats who are willing to put truth before popularity. Popularity comes and goes. But the truth is far more valuable. We need more people like Alan Grayson in Congress!

To me this was a run of the mill, off the cuff intro to my usual newsletter of facts, links and organizations to get involved with. In retrospect it was the last time my writing inspired her. That means something to me.

But looking back through our correspondence, I want to share a key email from 2007:

Article published Aug 29, 2007

We are all in this world together

Dear Editor:

Thank you for the editorial in the Aug. 22 issue, and also for the two thought_provoking letters you printed. Perhaps it is because the weather has been very hot and I spend time indoors reading, finding news online, and watching C_Span, but it seems to me that we are all more sensitive to a wider world with many troubles. Bridges fall. Hurricanes wreak havoc. Drought or floods destroy. And thereâ€™s war.

So Iâ€™m glad you take pen to paper, so to speak, to point out that reporters track the making and selling of weapons. This is not what we think of when we proclaim that a person should have the right to bear arms.

And through it all, we are talking about America in Iraq. I personally was adamantly against a pre_emptive strike into Iraq. I watched and listened as I heard how many months it would take to get the gear all in place for the invasion. What I wondered about was how difficult it would be to get the stuff back out. Of course, some would be used up. But how about explosives? Might they not be used for destructive reasons? The editorial, based on an AP report, gives numbers which make me think that guns multiply faster than rabbits.

Itâ€™s our country, and all of us in it need to think of ways to put an end to the folly. Would impeachment help? Should we just ride it out and then let the Democrats take the heat if they win the next election? So many questions.

To me, we must recognize that we are in this together. Letâ€™s get real and waste no time in trying to shove the blame on someone else. Letâ€™s think of positive solutions and expect our leaders to carry them out.

So I hope you will continue to lay out facts. During these past six years it seems that the media has given us few solid facts and a lot of opinions. And I hope if you do give us the hard truth that no one will shoot the messenger.

Yours truly,

Margaret Bassett

That was one of her letters she was proud of and sent me to circulate, and I DID circulate it.

Here is an email she sent me on immigration and a global perspective:

As a school girl, I spent summer Sunday afternoons in our empty schoolhouse, wondering what the pastel countries around the old globe were like. And I would pick a country and study what I could find in the World Book. All the while, I thought that the change of colors did not mean a big wall. More confusing still was whether various colors of people were expected to stay in their designated nations. Perhaps I came to this quandary because I saw real life evidence contradicting the lines. We all were from other states. Homesteading in our part of Wyoming happened after World War I. Our neighbors were from other statesâ€“Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, mostly. I reasoned our parents pioneered because they were looking for a better place to live.

In high school, I learned enough history to understand how religious freedom and better working conditions brought people across the oceans. They were largely the working poor and willing to become scullery maids and ditch diggers until they learned English and studied the Constitution. Then they could become citizens. Exceptâ€”Orientals were discouraged and could work on railroads, but could not bring their families or gain citizenship.

In college, I learned the details of the 1924 immigration law. It was necessary to make a change because women had become voters in the US. They could become citizens of another country by marrying an alien, but they would have to give up their American citizenship. As a matter of fact, it was generally believed that all persons lost their citizenship of another country when they were naturalized. One way for men (women were still not in the military) to gain citizenship was to join the army and serve honorably. There were a lot of "ifs" in common lore about US citizenship.

After college and WWII, rules changed quickly to allow for those who sought relief from being displaced from earlier homes. They were generally referred to as DPâ€™s, displaced persons. Prelude to that was the arrival of refugees during the war, if lucky enough to reach the other side of the Atlantic. My personal experience included weekends at Scattergood, the Quaker settlement at West Branch, Iowa which is the home of Herbert Hoover. Some of us students would spend time helping the Friends who were orienting recent arrivals of Jewish families. And there went my ditch digger analogy! Many of the men were doctors or professors. To polish their English was what they craved mostly, for they saw language as necessary to regain their former positions. It seemed incomprehensible to some that they would have to take refresher courses and pass new examinations to become licensed when they were well-established in their professions.

The Cold War brought other refugees, usually referred to as dissidents. And then the tide turned when Cubans and Haitians and later Central Americans claimed refugee status. By that time we had to recall what we had learned in high school history. The Monroe Doctrine had clearly emphasized that the Americas were for the Americans. During WWII, under the Good Neighbor Policy, those south of the border were courted for the contributions they could make in fighting totalitarianism. It became more than just semantics when my Latin American friends reminded me that it was incorrect to refer to citizens of the United States of America as Americans. They were Americans, too.

Fast forward to the demonstrations of the past few months. The rhetoric was heavy during the 2004 presidential campaign, but by 2006 there was action in the streets. I guess our country had a Latino problem.

Latino has become a term to describe someone who lives in the Western Hemisphere in some place other than Canada and the United States. So those who speak Spanish, Portuguese and French have an inclusive adjective. It tells nothing about country of origin. The term Hispanic narrows citizenship to those nations where Spanish is the official language. And still there is little that the words tell about a group of people who live in America and want to come to the United States.

The question of political importance at this time is how does the United States respond to a surge of population which comes from other countries, whether by legal or illegal means. They chance to make a living in our country better than in theirs, or else they wouldnâ€™t uproot themselves from a culture they like. Their religion is universal. They may differ on who the next Pope should be, but they recognize that the Pope has a commanding presence in all parts of the world.

But, oh, us Gringos! We donâ€™t understand that for centuries we have sent in the Marines to do what James Monroe, Teddy Roosevelt, and others declared to be in the interest of ourselves. After all, we stole a good part of our territory from the Mexicans.

And then there are the folks in places like Tennessee. Without Tennesseans perhaps the Panama Canal would not have been built, because that is where much of the labor came from. In that regard, I have an interesting story from my days of studying Constitutional Law in Iowa. One of my fellow students had a father from Tennessee and a mother from Panama. He was born in Panama, but not in the Zone. Did he have US citizenship? Should they have taken him to the Consulate when he was 21? (Never heard the end of the story, because by then 1945 had come and things were changing.)

Iâ€™ve lived in Tennessee since 1977 and I never hear about how Tennesseans helped make the Panama Canal. We do celebrate how Sam Houston, who once taught school a few miles from here, fought in Texas. He was Tennessee governor and is a big name in history.

But Iâ€™m hearing a lot about "those," "them people" or "Latinos." Folks who have lived here all their lives, worked hard, and enjoyed some success will speak about "the ones coming in" as though there is a threat. Largely it has to do with language. Why donâ€™t they speak English? And why do they rent an apartment and then bring a whole bunch of others to live there too? Itâ€™s classic concern for "there goes the neighborhood." But the language makes a starting point for a debate over educating their children, providing welfare, and more classic gripes that have confronted other new groups of immigrants.

For my part, I donâ€™t worry about the language. In my young, innocent college days I was pretty good in Spanish, even to translating El Cid, not that it helps me anymore than it does others who complain about not understanding. I do have a slight ability to detect country of origin according to accent. But dialect! Those people who espeak Espanish canâ€™t understand each other at times.

So now we have to talk about a delicate issue. Is there animosity between Hispanics and African-Americans. In Chicago there were many Puerto Ricans when I lived there, and no love lost between them and blacks. After a couple of friendly attempts, I backed off from the explanation that Borrenquenos are US citizens, too. There was the reaction I have come to recognize as "hair standing on the back of neck." At some point in discussing generally how all people have good points and some a few strange ones, there comes a superstitious fear. And that will be what will accompany many voters to the booth this fall. I feel truly baffled about what politicians should and can do to make firm commitments on their position. We may decide that there was an ironic e1oquence in the Senateâ€™s vain attempt.

But all of this has been a digression from my first paragraph. Where my heart was in the 30's is where my moral values take me in this century. However, I long ago gave up on believing that nations solve real problems of people who decide to breach borders. Actually, it can be said that nationalism is itself the problem. At this time, the Bush administration is looking at the enemy as having no borders. Why not? We have journalists without borders. Doctors without borders. Why not banditos without borders? Manuel Noriega and Osama bin Laden are both enemies of our Nation.

I get a little facetious about Nafta. Consider: now the textile industry moves its operation to Honduras; natives can no longer make a living in those factories so they go to Mexico; Mexicans are having a harder time of finding work so they cross the Rio Grande; and the "illegals" work for peanuts and make the Anglos mad for ruining the wages on their old jobs. And the irony is politicians talk about Nafta as needing a tune-up to see that labor is paid a decent wage and enjoys healthy working conditions. Duh!

I also want to post an email she sent me in Dec. 2005 that is interesting to review given what has happened since:

Your newsletter this week was, in Christian-speak, almost an epiphany. It reminded me of how much I took Al Gore's book to heart before the 2000 campaign. To be good stewards, the three ingredients of living are sometimes referred to as giving of time, talent and treasure. When you think of it, there isn't enough money in the world to heal an injured planet. Some can get jollies by taking their excesses to the recycle bin. But really all we have is ourselves in whatever form. And for a lot of us these days it starts at the keyboard. As long as we don't buy everything on the pop-ups.

There is a stealth issue, which most don't care to address. Rampant consumerism is what is messing up the nation. Any time one-third of GDP is considered to come from production and twice that much from consumers, we are headed for a meltdown. Yet, should we all start living within our means while saving some for our old age (Money can be described as congealed energy.), it's not just WalMart's stock which will plummet. If Bernanke refuses to print money for spendthrifts, those with the least of it are hurt the most. Before they beatify Greenspan I hope I can say that he did us no favor by making a red hot housing market. My observation is that Boomers, those who worry most about their entitlements, were conned by low interest rates. They cashed in 401k money to put in real estate. From my perspective their peers are the wheelers and dealers in politics and finance. I hope someone learns how to make a soft landing. And, for those who are raising young families, they've got a lot to think about before they answer all the Christmas ads with their plastic.

Well, that's my Scrooge message of the day. Keep up the good work!

You can see she was a bright, thoughtful woman!

Here is another fascinating email she sent me in 2005 while we were, over many months, still getting to know eachother:

David: Thereâ€™s more heat than light coming out of Washington these days, and I tune in c-spans and PBS and wonder where weâ€™re headed. Then I log on to my favorite back fence sites and that doesnâ€™t help much either. Jim Lehrer tonight featured a piece asking editors from other part of the country how their readers saw the filibuster question, to which they mostly replied only the activists cared and it hadnâ€™t touched most of the folks. "Grassroots" came into my head and I wondered about the term. The Nashville paper (not the Tennessean) said "folks" just hadnâ€™t got interested in it yet. And then thereâ€™s little old me!

Iâ€™m a walking time warp. When my father homesteaded in Northeastern Wyoming in 1918 he was in his mid-thirties. My mother, whom he met out there was younger, but she too was 18 when WWI ended. My three siblings and I were all born before the stock market crash. When FDR declared a bank holiday I already knew about how some people in other states had lost their farms when the banks went out of business. By the time I was through high school, many of my men teachers had left for the service to get a better commission. Times were tough on the farms still. I worked my way through college for five years at the University of Iowa and got out just as VJ Day came. In Washington on my first real job, I saw government workers re-align their assignments because all returning veterans were given extra points when they applied for jobs. After that, I spent a maturing period in the City, with a yearâ€™s timeout in Copenhagen. I met my husband in 1952 when I took a trip out West for the summer. The sour taste of Joe McCarthyâ€™s capers shoved me away from a future in international education. But I could always work. I was a good typist, and the first thing I learned in college was to be a good waitress. My husband and I followed resort restaurants in the beginning and then moved to Chicago in 1955 where we made a stake through 1977. Then we bought a fixer-upper in Maryville, TN. We had no company pensions, and I was too young for SS and Medicare for what seemed like a long time. We made it on the proceeds of a few investments and his Social Security check. I would be in deep trouble today except that in the 90's I was able to get ahead of the curve on inflation. It nearly flattened us during the 80's when double digit increases came for material to re-model the house. Now, I manage to pay fair market rent in the elder housing where I moved six years ago. Iâ€™ve been widowed 12 years (today, as a matter of fact) and could have moved easily, but I like it here. No family in the State but lots of friends.

When I took up gardening and canning and making our everyday clothes again, just as we had done in Wyoming, I didnâ€™t feel out of place. My neighbors were just like the people I grew up around. Many of them were a few years older than I and I learned the way to live on Social Security and to fight the Medicare rules. After my husband died, and there were new younger families with children, I became involved in the lives of the young. It was not easy for working class families in the 90s. I could supplement their scarce time by giving what I hope would be enrichment. The children had things, but little else in my view. I cancelled all but basic cable and ordered edutainment CDâ€™s after my sister gifted me with a computer. It is what I consider to be my way of paying back for 21 years of Social Security checks.

I lived in early life what can best be described as 19th Century. After formal schooling and some jobs I jumped to the 20th. I was just about ready to believe I was ready for Bill Clintonâ€™s bridge to the 21st, when all of a sudden it feels like Iâ€™m somewhere after WWII. I mean everyone is hellbent on acquiring whatever has just been invented. Now, with credit cards, they donâ€™t have to wait for payday. Many in the child-nurturing period are so busy trying to keep body and soul together that they donâ€™t remember what they learned about the three branches of government. Some are anxious to get to the welfare office for supplemental help, as others are too proud to even let their neighbors know when they need food. Itâ€™s always been that way. Iâ€™m just talking about our county, which is surely not one of the poorest in the State.

Through all these years I have only been able to become a little educated because of my husband, who grew up in San Francisco. Orphaned at 9, he knew the ways of city living and, in good paperboy fashion, was also well aware of the ways of the world. It took him a long time to realize that the depression was hard for us country people too. Actually, he didnâ€™t really understand until we moved down here. Oh, yes, he fell out of love with the Republican party and read Howard Fastâ€™s novels during that time. When he reached maturity he moved to LA and worked in a defense factory during WWII, the same kind of work he followed in Chicago. I became a bookkeeper there and changed over to computer programming in 1966. The greatest job Iâ€™ve ever had was teaching high school graduates to program or operate computers. The students were many of them directly from housing projects on student loans and grants. I canâ€™t say enough for LBJâ€™s Great Society. It made some real changes. The problem was it was not carefully monitored. Of course, there are excesses and Clinton was right to help rein it in. I have a hunch that Bush shoots for FDRâ€™s programs because if he mentions LBJâ€™s heâ€™d lose his so-called base. John Edwards wants to talk disadvantaged, and he may just be making some traction with his poverty group. I could make a case for myself as well. But no one can outdo Johnsonâ€™s upbringing.

What brought this on? It was when I wrote you about the Earth Day celebration in the Smokies and you replied that tourism is not a good economic base. Or something about like that. And I remembered that you said you were a city kid. Then I thought about the way the media learned to morph the map in red and blue. Sure enough, those states adjacent to water are bluer. Actually, they are wealthier because of global trade. The nation mimics the old tradition of town and country, meaning the people at the county seats ran the banks and sold the merchandise and elected the officials. Those in the country produced the goods (originally mostly food, but later industrial supplies) and climbed up the social ladder by sending the children to school and getting them jobs in town. Culturally, the rural folks knew they were superior because their kids worked hard and didnâ€™t dance or gambleâ€“or so the story goes. But those they called city slickers knew they had better homes and nicer clothes and could travel more. I recently read several of Sinclair Lewisâ€™ novels, which are older than me. Whenever I re-read Elmer Gantry I realize how little things change.

So here I sit, still a country bumpkin worrying over whether Section 8 housing will be cut even more, and how the children should learn to like to learn, and whether there will be any channel on TV that the tired, hard-working, underpaid parents will watch besides Fox. In my spare time I check out MSNBCâ€™s articles about why Wal-Mart stock is down and the predictions arenâ€™t rosy. That gets me to thinking about the many hours Iâ€™ve pounded away on the Wal-Mart predicament. Is it possible people in Peoria, or wherever, are going to have to listen to what happens in Washington? Best regards, Margaret

Now here is the first email I have a record of, though I know we must have connected before. It is from November 2004, so it was one of the first interactions we had. Again, much insight and background from someone who has been around for some time:

The first tells about previous progressive movements which supplied candidates. I realize that Vermont has an existing party, and there is some movement around Madison, Wisconsin.

The second is something with which I have little experience. It catches my eye because the working poor (hard-working poor) are certainly the forgotten man and woman as far as I can see.

In the Teddy Roosevelt age, an economic shift to heavy industry created robber barons, and thus a need to come back to a sense of fairness. In the second phase, labor was becoming organized. World War I created more jobs, but more discontent with working conditions. To avoid the revolutionary trends in Europe, especially Russia, a more benign form of organization came about here through unions.

The curious part of the aborted movement in 1948 with Henry Wallace produced the same kind of Bolshevik scare, but I believe that unanswered civil rights questions were what drove the scare to a frenzy. My experience at that time was that to be associated with rights for colored people put one in the same cubby hole as with communist and fellow-traveler groups.

About the only advantage of being old is that one can see three waves, described by Toffler. The first, agrarian, required decent shipping facilities for livestock and crops as well as reasonable prices for farm implements. (I grew up on a homestead in Northeastern Wyoming, where we battled dust storms and the depression.) The second wave was the industrial age where a combination of machine and men mass produced a never-ending supply of labor saving devices. From the end of World War II to the advent of cybernetics, more and better planes, locomotives, trucks, etc. shortened distances and made goods accessible to more people. Workers were lured into corporate loyalty with the promise of retirement benefits and medical insurance. Not until the 70's did the price of company affiliation begin to backfire for both sides. We talked about the rust belt. Lifelong union members began to question the Democratic party and Reagan welcomed them to his shining hill. The third wave, incubated during World War II, became all important as soon as computers advanced past tubes to transistors to the current microchips. (I started programming computers in 1966 and worked on three generations of IBM equipment within the spate of a few years. The Olivetti ten-key adding machine I pounded 8 hours a day had over 50 precision springs in it. My husband worked in a plant making such parts. We escaped job crises only because we retired to East Tennessee from Chicago after 22 years.)

By the last quarter of the 20th Century, the global village concept was real. And thus we come to what will have to be dealt with before a progressive movement can flourish again. Just as in the past, when Americans could not ignore people of the ghettoes and slums forever, so now no nationality can ignore the cry of other nationals for a share of the earthâ€™s treasure. I recommend reading Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiberâ€™s The World Challenge (Simon & Schuster 1981) which tells about the Near Eastâ€™s rising up to assert that technology as the price we pay for oil and other basic materials. And itâ€™s not just oil (OPEC) but other raw materials, and itâ€™s not just the Near East but many underdeveloped nations.

Another author who has influenced me is Lester Thurow, an economist who in 1995 wrote a book on the future of capitalism. He outlined what he considered the main changes over the ensuing twenty-five years. Changes in demography (mature countries have a high percentage of mature citizens) and communication and transportation (commerce can cross national boundaries to grow wheat in Siberia as well as North Dakota) affect voters in real time. Globalization, which is here to stay, can be criticized but there is no way to stop it. Countries can help their nationals to adjust, but recognizing how to corral unbridled world commerce takes more than tweaking the safety net. With world wide business comes the need for world wide rules governing it. On a line stretched from competition to cooperation regarding this challenge, there must be very astute negotiation. The WTO and the IMF are acting from a position of weakness, which allows laissez faire to flourish.

How a new facet of progressivism can come about is problematic. It espouses a mixture of innovation and conservatism. If the rest of the world wants to have goods, services and opportunities equal to what we Americans have learned to cherish, it goes without saying that super-consumerism should be nobodyâ€™s first goal.

Under the surface I think citizens in this country realize the truth of sharing or fighting. Wars only use more of the precious resources. The twin realities of Iraq and economic well-being were debated in this campaign as though it were an either/or proposition. George W. Bush's assertion that both must be achievedâ€“his recognition that people having a stake in their future will not have time to fight each other--has validity. Thatâ€™s all well and good, but heâ€™s trying to convince the Iraqis his war is different. Imperialism is the ultimate outcome from the way he goes about it. If we take a look at the article in The Nation, we can see that fighting each other is a recipe for decline of leadership. http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1124-10.htm

With a long history of solving problems in the USA by going to a place farther away, itâ€™s not surprising that Bush would like to get to the Moon and Mars.

If you and I pursue this line of reasoning, I believe we must organize small groups of individuals, preferably online, who will help to shape the real issues for 2008. My summer was spent with a yahoogroup who answered the media when members perceived that it was giving false information. With a mixture of professional backgrounds and serious interaction we, and others doing similar work, probably did have some impact on the outcome of the election. Because Kerry lost, we have not known how to proceed. I suspect this group is not the only one which is essentially inactive but still so committed that it is trying to find a new approach to carry on.

Finally, I suggest the article in the Nation about Paul Wellstone. Possibly his legacy has something to help us in progressing toward new insights.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020527&s=nichols

I will end with the obituary from her beloved OpEdNews:

The following obituary was provided to Opednews by Dr. Annabel Agee to be shared with Margaret's beloved online community:

Margaret Ems Bassett

02/14/1922 -- 8/21/2011
"Margaret Ems Bassett, age 89, quietly passed away at her residence in Maryville, TN, on Sunday, August 21, 2011. Born in Gillette, WY, on February 14, 1922, the eldest of four, Ms. Bassett is preceded in death by husband William John Bassett, parents James Edwin and Fanchon Rosenstiel Ems, sister Norma Agnes Ems Cotter, and brother Robert, and niece Roberta Ems Salley. She is survived by her brother Morris Ems, niece Janeth Cotter Hernandez, niece Connie Cotter Rasmussen, niece Colleen Ems Morrison.

Ms. Bassett graduated from Campbell County High School in Gillette, WY (1940), received a BA degree in political science from State University of Iowa (1944), studied as a graduate student until August 1945, worked in international education until 1950, spent a year in Denmark, took numerous computer science classes, and completed an MS degree from Roosevelt University (1975). Ms. Bassett worked in Chicago from 1955 to 1977, at which time she and her husband retired to Tennessee.

Her lifelong interest in political philosophy was reflected by her active role as editor for almost five years on OpEdNews (OEN), an online platform for which she wrote 68 articles and posted almost 4000 comments. Also to her credit, the content she generated for OEN was viewed over 700,000 times. Margaret's most recent OEN activity was logged on the Friday evening before her passing on Sunday. In her own biographical statement for OEN profile, she noted that her early introduction to computers (1966) has served her well in keeping up with "the requirements for modern communication." She said that she hoped to find "some good coming off her keyboard into the lives of those who come after her."

She will be missed by many of the residents of Maryville Towers, a senior housing facility where she has resided since selling her home in 1999. Many of her neighbors and friends will remember Margaret as the long-time organizer/leader of the Reminiscing Writers Group at Maryville Towers."

I would like to remember this wonderful woman. I think a fitting tribute would be a contribution to Wellstone Action or Progressive Majority. I know these were groups we both discussed and admired a lot, though I think more because they were my favorites. I am not sure what she would say was her favorite tribute, but I know these would be good enough in an imperfect world she knew and loved so well. Please join me in donated to these groups in Margaret Bassett's name.

Message to Bank of America CEO: Your stock has tanked, so don't lecture me!

2011-10-26T20:24:00.001-07:00

Bank of America CEO Brian T. Moynihan scolded us customers (for me, I am now mostly a FORMER customer), saying he was "incensed" at criticism of his bank.

Well Mr. CEO Moynihan, sir...did you notice that your stock has dropped from over $50 a share to about $6 a share? To me that marks YOU as a failure. Meanwhile, TD Bank, which did NO predatory lending and took NO taxpayer funded bailout money, has stayed about $70 a share through the entire time Bank of America tanked.

Seriously, Mr. CEO Moynihan, sir...do you have ANY right to be scolding ANYONE given the disgusting performance of your company?

Come back to me when you no longer need my tax money to just stay afloat. In a TRUE free market you and your lousy company would already be bankrupt, with companies like TD Bank buying up the remains of your assets at bargain prices. That is what TRUE capitalism would look like. Mr. CEO Moynihan, sir, you would be out of a job in a real free market. So stop whining and stop scolding and start showing some humility given the failure you represent.

Mr. CEO Moynihan, or should I say Mr. CEO $50 drops to $6 a share, has no business telling me I shouldn't complain about his lousy company.

I am an investor in the stock market. When the predatory lending scandal hit, and I saw banks like Bank of America tanking, I saw TD Bank as a buying opportunity because they avoided the whole predatory lending mess. My instincts were right...I made tons of money on that purchase. It was clear to me Bank of America made LOTS of mistakes. Their stock dropped and never recovered. Bank of America would be a penny stock or bankrupt if it hadn't been for the taxpayer funded bailout. So how dare Mr. CEO Moynihan show such arrogance. He is a loser, plain and simple. He failed his company and now he is blaming us??? We bailed him out and our anger at his poor business practices are fully justified. He should be THANKING us. Instead he scolds us...well to hell with that.

I am also a mortgage holder. I never even considered Bank of America for my mortgage. They weren't even on my radar, Mr. CEO Moynihan. You had nothing to offer me. I was with Wells Fargo. Didn't really like them. So I tried Chase. they dicked me around until I told them to get lost. So I wound up with TD Bank who offered me a good deal and stuck with it. So now I pay my mortgage to TD Bank every single month and Bank of America and Chase can kiss my on time paying ass goodbye because they offered me NOTHING despite a solid credit rating and a consistently on time payment record. Again, Bank of America and Chase show what LOUSY business models they work with. And again, Mr. CEO Moynihan shows that he is a LOUSY businessman because HIS bank had nothing to offer me while their stock was plummeting.

I also use credit cards. And here is where I was a big Bank of America customer. Somehow I wound up with most of my credit cards with Bank of America. But I didn't like them. And Mr. CEO Moynihan confirms that Bank of America does not deserve my business. So at this point I have switched almost all my credit card use to Discover and USAA. Bank of America has LOST MY BUSINESS. Got that Mr. CEO Moynihan? You have LOST MY BUSINESS. Losing people like me is why YOUR stock is at $6 a share and TD Bank is at over $70 a share. I am surprised you maintain such arrogance with your tiny $6 a share company!

Smart businessmen know that making customers feel good is the whole trick to doing business. Bank of America, and particularly Mr. CEO Moynihan, have lost sight of that very basic rule of doing business. Without taxpayer bailouts Bank of America would be dead in the water. That is a plain fact. Mr. CEO Moynihan owes American taxpayers his very job. I see Bank of America as a toxic company at this point. They'd have to do a hell of a lot to convince me to patronize them ever again, and when Mr. CEO Moynihan, as CEO of a company, insults me, does he really think it inspires me to become their customer or investor again? Hell no!

So Mr. CEO Moynihan, sir...you do NOT get my business. You do NOT get my investment. There are better banks out there. I am now mostly doing business with THEM and not with you. And I have some investment in at least one of them (and it doubled in value since I bought it!), but would never touch your toxic stock.

So think about it. Mr. CEO Moynihan is CEO of a company that would be a penny stock or out of business if taxpayers hadn't bailed him out. So who gives a rat's ass if he is "incensed" at our anger? HE is the one who should be begging us for forgiveness. We owe him nothing. We already bailed him out and if we take our business elsewhere, that is his own fault, not ours. Personally I am happy with USAA and TD Bank. Others are switching to credit unions, with membership in credit unions BOOMING.

I feel that Occupy Wall Street protesters should publicly cut up their Bank of America credit cards and switch to credit unions or banks who didn't do predatory lending or take a taxpayer bailout. Tell Mr. CEO Moynihan just what you think of his being "incensed" at us. He needs us. We don't need him. Cut up your Bank of America credit cards, close your Bank of America accounts, and refinance your mortgages to other banks or credit unions. Then Mr. CEO Moynihan can be "incensed" all he wants without our business.

Return to Mole's Consumer Advice Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

Oct. 14, 1943: Jewish Rebellion at Sobibor Death Camp

2011-10-13T22:56:00.001-07:00

There is an image of Jews going tamely to slaughter in the Holocaust. And it is true, for various reasons, this did happen all too often. But some Jews stood up and fought, even at times defeating the Nazis at least for a time. Throughout the Nazi era, there were always Jews who stood up and fought, and we should not forget those fights.

Sobibor was one of the Nazi death camps. Not just a run of the mill, as it were, concentration camp. But a full out Death Camp whose sole purpose was the death of Jews.

Jews so thoroughly trashed the place that the Nazis did all they could to eliminate every memory of the place. I want to REMEMBER Sobibor, just as much as the Nazis want us all to forget it. In honor of the Jews who rebelled at Sobibor, here is a song written by someone in the Vilna Ghetto, inspired by the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, honoring those who stood up and fought. It is sung in this case by Paul Robeson, who does it full justice:

In 1943 Jews were responsible for the destruction of one of the worst Nazi death camps. You probably haven't heard of Sobibor. Sobibor was designed specifically and solely to kill. It wasn't a camp where they worked people to death. It was a camp where they killed people. Mengele in Auschwitz, sorting who died and who lived for just awhile longer, was kind compared to the brutality of Sobibor.

Two of the six Nazi death camps, Treblinka and Sobibor, were destroyed as a result of Jewish uprisings. These events were suppressed not only by the embarrassed Nazis, but also ironically by some Jews who felt ambivalent about resistance, and by some Israelis who, until the revelations of the Eichmann trial, felt those who remained in the Diaspora had, by not moving to Israel, been partly responsible for their fate. I think the memory of Jewish resistance against the Nazis is extremely important to keep alive. I think we all need to know in our gut that two Death Camps received fatal blows from Jewish rebels.

Sobibor was almost the forgotten Nazi Death Camp. It was almost forgotten because the SS themselves tried to eradicate all traces of the camp. The camp had become an embarrassment after nearly half the Jews at the camp rebelled and escaped. Yeah...nearly half. So the SS tried to erase all memory of it...but they have failed.

Some memories of Sobibor:

That rebellion happened October 14th, 1943.

Most concentration camps focused on working the prisoners to death. The Nazis had two, sometimes conflicting, goals. Extermination of Jews and slave labor. By their own admission they focused more on extermination and later felt they should have saved more Jews for slave labor than they did.

This confuses some people who expect all of the Nazi camps to be the same. Simply put the Nazis had different camps for different purposes. Some camps started early on as places to put political dissidents, mostly non-Jewish. Other camps, overlapping with this first set, were designed as work camps, turning everyone the Nazis didn't like into slaves. The "Death Camps" focused on killing people as fast as they could. There were six death camps, all located in Poland: Aucshwitz II, Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibor, and Treblinka. More than 250,000 people were murdered at Sobibor alone. Both Treblinka and Sobibor were destroyed thanks to Jewish uprisings.

At 4 PM, Oct. 14th, 1943, rebels led by Alexander (Sasha) Pechersky started killing SS soldiers at Sobibor. The first to die was the camp's deputy commander, killed as he visited the tailor's shop to try on a new uniform. Here is an account of that first blow as told by a survivor:

October 14, 1943 was a warm, sunny day and nothing disrupted the routine. Only a very small group knew that this was to be the fateful day. The Nazis in the camp went about their business as usual. At precisely 4:00 P.M., the stage was set. Everything now depended on the nerves of the attackers, their faith in themselves and luck.

Acting commander SS Untersturmfuehrer Niemann rode up on his horse and entered the tailor shop. Mundek was ready, holding the new uniform. The German without suspicion, unhooked his belt with its pistol in the holster and causally threw it on the table.

As tailors have done for ages, he patted and turned Niemann at his will. Finally he told him to stand still while he marked the alterations with a crayon. Then the blow fell. The Nazi dropped like a fallen tree, his head split. Shubayev rushed to Sasha's quarters and delivered the first pistol. They embraced. Now, there was no turning back.

They killed 11 German and Ukrainian guards (more by some accounts), triggering a mass breakout. About half of the camp's prisoners escaped, though in the end only 50 survived the war. Some were killed by Germans...some by Poles. Here is the same survivor's account of the breakout:

Someone was trying to cut an opening in the fence with a shovel. Within minutes, more Jews arrived. Not waiting in line to go through the opening under the hail of fire, they climbed the fence. Though we had planned to touch the mines off with bricks and wood, we did not do it. We couldn't wait; we preferred sudden death to a moment more in that hell.

Corpses were everywhere. The noise of rifles, exploding mines, grenades and the chatter of machine guns assaulted the ears. The Nazis shot from a distance while in our hands were only primitive knives and hatchets.

We ran through the exploded mine field holes, jumped over a single wire marking the end of the mine fields and we were outside the camp. Now to make it to the woods ahead of us. It was so close. I fell several times, each time thinking I was hit. And each time I got up and ran further...100 yards...50 yards... 20 more yards...and the forest at last. Behind us, blood and ashes. In the grayness of the approaching evening, the towers' machine guns shot their last victims."

Within days of this rebellion, SS chief Heinrich Himmler ordered the camp dismantled and all traces destroyed. Camp III, the actual extermination area, was immediately destroyed and hidden. The other facilities were used until July 1944.

This was one example of Jewish resistance against the Nazis. And, although only 50 survived the war, their actions shut down one of the Nazi death camps. That is about as successful as half-starved, terrified, desperate people can be in the face of one of the most technologically advanced group of sociopaths in history.

THIS is the kind of history we need to remember.

BACK TO PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT NEWSLETTER MAIN PAGE

Return to Mole's History Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

Funding or Defunding the Doe Fund...Council Members Brad Lander and Daniel Dromm Respond

2011-10-05T17:50:00.001-07:00

A short time back I took City Councilmembers Steve Levin and Brad Lander to task for, what seemed at the time, a casual decision to defund the Doe Fund's clean up efforts in Park Slope. I particularly took them to task for misleading statements and for denigrating the Doe Fund overall, which I found difficult to stomach because the Doe Fund is one of the most successful (among the ONLY successful) organizations for reducing recidivism among parolees.

Steve Levin has shown no interest in this issue...or any issue in the district from what I can tell. I guess as long as he has the backing of corrupt Party Boss Vito Lopez (his mentor) he feels he can cruise along with no problem...particularly since he also managed to get the formerly decent Working Families Party backing him as well, creating a nasty and disgusting alliance between the Vito Lopez machine and a Working Families party that at BEST skirted the law, and in reality had to scramble to avoid prosecution after breaking some campaign finance laws for the likes of Steve Levin.

But Brad Lander, who I have had some serious disagreements with, seems different than Steve "Vito's Kid" Levin. Brad Lander HAS been involved with the community, even if I disagree with him on the Doe Fund's role in the community, and he took the time to respond to my article taking him to task.

Let me begin by reviewing what I wrote before, then quoting Councilmember Brad Lander responding to my article, then giving something of a rebuttal from myself and giving a different opinion from Councilmember Daniel Dromm.

It all started with my building's resident Yenta asking me why 7th Ave is no longer being cleaned up. Until recently, she observed, men in blue outfits (a collaboration between the city and the Doe Fund aimed to help the homeless and parolees transition back into society and employment while cleaning up city streets not adequately cleaned by the city) would help the city empty the garbage and clean the streets. Recently those blue-uniformed men disappeared from 7th Avenue completely and in their place garbage piled up everywhere adding to what my wife already referred to as the "7th Ave. Stink."

To me this is not, however, primarily about the cleanliness of our neighborhood. It is about a program that is one of the most successful in the nation in getting homeless and parolees back into society. Here is the description of the Doe Fund from their website:

Ready, Willing & Able is The Doe Fund's holistic, residential, work and job skills training program which helps homeless individuals in their efforts to become self-sufficient, contributing members of society. Ready, Willing & Able has helped more than 4,500 men and women become drug-free, secure full-time employment, and obtain their own self-supported housing. The program targets the segment of the homeless population considered the hardest to serve: single, able-bodied adults, the majority of whom have histories of incarceration and substance abuse. Criteria for acceptance into the program is that the applicant be ready, willing and able, both physically and mentally, to work and maintain a drug-free lifestyle.

Folks, this kind of program saves taxpayers money in the long run. Like vaccinations and education, programs like this are one of the best investments society can make with taxpayer money. And, like cutting education, cutting this program is one of the dumbest moves a government can make because it will COST us all money in the long run. That is why I am interested in this issue, even though the 7th Ave Stink is also something I am concerned with. But the media articles that only focused on the garbage issue missed the main point. As did, I think, the initial response from Brad Lander and Steve Levin, though as I will quote below, Brad Lander has more depth to his stand than his initial statements indicated.

Responding to the disgusting conditions on 7th Ave these days, my building's resident Yenta asked me who to talk to. I recommended several offices she could contact including city council reps Levin and Lander, who represent the area. Here is the letter she got from Brad Lander's office (Levin, who actually represents our building, never bothered to answer...says alot right there about Steve Levin!):

Dear Ms. _____, Thank you for contacting me. Unfortunately, the blue-uniformed street cleaners on 7th Avenue were lost to budget cuts. Do you know any of the merchants on 7th Avenue? The merchants on 5th Avenue have formed a Business Improvement District, that maintains the avenue at a higher level of cleanliness that the Sanitation Department can do on its own. Maybe something similar is needed for 7th Avenue or merchants there could team up with the 5th Avenue merchants? Best,Alex

Now first off, I will agree with Lander's office that perhaps 7th Ave needs a merchant's association like 5th Ave has. That would help. But I also want to say Lander's office is misleading here. The blue-uniformed men form the Doe Fund who clean our streets are at least partly funded by discretionary funding (and some City Councilmembers, like Daniel Dromm, HAVE chosen to help fund it...more on that below). So it isn't really budget cuts that led to the loss of this service in our neighborhood, it is mainly that Brad Lander and Steve Leven CHOSE to cut this program. They are using their discretionary funding money somewhere else. Discretionary spending all too often goes to rewarding political supporters, and Steve Levin, at least, is part of a corrupt political machine that is infamous for funneling taxpayer money to reward political allies. As I will quote below, Lander is making some decisions that I may not agree with, but which have some reasoning behind it. Levin may well be simply following in the Vito Lopez machine tradition of rewarding cronies and not giving a rat's ass about the community, though I don't know because he answered no one in our building on the matter.

I also should note that my building's Yenta had some very harsh statements about Lander after actually meeting him, though since I was not there I can't judge the interaction. She can be harsh, and Lander, in my experience, can fumble delicate interactions. I remain hopeful that Lander will prove a good Councilmember, but he failed to make a good initial impression on this issue...but after my original article, he took the time to respond and in that response showed a more thoughtful side that failed to come out when my building's Yenta was trying to get answers.

Here is Brad Lander's response to my objections to his decision...and note that it differs from what his office sent to my building's Yenta: (I left out parts...if Brad feels I did so unfairly I will repost with those parts added, but they mostly deal with his response to another article that both he and I feel didn't address the real issues)

First, thanks for your nice words on my support of community efforts in response to the awful string of sexual assaults in the area.

I wanted to respond to your post on the cancellation of the City’s contract (funded previously by City Council discretionary member-item funding) with the Doe Fund to provide extra sidewalk cleaning on 7th Avenue...[Here is where I cut something Brad may want included and if so I will repost including it...but I feel it didn't address the main issues I was engaging him on]

However, because you raised the issue of the Doe Fund in your blog post, I wanted to give you some additional background.

I’ve spent much of my career working on homelessness and affordable housing, and in my time at the Fifth Avenue Committee also worked extensively on supporting successful community re-entry for former prisoners through FAC’s “Developing Justice” program. If you take a look you’ll see that many of my member items go to organizations that try to help people get back on their feet, and address underlying causes. This summer, I helped Old First Church & the new Park Slope Interfaith Social Justice Network organize a new nightly respite shelter...[sentence fragment removed]

Many of the people who I most respect in this field – from the Coalition for the Homeless, and the Legal Aid Society – are highly critical of the Doe Fund. They believe that they pay the men in their programs less-than-minimum-wage, and that their programs are paternalistic.

As you may remember, it was the Doe Fund that bused homeless people to City Hall to support Bloomberg’s efforts to overturn the will of the voters & extend term limits so he could have a third term. And they were well-rewarded with increased funding afterward (maybe they could use some of the additional $10 million they got to keep the street-cleaning going on 7th Avenue):

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/07/nyregion/07doe.html?pagewanted=all

Even before this, however, the Doe Fund was one of Mayor Giuliani’s most-favored-not-for-profit organizations, and founder/CEO George McDonald often defended Giuliani’s "approach" to dealing with homeless and poverty. You might also check out this article about McDonald keeping for himself $100,000 in prize money awarded to the organization:

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-11-05/local/27080283_1_doe-fund-prize-money-daniel-borochoff

All that said, we honestly cut the program because we simply could not afford it. Member items have been cut back, as the Council has tried to protect other things from the Mayor’s budget axe – not only teachers, firefighters, etc … but also some of the most important programs that address criminal justice, re-entry, and recidivism. For example, one initiative that I fought hard to have the Council restore, over the Mayor’s cut, was a $3.5 alternatives-to-incarceration & re-entry support initiative, that funds the best groups doing that work – including CASES, Center for Community Alternatives, Center for Employment Opportunities, Fortune Society, Legal Action Center, Osborne Association, and Women's Prison Association. The mayor wanted to eliminate the program entirely, and we were able to restore it. I believe these programs are the best at addressing re-entry (and related criminal justice issues).

But restoring cuts made by the Mayor leaves far less money for discretionary member items – in my case about 50% less. As a result, the Doe Fund cost about 25% of my total discretionary spending, for one street. Keeping it would have meant cutting another 10 not-for-profit organizations who rely on the small grants we are able to provide (like NYC Coalition Against Hunger, Brooklyn Housing & Family Services, CAMBA, Food for NYC, Center for Antiviolence Education, South Brooklyn Legal Services, etc).

Let me begin by emphasizing that Lander and Levin still were misleading in their response to constituents and the media, as I outlined in my last article. The cuts were THEIR choice and were not related to firehouses and teachers the way they implied. The explanation given by Lander in response to my article contains a good deal of thoughtful information, some of which I agree with some I do not. Had Brad been more up front rather than add his name to a claim about teachers and firehouses (whose funding is not really related to the Doe Fund getting discretionary funding) it would have looked better. Also, given the fact that the Doe Fund is viewed as having a very good record of reducing recidivism, Lander and Levin's claim that it is not cost-effective is suspect. A better analysis, and a more up front analysis, could have helped. I can point out a couple of instances where the Doe Fund's cost-effectiveness can be called into question (see below) but it also is one of the most successful programs at reducing recidivism (refer to numbers in original article). The benefit to the community of cleaner streets combined with one of the best records of reducing recidivism means it is a program that should not be easily dismissed. Brad Lander's thoughtful response gives some much needed background. The original misleading, glib answer was not helpful.

Now to start, I will give my agreements with Brad's statement. I also have criticized the Doe Fund for their ties to Bloomberg and their push for his third term. But in a nation where prisons are a sadly booming big business, costing an increasing amount of taxpayer money just to keep more and more people behind bars in perpetuity, it seems to me that the cost effectiveness of the Doe Fund is hard to argue with. And there are so few programs that succeed at reducing recidivism that it seems terrible to defund one of the few that works.

Let me review the cost effectiveness of the Doe Fund, even if they have their faults:

The Doe Fund program always struck me as a win-win situation: neighborhoods got cleaned up beyond the minimal effort the city puts in, and parolees get a much better shot at making life outside prison work, reducing recidivism and hence saving the state money in the long run. Great, no? AND IT WORKS!

From "Women Out of Prison:"

Since taking office in 1989, District Attorney Charles Hynes remains an active proponent of reentry programs, like Ready, Willing, and Able, as a viable means to reduce recidivism.

“Reentry is the most important criminal justice issue we face,” said Hynes at a Roundtable Reentry meeting last November. “Putting people back into prison is, simply, morally indefensible.”

Unlike studies that show two-thirds of all incarcerated people reentering civilian life return to prison within three years, the success rates coming out of transitional employment programs tell a completely different story.

“When we look at the graduates of our program, we are finding a recidivism rate of less than 4 percent, compared to a national average of 45 percent,” says Lee Alman, Director of Public Affairs at The Doe Fund. “They are staying out of the criminal justice system.”

According to Hynes, joint programs overall that incorporate both treatment and employment for newly released prisoners have the effect of “reducing recidivism to mere fractions.” In 1999, Hynes created the city’s first significant prisoner reentry program, named “Community and Law Enforcement Resources Together,” and partnered with The Doe Fund to provide these employment opportunities.

So far the Brooklyn model seems to be working. As the city has seen a huge rise in drug cases since Paterson’s historic reforms this past April, they have, in Hynes’ words, “hardly made a ripple in Brooklyn,” because of treatment programs like ComALERT that have been in place for several years now.

And the savings have been significant. A study conducted by the Office of National Drug Control Policy in 2004 found that the economic cost of drug abuse nationwide is $180 billion, and roughly 60 percent are crime-related costs (i.e., court costs, law enforcement, etc.). Furthermore, it costs $187 a day to incarcerate someone in the New York penal system. According to Hynes, it costs New York taxpayers $10 a day to put an offender through treatment programs like ComALERT.

THIS IS WHAT IS BEING CUT. Not just a cosmetic makeover of a fancy neighborhood. It is a program that reduces recidivism and saves taxpayers money...it, based on District Attorney Hynes' numbers above, represents a net savings of $177 per day per person that goes through this program and does not re-enter prison. That is what good government is all about but it seems it is not a priority right now.

That may be my main disagreement with Brad Lander. He portrays the program as not cost-effective. I can't agree with that. His other criticisms I think I agree with. But it is the most cost-effective program I have been able to find when it comes to reducing recidivism. And so far nothing Brad has said counters that impression. YES they may be flawed. They have been criticized for paying their top execs high salaries (can I get in on that...I could use the raise!)...and they have been rightly criticized for getting too involved politically in Bloomberg's power grab for a third term. AND the Doe Fund may well be paternalistic and pay their workers sub-minimum wage. BUT...and this is the key point for me, they remain one of the most effective programs when it comes to reducing recidivism, and I consider this a VERY important thing. Lander has not convinced me otherwise here. The Doe Fund remains one of the best programs, even if it has its own flaws. Lander has not convinced me that he is supporting anything better. YES I may like the politics of what Lander prefers over the Doe Fund...but I remain unconvinced that the bottom line in cost-effectiveness and overall benefit to the community is better served by Levin and Ladner defunding the Doe Fund.

And I am not alone. Councilmember Daniel Dromm made a different decision about the Doe Fund. He chose to use his discretionary funding to support the Doe Fund in his district, continuing the clean up program for his constituents (the loss of which in Park Slope that led me into this issue) AND supporting the service given to parolees. I requested a statement from Dromm's office, asking some very specific questions partly based on Lander's comments to me. To give credit where credit is due, Lander went into detail. Dromm's office gave me a somewhat lame, canned answer. I happen to agree with the statement from Dromm's office, but it failed to address issues I specifically asked them based on Lander's statement. So, though I think Dromm has it right in many ways, Lander took more time addressing my concerns than Dromm did even though I asked Dromm's office very specific questions.

Here is Daniel Dromm's rather canned (though I thinks accurate) statement on his choice, contrary to Levin and Lander's choice, to support the Doe Fund in his district:

"The Doe Fund's Ready, Willing & Able program is a win-win situation for the community it serves and the individuals that are part of the program," said New York City Council Member Daniel Dromm (D-Queens). "It benefits our community by significantly improving our quality of life while giving the formerly homeless and incarcerated an opportunity to rehabilitate themselves and make positive contributions once they re-enter our society. The Doe Fund is one of a number of successful approaches to working with this group and helping them to re-enter as productive citizens. Our City needs more re-entry programs like the Doe Fund and The Fortune Society, which I am also proud to support."

I agree...but Dromm did not address the issues raised by Lander about the Doe Fund. Even though I continue to be critical of Lander (and even more so of Levin who doesn't seem to even care enough to respond to his constituents on the issue!) the issues he raises about the Doe Fund are valid. I asked Dromm's office about those issues and they failed to respond. Pity. I would have loved to hear how they address them.

Bottom line is this. Levin has once again shown a lack of concern for Park Slope. Brad Lander does show considerable concern for Park Slope, though his initial responses were just as canned as Dromm's and less tied to the facts. But once challenged he gave a much better response than his initial comments, and raised legitimate issues about the Doe Fund, though I think his conclusions of the cost-effectiveness of the program have been proven wrong.

I do hope that the businesses on 7th Ave take up the slack and clean up the streets better. I know I am not alone in somewhat avoiding 7th Ave during summer months when it stinks and the puddles are disgusting soups of rotting material. But the main focus of any business association will not be the homeless and parolees. They have no real reason to reduce recidivism. Any program they choose to fund to clean up Stinky 7th Ave will not necessarily do ANYTHING to reduce recidivism. THAT is where I think defunding the Doe Fund screws over New York. We lose our best program for getting people out of prison and back in society. Flaws and all, the Doe Fund is largely unsurpassed in that regard. So 7th Ave is getting stinkier and less pleasant to shop along, while prisoners lose yet another opportunity to turn their lives around.

I thank Brad Lander for his response. Unlike Steve "Vito's Kid" Levin I feel both Lander and Dromm are interested in their respective communities. Both gave lame responses when first challenged on this issue. But I do feel both gave serious thought to the issue before coming to opposite conclusions. I happen to think Dromm came to the right conclusion while Lander did not.

Taking on Wall Street Every Day

2011-10-05T04:25:00.000-07:00

I have personally been switching my money (credit cards, accounts, mortgage) away from the big bad mega-banks that screwed Americans with predatory lending and took taxpayer handouts with better banks and financial institution. And I invite you to join me. It is a way of moving your money at least a step away from the worst of Wall Street.

In particular I pick four banks to target: Bank of America, Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo

I base my recommendations on three things:

1. Customer service complaints. The banks that get the most customer service complaints are as follows: (according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, I think these numbers are from 2009)

Bank of America: 7,230 complaints (25.5% of total)
J.P. Morgan Chase: 4,890 complaints (17.3%)
Citigroup: 3,742 complaints (13.2%)
Wells Fargo: 2,695 complaints (9.5%)
HSBC North America: 1,963 complaints (6.9%)
Wachovia: 1,265 complaints (4.5%)
U.S. Bancorp: 1,027 complaints (3.6%)
National City: 586 complaints (2.1%)
The Royal Bank of Scotland Group: 537 complaints (1.9 %)
Key Corp: 343 complaints (1.2 %)

Total Top 10 complaints: 24,278 complaints (85.7%)
Total complaints: 28,316 complaints (100%)

Furthermore, the numbers of complaints are getting worse. Chase, Bank of America and Citicorp in particular declined seriously in terms of customer service in 2010, according to the Comptroller of the Currency, the American Consumer Satisfaction Index, and Better Business Bureau.

I advocate avoiding the banks that are around 10% or more of the total complaints (Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Chase and Bank of America). Why patronize companies that treat their customers like crap? Particularly since they have been giving even WORSE service since we bailed them out!

2. Predatory lending. The same banks that rank highest in customer service complaints are among the worst offenders when it comes to predatory lending. That is strike two against them. Why patronize companies that have bad, greedy business practices that lead to national and international economic crises? And furthermore the predatory lending was carried out by these same banks in a racist manner, charging higher interest rates for blacks and Hispanics than for whites and Asians. And it is the SAME four banks that were the most racist in their predatory lending.

3. Welfare Banks: The same banks are also ones that eagerly took taxpayer funded bailout money while also advocating for cuts to services for poor and middle class Americans as being "big government". They are selfish and hypocritical as well as lousy businesses.

Also, I should note that two of these banks, Bank of America and Citigroup, also are two of the top ten tax dodging companies in America. They love to take our tax money, but hate to pay their fair share.

So I advocate boycotting at least Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Chase and Bank of America. However people need alternatives. I personally have switched to USAA and TD Bank, both of which are famous for customer service, did no predatory lending, and took no bail out money. But I am learning about even better options through Green America.

Green America (which I have been associated with since they were Co-op America) has some resources:

* The basics about socially responsible investing

* How to retire with one million dollars in a just and sustainable world

* How your savings and checking accounts can build healthy communities through community investing

I personally have been divesting myself of these big bad banks like Bank of America, Chase, Wells Fargo and Citibank and instead switching my mortgage, accounts and credit cards to USAA (which only works with Veterans and their families) and TD Bank (a large bank that actually has excellent customer service and did not engage in predatory lending). Other people I know have been switching to local credit unions. I have particularly liked TD Bank who refinanced my mortgage at a much better rate and much simpler than the big bad banks. By comparison, Chase dicked me around so much, constantly upping the interest rate every time I talked to them, that I finally told them where they could stuff their refinance. TD Bank offered me a better rate and stuck by it.

But so far my wife and I still haven't been able to get rid of all our Chase and Bank of America credit cards. Paying off the debt is tough, but we are working on it. But I would like to find better credit cards to use.

Well, Green America has some suggestions I would like to pass on to you.

Cards Connected to Better Banks
There are socially responsible banks and credit unions that exemplify responsible lending practices—as well as community investing institutions that take the social mission one step further by also investing in low-income populations.

Wainwright Bank Visa Cards (fees and rates vary): Wainwright, a Boston-based bank with a tradition of “socially progressive” banking, offers six different Visa credit cards with different rates and terms. All of these cards are issued and managed by Elan, a financial services company. Steven F. Young, senior vice president at Wainwright, says they “chose Elan because we felt their consumer practices were best.”

Permaculture Credit Union’s (PCU) Visa card (13% apr, no annual fee): Based in New Mexico, PCU is committed to Earth-friendly and socially responsible loans and investments. PCU’s card is issued by the Illinois Credit Union League to anyone, whether or not they are a PCU account holder, though applicants should mention they are “affiliated” with Permaculture Credit Union.

ReDirect Visa (15.15% apr, no annual fee): The ReDirect card is issued by Washington state’s ShoreBank Pacific.Depositors fuel the bank’s lending programs, which enable sustainable community development. ShoreBank Pacific issues the card by way of TCM, which is owned by ICBA Bancard, a subsidiary of the Independent Community Bankers of America.

Your card fees support ShoreBank Pacific’s community investing mission, and half of the card’s proceeds go toward reducing CO2 emissions through Sustainable Travel International’s “MyClimate” high-quality offsets. In addition to a conventional rewards program, the card also earns cardholders discounts at the sustainable businesses listed in regional “ReDirect Guides” for Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins, CO; Portland, OR/Vancouver, WA; and Salt Lake City/Park City, UT. Those businesses that offer Internet purchasing will extend ReDirect discounts to any cardholder. There’s no need to have a ShoreBank Pacific account to apply.

Salmon Nation Visa (15.15% apr, no annual fee): This card, also from ShoreBank Pacific, directs a percentage of its income to growing a community of citizens that practice environmental stewardship of “Salmon Nation,” a bio-region stretching from Alaska to Oregon where wild salmon live. Like the ReDirect card, Salmon Nation Visa isn’t benefiting a mega-bank, and you don’t need a ShoreBank Pacific account to apply.

The Loop Card (11.99% apr, no annual fee): A Visa from Albina Community Bank in Oregon. Profits from this Visa from Oregon’s Albina Community Bank not only support Albina, but one percent of every purchase goes to Portland’s neighborhoods, funding education, health, social services, environment, the arts, or economic development projects. You do not have to have an account with Albina to get the card, and it is not connected to a mega-bank.

Shorebank’s Elan Visa Consumer Card (variable apr, no annual fee): ShoreBank, in the Midwest, is a community development and environmental bank that issues a credit card available to anyone nationwide through Elan, the same company servicing Wainright Bank’s cards, at a rate determined by your credit history.

Self-Help credit union cards (9.95–12.95% apr, no annual fee): Self-Help, headquartered in North Carolina, works in communities traditionally underserved by conventional financial institutions. It offers Classic and Platinum Visa credit cards to members, and through online banking, anyone nationwide can become an account holder and apply. The cards are issued by Self-Help, a community development bank.

For those purchases you make by credit card, using one of these best-option cards can make your charges a force for good.

One of my goals once we can pay off most of our current credit card debt is to switch from my current credit cards, which are still mega-bank linked, to one or two of these cards. I hope you will all join my in making the switch.

Return to Mole's Consumer Advice Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

Preventing and Dealing With Bed Bugs

2011-10-04T06:33:00.001-07:00

This is a second update from an earlier article. (I try to keep things fresh!)

In 2006 I wrote an article about a relatively new but spreading problem: bed bugs. Since I wrote that article the problem has gotten bad enough that it has sparked a whole industry of detection and extermination of bed bugs and has led to hundreds of articles all over the mainstream media reporting on this growing problem. But this has led to misunderstandings and some shady businesses as well. This article is designed to help you avoid bedbugs if possible, and get rid of them if you do get them. The problems continues to get worse. Every week I see mattresses wrapped in plastic laid out (unnecessarily!) on the street to be discarded, probably due to a bed bug scare or infestation. The last two days alone I saw some 20 mattresses as well as considerable amount of bedding and a couple of couches all tightly wrapped up and being needlessly thrown out. I assume most of these are due to bed bugs.

In 2010 the building I live in had a bed bug scare. It seemed at first as if several apartments were affected with possibly two separate initial infections (at opposite ends of the building). Turns out that probably only one apartment ever had them, but had the building's managing board not acted rapidly it would have spread. As it was the managing board spent tens of thousands of dollars to pinpoint possibly affected apartments and proactively treat them. During that time we became quite informed about the pests. More recently we had another scare. That turned out to be nothing. But it reinforced our knowledge of the issue.

The bad news is the problem continues to spread and a lot of what is being done about it is the wrong approach. For example, throwing away your mattress if it has bed bugs is unnecessary and it helps spread the problem because you have just put the bed bugs out on the street where they can get on people's shows (including your own to re-infest your home). The good news is there are some very simple things you can do that will prevent them from coming into your living space. Three relatively simple and inexpensive methods greatly reduce your chances of getting them: mattress covers, diatomaceous earth, and rubbing alcohol.

First, the problem...

From the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene website:

Bed bugs are small insects that feed on the blood of mammals and birds. Adult bed bugs are oval, wingless and rusty red colored, and have flat bodies, antennae and small eyes. They are visible to the naked eye, but often hide in cracks and crevices. When bed bugs feed, their bodies swell and become a brighter red. In homes, bed bugs feed primarily on the blood of humans, usually at night when people are sleeping...

Typically, the bite is painless and rarely awakens a sleeping person. However, it can produce large, itchy welts on the skin. Welts from bed bug bites do not have a red spot in the center--those welts are more characteristic of flea bites...

Although bed bugs may be a nuisance to people, they are not known to spread disease.

That is also good news. Bed bugs are not disease vectors like mosquitoes. They are just irritating in the extreme...and they can really infest an apartment if not properly addressed. But no one gets sick or dies from bed bugs.

WHY NOW?

The problem first became wide spread in NYC in 2005...after a lull of about 60 years where there were few or no reportings of bed bugs in NYC, one of the current epicenters. Since then the epidemic has taken off. Now I have heard from one professional that one out of every eleven apartment units in NYC has bed bugs. Let me emphasize that I was sounding the alarm early on this one!

Why the sudden epidemic? There are several possible reasons. Some have tried to blame it on immigrants. That is almost certainly not true since here in NYC we have a pretty constant influx of immigrants and the influx of bed bugs has never correlated with influx of immigrants. If this was going to be a major source of spread, there would not have been a 60 year lull. NYC has always been a major immigrant hub (I know my ancestors came through here) but the upswing in bed bugs seems to have only started around 2005 for NYC. But elsewhere in the country the upswing started more like 2000, according to a an article from Time Magazine back when I first looked into this. Blaming immigrants is just plain unfounded.

One aspect of the sudden rise of the bed bugs is simple evolution. I have often reported on how the misuse and overuse of antibiotics, particularly in animal feed, has led to a huge emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria. This has been a huge problem and is one reason why I now only buy meat and chicken raised without antibiotics. Well the same thing happens with insects. Overuse and misuse of pesticides in America and abroad has led to bed bugs that are resistant to most pesticides. For the record, same goes with lice. Those horribly toxic shampoos used for lice are mostly useless by now because the lice have evolved resistance against them. The proper use of a lice comb and careful removal of eggs is the only truly effective way to remove lice. And many treatments for bed bugs are ineffective for the same reason.

Another aspect that I suspect is going on is global warming. Simple fact is that most insects prefer warmer temperatures. I want to emphasize that this is speculation. The evolution of pesticide resistance is not speculative but pretty much established fact. But global warming HAS been shown to be the cause for the spread of many pests, and it almost certainly will eventually be shown to play a role for many more. So I am betting that rising temperatures have helped the bed bug infestation spread.

So what can you do? I'm going to work backwards, from treatment to detection to prevention. Why? Because if I give you an idea about how awful the treatment and expensive and potentially inaccurate the detection, prevention will sound much better to you. And honestly the more we all work to keep these things under control the more likely it will be we can limit them. Remember that if your neighbors get them, you will probably get them too if you aren't actively trying to prevent them (diatomaceous earth is the best way to prevent spread from a neighbor!).

TREATMENT

There seem to be three main treatments. All three are horrible to go through and hugely expensive. They are basically heating, freezing, and poisoning. I guess there is a fourth which you can use for any items that can't stand up to the other treatments: bag everything for 2 years. That is about how long it takes to kill bed bugs by starvation. I did notice that the more convinced exterminators were that we didn't actually have them, the more they backed off that number. Eventually they seemed to settle on 6 months. But there has been research that showed even after a year sealed in a bag with no food or water, the researchers could still find bed bugs not just living, but actually reproducing! They are tough SOBs. So sealing them off requires two years to be absolutely sure. One exterminator suggested adding moth balls to the bag you put things in can help speed up the process, but I have not confirmed that. Probably 6 months with mothballs in the bag is good enough, but not as certain as 2 years.

Also, I notice many homes in NYC with mattresses thrown out. I suspect this sudden increase in mattresses being thrown out is due to bed bugs. But there is no need to throw out a mattress because mattress covers will seal them in, away from you, until they die. Mattress covers are necessary anyway (see below) so just put them on and keep the mattress. It saves money and keeps them from spreading to other parts of the neighborhood. Mattress covers are cheaper than a new mattress!

Treatment usually involves bagging almost everything you own for months to years, punching 1 inch diameter holes in many of your walls, then either getting poison all over everything, including inside your walls (and it takes WEEKS to fully clean up), or raising the temperature in the whole apartment above what bed bugs can tolerate, or lowering the temperature in the whole apartment to below what they can tolerate. Only bathrooms and kitchens are largely left untouched (as long as you seal them off so the poison doesn't get in them). All of these treatments are horribly inconvenient, expensive and disruptive. Best to avoid them if you can by preventing bed bugs altogether!

DETECTION

Detection has issues as well. Usually what is first obvious is the itching from the bites. Then people will notice the bugs' very dark droppings (basically like dried up flakes of blood...yeah...your blood if you've got itching bites). By the time you are noticing them, it is likely that you have a pretty bad infestation. People won't always see them because they mostly come out at night, but a really bad infestation they will be everywhere, day and night. The earlier you catch the problem the easier it is to deal with.

There are two expert methods of identifying them: trained people and trained dogs. The dogs have been getting a lot of press these days, and they CAN be very effective. The dog's nose is an amazing thing, and they really can be trained to sniff out anything and tell you about it. There are bomb sniffing dogs, drug sniffing dogs, and now bed bug sniffing dogs. The flaws are that they are extremely expensive and, though potentially extremely accurate, they are in practice sometimes very inaccurate. Dogs basically want food and attention. They don't care about accuracy...they just want to be rewarded, so they are easily distracted. We are pretty sure that our building had many false alarms because of a dog whose handler was less than professional. I am not saying it is a scam (though that can happen if the same company offers detection and treatment!) or the dog was poorly trained. It just has a built in inaccuracy which has to be kept in mind. The dogs are VERY accurate IF AND ONLY IF they are properly trained and handled and not distracted.

When my building had a second scare I had the chance to better understand a good vs. bad use of a bed bug sniffing dog. I bet most of these dogs are almost as well trained as bomb or drug sniffing dogs, so have a lot of potential. But the handlers also have to be properly trained. The first time I personally witnessed a bed bug sniffing dog and handler team doing its thing I felt both dog and handler were performing for an audience and I felt they were giving false positive readings because of it. It seemed very unprofessional. Was the handler inexperienced? Or simply unprofessional? Or was it an outright scam to drum up business for his company? I don't know.

The second year we had an issue a different dog and different handler came (though from the same company). This time they seemed MUCH more professional and the handler limited the number of people around the dog to limit distractions. He did not detect bed bugs in our building. The difference was very clear between a handler who was showing off and one who was doing his job.

Bottom line is this: the dogs are potentially really accurate, but the handlers are variable, even from the same company. My advice is a.) get an inspection from a different company than you will hire to deal with any infestation and make that clear from the start. Otherwise the company you hire to detect a problem will be the same company that handles the problem, creating a conflict of interest. And b.) watch the dog and handler...if they seem to be playing to an audience there is a problem. If they seem to be open to one person observing but focused on keeping the dog from being distracted, then they are more trustworthy. Beware of show offs, whether dog or handler.

What about human detection? People will miss the very beginning of an infestation that a dog could catch, but they do the inspection in a smarter manner and so can be more accurate overall once an infestation has gotten going beyond the first stages. Dogs are potentially more accurate but sometimes people do the inspection in a smarter way. So it's a toss up which to hire.

But the bottom line is if either a dog or a person with training in detection tells you you have them, it is really hard not to say yes to the treatment because far, far better safe than sorry. The earlier you catch it the easier it is to stop, so if you want to wait and see if the dog or person is right, you may find yourself with an out of control infestation which will be even harder and more expensive to deal with.

PREVENTION

Oh, and is now a good time to mention bed bugs are ALL OVER THE CITY? One out of every 11 apartment units in NYC. Hotels. In the UN building. In places of work. In movie theaters. The good news is that they don't really move around so much except at night, so they aren't jumping from person to person much. Though the darkness in movie theaters is a concern...when you come back from a movie, be particularly careful about your shoes, coat and pants cuffs. Treatment with rubbing alcohol (mentioned below) will help.

The main vector is bringing into your apartment items that have already got them living inside them...furniture, books, etc. But one exterminator I talked to believed people's shoes are a major vector. So they aren't spread so much directly from one person to another (like lice) but by bringing infested things into your building.

So what can you do to prevent them from coming into your living space?

First be really, really careful scrounging anything, particularly furniture. Now I have scrounged a lot of stuff in my time...still do from time to time, but now I am highly careful. If a book has bed bugs, it is pretty easy to detect...if you look. You will see the black specs that are their droppings. Furniture can be harder, but there are treatments if you really want to bring a scrounged piece of furniture into your apartment. Heating (if you can), rubbing alcohol, or diatomaceaous earth (see below). But my wife figures the safest is to not scrounge at all.

Mattresses and pillows can be sealed up. This costs some money, but if you get good mattress and pillow covers, even if you have an infested mattress or bed you can just leave it in the cover and they will eventually die and you keep the bed from being their favorite habitat. These covers are the most recommended action you can take. When exterminators heard we already had them, they were 90% sure we couldn't have a problem. So covering your mattresses and pillows with high end versions of these covers will really protect you. This is a cost you probably don't want to skimp on. And a good cover shouldn't be uncomfortable. It also keeps you from having major dust mite problems, something almost all beds have and can make allergies worse. So the mattress and pillow covers are good all around, reducing chances of bed bug problems and reducing allergies.

But shoes are an issue as well. One exterminator said you should always take your shoes off when you come in and if possible place them in a container with diatomaceous earth (again...see below). He believes that (scrounging an infested bed aside) this would prevent almost all spread of bed bugs. Not sure if that is true, but it certainly would help. Another exterminator I and others talked to suggested buying 90% or higher rubbing alcohol (a higher percent than the usual stuff you get, which is 70%) and putting some in a spray bottle in your entryway. Spraying your shoes every time you enter your home (particularly after being in a movie theater), your luggage when traveling (inside and out, before and after traveling), and any furniture you bring in can greatly limit the chances of bringing bed bugs into your home.

Now we come to some amazing stuff that I was dubious about but have seen in action. Diatomaceous earth is one of the best treatments to protect your home from ANY crawling bug, from ant to cockroach to bed bug, from entering. Diatoms are tiny animals that live in the ocean and create a silica shell. These shells are beautiful (if you have a microscope to look at them with), elaborate, and very sharp. These animals die, fall to the bottom of the sea, and form thick beds of diatom skeletons. When plate tectonics (earthquakes and continental drift) brings these deposits up above sea level, they can be mined. These deposits of tiny silica skeletons of long dead diatoms are called diatomaceous earth. It is a white powder of very tiny sharp skeletons. To us the sharpness, at worst, will irritate our skin a bit. It can't really harm us (in fact some people eat the stuff to cure or prevent intestinal parasites, but I am not sure this is okay!). But to something small like an insect, it is like the death of a thousand cuts. The coating around an insect that helps keep in moisture gets pierced and they dry out and die.

You can get diatomaceous earth online or in a hardware store. It isn't that expensive. If you even get so-called "food grade" diatomaceous earth it can be used in a kitchen because it is considered so harmless.

We got diatomaceous earth and I basically spread it around the entire perimeter of every room in our apartment, making sure to get it into every crevice. The problem is this stuff gets everywhere. I found it irritating to my lungs at first, but once most of it settled and we vacuumed up anything not around the edges of a room (this is also good for making sure your vacuum isn't infested!) that went away. Next time I use it so liberally I will wear a face mask. For months after I spread the stuff around, the diatomaceous earth was still visible in the crevices and corners around many of the rooms but isn't a problem in any way.

And the effectiveness? Within one day of spreading it around every single crawling insect, including ants, confused flour beetles, and cockroaches, just disappeared from our apartment. And they didn't come back for about a year. We live in a basement apartment, so we get insects every year and always have a kind of on going war with them. Nothing major, but we have to be vigilant. But after spreading diatomaceous earth, all crawling insects disappeared for a full year.

This year we started seeing some ants again and I spread diatomaceous earth next to the sliding glass door and our basement windows. And again all crawling insects just disappeared. I still see plenty of ants outside, but none have come inside. And no cockroaches for a more than year now! In NYC...almost unheard of. The stuff works.

So if most of NYC put their mattresses and pillows into bed bug covers, took off their shoes and put them in containers of diatomaceous earth or sprayed them with 90% or higher rubbing alcohol when they got home, and spread diatomaceous earth around the edges of their apartment walls, I am betting they would find many pests would be greatly reduced from their apartments. Bed bugs, ants and flour beetles are hard to get rid of. Diatomaceous earth does it. And it isn't the kind of thing that is easy to evolve a resistance to so it won't lose its effectiveness over the years.

So there you go. Together we can all fight bed bugs. Hope this helps!

Return to the Health and Wellness Blog

Return to I Had a Thought

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

2011-09-25T04:33:00.000-07:00

Mike Lofgren has left the Republican Party. He is not the first and won't be the last. Lofgren was a Republican staffer who worked in both the House and Senate Budget Committees.

He grew so disgusted by the corruption and lies of the Greedy Oil Party that he has left them...and has been writing about his dissatisfaction. From his article on Truth Out.com:

But both parties are not rotten in quite the same way. The Democrats have their share of machine politicians, careerists, corporate bagmen, egomaniacs and kooks. Nothing, however, quite matches the modern GOP.

To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics. To be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like Robert K. Dornan or William E. Dannemeyer. But the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: Steve King, Michele Bachman (now a leading presidential candidate as well), Paul Broun, Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, Louie Gohmert, Allen West. The Congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.

It was this cast of characters and the pernicious ideas they represent that impelled me to end a nearly 30-year career as a professional staff member on Capitol Hill. A couple of months ago, I retired; but I could see as early as last November that the Republican Party would use the debt limit vote, an otherwise routine legislative procedure that has been used 87 times since the end of World War II, in order to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis. Then, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages...

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe.

This comes from a Republican (now former Republican) insider. He saw what was going on from WITHIN the Republican Party and found it disgusting and corrupt. He also directly addresses the destructive and cynical hypocrisy of the modern Greedy Oil Party:

This tactic of inducing public distrust of government is not only cynical, it is schizophrenic. For people who profess to revere the Constitution, it is strange that they so caustically denigrate the very federal government that is the material expression of the principles embodied in that document. This is not to say that there is not some theoretical limit to the size or intrusiveness of government; I would be the first to say there are such limits, both fiscal and Constitutional. But most Republican officeholders seem strangely uninterested in the effective repeal of Fourth Amendment protections by the Patriot Act, the weakening of habeas corpus and self-incrimination protections in the public hysteria following 9/11 or the unpalatable fact that the United States has the largest incarcerated population of any country on earth. If anything, they would probably opt for more incarcerated persons, as imprisonment is a profit center for the prison privatization industry, which is itself a growth center for political contributions to these same politicians.[1] Instead, they prefer to rail against those government programs that actually help people. And when a program is too popular to attack directly, like Medicare or Social Security, they prefer to undermine it by feigning an agonized concern about the deficit. That concern, as we shall see, is largely fictitious...

This legislative assault is moving in a diametrically opposed direction to 200 years of American history, when the arrow of progress pointed toward more political participation by more citizens. Republicans are among the most shrill in self-righteously lecturing other countries about the wonders of democracy; exporting democracy (albeit at the barrel of a gun) to the Middle East was a signature policy of the Bush administration. But domestically, they don't want those people voting.

You can probably guess who those people are. Above all, anyone not likely to vote Republican. As Sarah Palin would imply, the people who are not Real Americans. Racial minorities. Immigrants. Muslims. Gays. Intellectuals. Basically, anyone who doesn't look, think, or talk like the GOP base. This must account, at least to some degree, for their extraordinarily vitriolic hatred of President Obama. I have joked in the past that the main administration policy that Republicans object to is Obama's policy of being black.[2] Among the GOP base, there is constant harping about somebody else, some "other," who is deliberately, assiduously and with malice aforethought subverting the Good, the True and the Beautiful: Subversives. Commies. Socialists. Ragheads. Secular humanists. Blacks. Fags. Feminazis. The list may change with the political needs of the moment, but they always seem to need a scapegoat to hate and fear.

It is not clear to me how many GOP officeholders believe this reactionary and paranoid claptrap. I would bet that most do not. But they cynically feed the worst instincts of their fearful and angry low-information political base with a nod and a wink...

I do not mean to place too much emphasis on racial animus in the GOP. While it surely exists, it is also a fact that Republicans think that no Democratic president could conceivably be legitimate. Republicans also regarded Bill Clinton as somehow, in some manner, twice fraudulently elected (well do I remember the elaborate conspiracy theories that Republicans traded among themselves). Had it been Hillary Clinton, rather than Barack Obama, who had been elected in 2008, I am certain we would now be hearing, in lieu of the birther myths, conspiracy theories about Vince Foster's alleged murder.

There is a lot more...it is a long article and represents the careful unloading of what seems like years of gradual disillusionment in the political party he had previously identified with. I suggest reading the whole thing.

Arianna Huffington is another person who made the transition from Greedy Oil Party cultist to opposing the GOP when she realized they were a bunch of liars who never actually did what they promised. She worked for Newt Gingrich and it was Newt Gingrich's own cynical hypocrisy drove Huffington away. I am no big fan of Arianna Huffington, but I respect the fact that she, like Lofgren, was able to see through the lies and theatrics of the Greedy Oil Party and reject them as one of the most destructive and corrupt forces in American politics. Lufgren is right...there is corruption in the Democratic Party as well, as I have written about frequently in regards to my own home territory of Brooklyn. But the corruption within the Republican Party, measured by comparing the numbers of politicians under investigation, indicted or convicted, FAR outweighs any corruption within the Democratic Party (see also this site for a somewhat less clearly laid out but more up to date analysis). Furthermore, many Democrats, myself included, fight to reform our own Party (to the degree of even endorsing Republican Joseph Cao in Louisiana against a corrupt Democrat). There is hardly a corrupt Republican who isn't embraced by the Greedy Oil Party and often given and maintained in leadership positions.

More interesting is the case of Pete McCloskey who was so disgusted by the behavior of the Republican Party during the Bush years that he left the party. Pete McCloskey had been a life-long Republican and a former candidate for President in a Republican primary. He himself says his family had been Republicans since before Lincoln, suggesting they were among the founders of the party. Yet the corruption and hypocrisy of the modern Greedy Oil Party drove away Pete McCloskey. Here is the letter he wrote explaining his decision:

McCloskeys have been Republicans in California since 1859, the year before Lincoln's election. My great grandfather, John Henry McCloskey, orphaned in the great Irish potato famine of 1843, came to California in 1853 as a boy of 16, and joined the party just before the Civil War.

By 1890 he and my grandfather, both farmers, made up two of the twelve members of the Republican Central Committee of Merced County. My father's most memorable expletive came when I was a boy of 10 or 11: "That damn Roosevelt is trying to pack the Supreme Court!"

I registered Republican in 1948 after reaching the age of 21. We were the party of civil rights, of free choice for women and fiscal responsibility. Since Teddy Roosevelt, we had favored environmental protection, and most of all we stood for fiscal responsibility, honesty, ethics and limited government intrusion into our personal lives and choices. We accepted that one the duties of wealth was to pay a higher rate of income tax, and that the estates of the wealthy should contribute to the national treasury in reasonable measure.

I was proud to serve with Republicans like Gerry Ford, the first George Bush and Bob Dole.

In 1994, however, Newt Gingrich brought a new kind of Republicanism to power, and the election of George W. Bush in 2000 has led to wholly new concept of governance. The bureaucracy has mushroomed in size and power. The budget deficits have become astronomical. Our historical separation of church and state has been blurred. We have seen a succession of ethical scandals, congressmen taking bribes, and abuse of power by both the Republican House leadership and the highest appointees of the White House.

The single cardinal principle of political science, that power corrupts, has come to apply not only to Republican leaders like Tom DeLay, Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and John Doolittle, but to a succession of White House officials and appointees. The stench of Jack Abramoff has permeated much of the Washington Republican establishment.

The Justice Department, guardian of of our rule of law, has been compromised. It's third ranking official, a graduate of Pat Robertson's dubious law school, has taken the 5th Amendment.

Men who have never felt the fear of combat, and who largely dodged military service in their youth, have led us into grievous wars in far off places with no thought of the diplomacy, grace and respect for other peoples and their cultures which has been an American trademark for at least the last two thirds of a century. We have lost the respect and affection of most of the world outside our borders. My son, Peter, one of the U.S. prosecutors at The Hague of the war crimes in Serbia and elsewhere, tells me that people of other countries no longer look at the country which countenances torture as a beacon for the world and the rule of law.

Earth Day, that bi-partisan concept of Gaylord Nelson in 1970, has become the focus of almost hatred by today's Republican leadership. Many still argue that global warming is a hoax, and that Bush has been right to demean and suppress the arguments of scientists at the E.P.A., Fish & Wildlife and U.S.Geological Survey.

I say a pox on them and their values.

Until the past few weeks, I had hoped that the party could right itself, returning to the values of the Eisenhowers, Fords and George H. W. Bush.

What finally turned me to despair, however, was listening to the reports, or watching on C-Span, a whole series of congressional oversight hearings on C-Span, held by old friends and colleagues like Pat Leahy, Henry Waxman, Norm Dicks, Nick Rahall, Danny Akaka and others, trying to learn the truth on the misdeeds and incompetence of the Bush Administration. Time after time I saw Republican Members of the House and Senate. speak out in scorn or derision about these exercises of Congress oversight responsibility being "witch-hunts" or partisan attempts to distort the actions of people like the head of the General Service Administration and the top political appointees in the Justice and Interior Departments. Disagreement turned into disgust.

I finally concluded that it was a fraud for me to remain a member of this modern Republican Party, that there were only a few like Chuck Hegel, Jack Warner, Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins I could respect.

Two of the best, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and Jim Leach of Iowa, after years of battling for balance and sanity, were defeated last November, and it seems that every Republican presidential candidate is now vying for the support of the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells rather than talking about a return to the values of the party I joined nearly 59 years ago. My favorite spokesmen have beome Senators Jim Webb and Barack Obama.

And so it was, that while at the Woodland courthouse the other day, passing by the registrar's office, I filled out the form to re-register as a Democrat.

The issues Helen (McCloskey) and I care about most, public financing of elections, a reliable paper ballot trail, independent re-districting to replace gerrymandering, the right of a woman to choose not to bring a child into the world, a reversal of the old Proposition 13 and term limits which have so hurt California's once superb education system and the competence of our Legislature, are now almost universally opposed by California's elected Republicans, and the occasional attempts at reform by our Governor are looked on with grim disdain by most of them.

From Helen's and my standpoint, being farmers in Yolo County gives us the opportunity to work for purposes which were once Republican, but can no longer be found at Republican conventions and discussions.

I hope this answers your questions about the party and a government I have served in either civil or military service under ten presidents, five Republican and five Democrat ... I doubt it will be of much interest other than to our friends, but it has been a decision not easily taken.

Respectfully,
Pete McCloskey

The Republican Party has for some time now become a party of extremists where every single reasonable Republican is driven out or silenced and corruption rules the day. It is time America recognized the corrupt Greedy Oil Party for what it is: an anti-American, destructive, greedy and corrupt organization that cares nothing for actual governance but only cares about being able to freely loot the American economy for their own personal power and gain.

BACK TO PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT NEWSLETTER MAIN PAGE

Return to I Had a Thought

Democrats Routinely Better for the Economy

2011-09-25T04:32:00.000-07:00

I have covered this before, but it seems it is always good to review the facts. From the Democratic Policy Committee:

Since 1929:

· An investment of $10,000 in the S&P stock market index during only Republican administrations would have yielded a return of just $10,506 (this includes the abysmal 36.7 percent drop in returns over the eight years of the George W. Bush Administration).

· That same $10,000 invested during Democratic administrations would have grown to $389,320 (this includes the 29.5 percent increase in returns over the [first] 281 days under President Obama’s Administration).

[New York Times, Opinion, 10/14/08, updated by author Tommy McCall 10/28/09*]

This is a striking 37-fold difference in performance.

According to this analysis, annualized returns under Republican presidents through the end of the George W. Bush Administration, who presided over a 4.4 percent annualized drop in returns, were only 0.1 percent. By contrast, Democrats presided over a nine percent annualized gain for investors.

Stocks do better under Democrats.

The fact is that the economy has performed significantly better under Democratic administrations than Republican administrations. Between 1960 and 2008, Democratic presidents presided over stronger economic growth, larger increases in median family income and higher job creation, as well as lower federal spending, federal deficits, and inflation. [Slate, 9/16/08; New York Times, 8/30/08]

For example, over the past 48 years, Democrats have presided over:

· Stronger growth in the economy. From 1960 to 2008, real GDP grew faster under Democratic presidents (4.1 percent per year on average) than under Republican presidents (2.7 percent).

...

Better household incomes for all. Between 1948 and 2008, annual incomes grew for all income classes under Democratic Administrations. By contrast, under Republican Administrations, the richest Americans enjoyed a disproportionate share of income growth.

Over this same period, real median income, representing the exact middle of American households, grew more under Democrats (2.2 percent) than under Republicans (0.6 percent). In fact, under President Bush, real median income actually fell $2,197. Looking back as far as we have data (back to President Kennedy), only two other Administrations have had a decline in real median household income.

· Largest decreases in poverty. Since the census began tracking the poverty rate in 1959, Democratic presidents have often produced the largest drops in poverty rates, while Republicans have seen the largest increases. As an example, during the eight years of William Jefferson Clinton Administration, the poverty rate decreased by 21.17 percent and the number of Americans living in poverty decreased by 19.57 percent. Unfortunately, those gains more than reversed in the George W. Bush Administration, when the poverty rate increased by 12.82 percent and the number of Americans living in poverty increased by 21.04 percent. More than numbers and percentages, these figures reflect that, while more than 7.6 million Americans rose out of poverty during the Clinton years, nearly 7 million fell into poverty during the Bush years.

Economic Growth is BETTER and more EQUITABLE under Democrats

Lower unemployment and more robust job growth. The unemployment rate has been lower under Democratic presidents (5.3 percent on average) than under Republicans (6.2 percent).

Moreover, in the eighty years between the start of the Hoover Administration and the end of the George W. Bush Administration, job growth was higher under all six Democratic Presidents than under any of the seven Republican Presidents.

The statistical probability of that happening through random chance is more than 1,700 to 1.

Democrats Create More Jobs

And let me add (not from the same source): Even in terms of fiscal responsibility, that thing Republicans like to harp on, it is really a Democratic value as proven by the numbers:

Republicans do FAR more deficit spending that Democrats.

The numbers don't lie. It is very clear that Democrats are better for ALL aspects of the economy.

BACK TO PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT NEWSLETTER MAIN PAGE

Return to I Had a Thought

Steve Levin and Brad Lander Let Down Constituents

2011-09-21T05:19:00.000-07:00

I want to preface this article by saying that Councilmember Brad Lander has been doing some good things recently which I want to acknowledge before I lay into him on this issue. In particular I want to re-emphasize the good work Brad Lander has been doing with the Center for Anti-violence Education (which my wife teaches at) to get self-defense classes for women in the areas where there have been a spate of assaults on women. But there is another issue where Brad Lander and fellow Councilmember Steve Levin have made, in my mind, a serious error.

It all started with my building's resident Yenta (by her own admission) asking me why 7th Ave is no longer being cleaned up. Until recently, she observed, men in blue outfits (a collaboration between the city and the Doe Fund aimed to help the homeless and parolees transition back into society and employment) would help the city empty the garbage and clean the streets. Recently those blue-uniformed men disappeared from 7th Avenue and in their place garbage piled up everywhere adding to what my wife already referred to as the "7th Ave. Stink." I have to say 7th Ave. smells worse on average than any other street I personally walk down in Brooklyn or Manhattan. And now that the Doe Fund people have disappeared from 7th Ave. the stink is getting worse.

To me this is not, however, primarily about the cleanliness of our neighborhood. It is about a program that is one of the most successful in the nation in getting homeless and parolees back into society. Here is the description of the Doe Fund from their website:

Ready, Willing & Able is The Doe Fund's holistic, residential, work and job skills training program which helps homeless individuals in their efforts to become self-sufficient, contributing members of society. Ready, Willing & Able has helped more than 4,500 men and women become drug-free, secure full-time employment, and obtain their own self-supported housing. The program targets the segment of the homeless population considered the hardest to serve: single, able-bodied adults, the majority of whom have histories of incarceration and substance abuse. Criteria for acceptance into the program is that the applicant be ready, willing and able, both physically and mentally, to work and maintain a drug-free lifestyle.

Dear Ms. _____, Thank you for contacting me. Unfortunately, the blue-uniformed street cleaners on 7th Avenue were lost to budget cuts. Do you know any of the merchants on 7th Avenue? The merchants on 5th Avenue have formed a Business Improvement District, that maintains the avenue at a higher level of cleanliness that the Sanitation Department can do on its own. Maybe something similar is needed for 7th Avenue or merchants there could team up with the 5th Avenue merchants? Best,Alex

Now first off, I will agree with Lander's office that perhaps 7th Ave needs a merchant's association like 5th Ave has. That would help. But I also want to say Lander's office is full of it here. The blue-uniformed men form the Doe Fund who clean our streets are at least partly funded by discretionary funding (and some City Councilmembers, like Daniel Dromm, HAVE chosen to help fund it). So it isn't just budget cuts, it is also that Brad Lander and Steve Leven CHOSE to cut this program. They are using their discretionary funding money somewhere else (Lander may well be sending money to some of these self-defense courses for women in the area affected by assaults). Discretionary spending all too often goes to rewarding political supporters, and Steve Levin, at least, is part of a corrupt political machine that is infamous for funneling taxpayer money to reward political allies. I am not sure what Brad and Steve feel is more important than the Doe Fund, but they are giving misleading information to constituents and, as I will discuss below, to the press.

Again, I want to emphasize that to me the number one issue is NOT whether 7th Ave gets extra cleaning above and beyond the minimal job done by the city. The main issue is deeper and focuses on how we handle homeless and paroled members of our society. Do we find ways of reintegrating them into society or do we let them cost society more and more money because they never are able to become functioning members of society and instead wind up in and out of prison. The Doe Fund program always struck me as a win-win situation: neighborhoods got cleaned up beyond the minimal effort the city puts in, and parolees get a much better shot at making life outside prison work, reducing recidivism and hence saving the state money in the long run. Great, no? AND IT WORKS!

From "Women Out of Prison:"

Since taking office in 1989, District Attorney Charles Hynes remains an active proponent of reentry programs, like Ready, Willing, and Able, as a viable means to reduce recidivism.

“Reentry is the most important criminal justice issue we face,” said Hynes at a Roundtable Reentry meeting last November. “Putting people back into prison is, simply, morally indefensible.”

Unlike studies that show two-thirds of all incarcerated people reentering civilian life return to prison within three years, the success rates coming out of transitional employment programs tell a completely different story.

“When we look at the graduates of our program, we are finding a recidivism rate of less than 4 percent, compared to a national average of 45 percent,” says Lee Alman, Director of Public Affairs at The Doe Fund. “They are staying out of the criminal justice system.”

According to Hynes, joint programs overall that incorporate both treatment and employment for newly released prisoners have the effect of “reducing recidivism to mere fractions.” In 1999, Hynes created the city’s first significant prisoner reentry program, named “Community and Law Enforcement Resources Together,” and partnered with The Doe Fund to provide these employment opportunities.

So far the Brooklyn model seems to be working. As the city has seen a huge rise in drug cases since Paterson’s historic reforms this past April, they have, in Hynes’ words, “hardly made a ripple in Brooklyn,” because of treatment programs like ComALERT that have been in place for several years now.

And the savings have been significant. A study conducted by the Office of National Drug Control Policy in 2004 found that the economic cost of drug abuse nationwide is $180 billion, and roughly 60 percent are crime-related costs (i.e., court costs, law enforcement, etc.). Furthermore, it costs $187 a day to incarcerate someone in the New York penal system. According to Hynes, it costs New York taxpayers $10 a day to put an offender through treatment programs like ComALERT.

THIS IS WHAT IS BEING CUT. Not just a cosmetic makeover of a fancy neighborhood that smells because Levin and Lander want to use discretionary spending on other things. It is a program that reduces recidivism and saves taxpayers money...it, based on District Attorney Hynes' numbers above, represents a net savings of $177 per day per person that goes through this program and does not re-enter prison. That is what good government is all about but it seems it is not a priority right now.

My building's resident Yenta was not satisfied with the answer she got from Lander's office and took the matter up at Community Board 6. She says they basically blew her off. But a reporter was there and came up to talk to her. The result is an article in the Brooklyn Paper:

Park Slope’s main street has morphed into a trash-ridden dump after two city councilmen allowed a street-cleaning contract to expire — a contract that only came about because the Department of Sanitation couldn’t keep the retail strip clean...

That’s because the city’s trash collection schedule is not frequent enough to keep the bustling street clean — and elected officials have chosen not to renew a contract with the Doe Fund, a non-profit that hires homeless men for clean-up crews.

The Department of Homeless Services, in conjunction with the Park Slope Civic Council, first inked the one-year, $40,000 contract in 2008 in order to maintain the street beyond the city’s duties. Now, Councilman Steve Levin (D–Park Slope) and Councilman Brad Lander (D–Park Slope) say the contract, which had been renewed for three years, is no longer cost-effective and sustainable...

Now let me stop Lander and Levin right there. Not cost-effective? Seriously? Do they not know that it saves us all money by helping prevent recidivism? Perhaps DA Hynes needs to sit these two boys down and explain some things to them. So let me be clear. This is the FIRST place where Levin and Lander are misleading...the program is about as cost-effective as you can get and far more so than average for programs funded by discretionary funding. I do know that tough choices need to be made. I hope that their constituents look REALLY carefully at the choices they make this year with their discretionary spending and see if it justifies their claim that the Doe Fund program is not cost-effective enough. Lander and Levin better be ready to defend the cost-effectiveness of each and every program they do fund after that comment. And I wish the NYC news media were better at holding city council members accountable for their discretionary spending...this would be a good opportunity, I would think. Back to the article.

The councilmen later sent a joint statement noting that avoiding teacher layoffs and firehouse closures come before The Doe Fund.

“We have had to close multi-billion dollar budget gaps,” the statement notes

Here is the second misleading statement. I am not aware that firehouses and teachers are paid for through discretionary spending. That strikes me as a straw man argument. Again, I am sure Levin and Lander do have to make tough choices with their discretionary spending, but to imply that firehouses will close and teachers get laid off if they funded the Ready, Willing and Able program is just plain misleading. And the Brooklyn Paper should have caught that, quite honestly.

Again, I do agree with Lander and Levin that perhaps it is time for a 7th Ave. merchant's association to help out. But that attitude assumes that the only benefit is a more pleasant street. That is not true. Councilmember Daniel Dromm knows that the benefits are much more than that and HE has funded the program in his district where Levin and Lander have not. That may be a justifiable decision on Lander and Levin's parts, but it is hard to tell if that is so when their statements to constituents and to the press are misleading on what the benefits of the Doe Fund are and where the money really comes from. You made your choices, Brad and Steve. If they are justifiable then tell us your real reasoning. Don't mislead us.

Return to I Had a Thought

One of the greatest stories ever told: Kaze no Tani no Nasicaa

2011-09-15T23:11:00.000-07:00

One of the most magnificent stories I have ever encountered (presented both as Anime and in much more elaborate form, as Manga) is the story by Hayao Miyazaki of Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind. In many ways it was his rough precursor to his later Princess Mononoke, but in both the original (not dubbed) Anime, and in the Manga he made from it, there is a much richer and more ambiguous plot.

So far I am not aware of any good dubbed versions of Nausicaa. You can find pretty good dubbed versions of most of Miyazaki's movies, but Nausicaa has been an exception. Too much gets changed. Most disturbing is the tendency to get rid of the original music which, Quentin Terantino style, was considered an absolutely crucial part of the original movie.

Let me just say that the Manga has so much more to it. It was so complicated a plot that my mother (despite a Ph.D. in Anthropology) lost track of the political threads. But it is one of the richest, most beautiful and amazing stories ever told. The movie version is excellent, and the animation wonderful if somewhat dated. But the Manga goes so far beyond the plot in the movie it is almost a different story.

This story comes from the imagination of one of Japan's greatest animators, Hayao Miyazaki. Here are three trailers to give you an idea of the anime.

Naushikaa: (Korean trailer but gives the BEST impression of the story)

An adequate English trailer:

The name Nausicaa comes from Homer's Odyssey and was a deliberate break by Miyazaki with Japanese tradition, though he combined the Western myth of Nausicaa with a Japanese myth of a Princess who loved insects.

Japanese Movie trailer, with the amazing original music (with ocarina notes indicated):

The basic plot of both the Anime and Manga (though the Manga takes it so much further) is that humans destroyed the world in seven days of fire...after that remnants of humanity hung on in small pockets of safety while the rest of the world is engulfed in a toxic forest of fungi and insects.

The Manga in particular explores the political outcomes of this as well as the environmental developments, but the bottom line is that the world of humans is failing centuries after the seven days of fire. War leads to the resurrection of some of the old weapons and these threaten to complete the destruction of humanity. Into this end of days scenario comes Nausicaa, a savior who combines berserker rages with scientific discovery with tearful love for all living things. Nausicaa with all her ambiguities becomes a potential savior. In the Anime her being a savior is definitive. In the Manga it is much more ambiguous, but still fascinating.

This is one of the best stories you or your children will ever see. Check out the anime for the simpler version.

Or, if you prefer a far more complex, ambiguous story, I strongly recommend the manga version as one of the best stories ever told bar none...It always brings tears to my eyes throughout the story.

Return to Mole's Book Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

The Middle East: When will it end?

2011-09-08T20:09:00.000-07:00

I am a Jew raised with a gut-level LOVE of Israel

I am also a progressive who detests the political game of the likes of Bush and Netanyahu.

I also detest the terrorist actions of many who think innocents are fair targets.

Israel and Palestine BOTH have the same right to exist. Both Israel and Palestine must be viable, stable, secure and prosperous nations.

We are far from that, though we need to focus on what can bring about a stable, secure, prosperous, EQUAL Israel AND Palestine.

A very thoughtful and unusual piece on the Middle East (no one comes off well, from someone who almost never gets political)

Another, more visual, version derived from Tom Waits' version (with due honor to Waits):

Want to support peace in Israel/Palestine while also getting some really excellent food? Click here...my own local food co-op carries these delicious and peace-inspiring products.

Return to Mole's History Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

2011-09-05T06:10:00.000-07:00

But both parties are not rotten in quite the same way. The Democrats have their share of machine politicians, careerists, corporate bagmen, egomaniacs and kooks. Nothing, however, quite matches the modern GOP.

To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics. To be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like Robert K. Dornan or William E. Dannemeyer. But the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: Steve King, Michele Bachman (now a leading presidential candidate as well), Paul Broun, Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, Louie Gohmert, Allen West. The Congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.

It was this cast of characters and the pernicious ideas they represent that impelled me to end a nearly 30-year career as a professional staff member on Capitol Hill. A couple of months ago, I retired; but I could see as early as last November that the Republican Party would use the debt limit vote, an otherwise routine legislative procedure that has been used 87 times since the end of World War II, in order to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis. Then, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages...

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe.

This tactic of inducing public distrust of government is not only cynical, it is schizophrenic. For people who profess to revere the Constitution, it is strange that they so caustically denigrate the very federal government that is the material expression of the principles embodied in that document. This is not to say that there is not some theoretical limit to the size or intrusiveness of government; I would be the first to say there are such limits, both fiscal and Constitutional. But most Republican officeholders seem strangely uninterested in the effective repeal of Fourth Amendment protections by the Patriot Act, the weakening of habeas corpus and self-incrimination protections in the public hysteria following 9/11 or the unpalatable fact that the United States has the largest incarcerated population of any country on earth. If anything, they would probably opt for more incarcerated persons, as imprisonment is a profit center for the prison privatization industry, which is itself a growth center for political contributions to these same politicians.[1] Instead, they prefer to rail against those government programs that actually help people. And when a program is too popular to attack directly, like Medicare or Social Security, they prefer to undermine it by feigning an agonized concern about the deficit. That concern, as we shall see, is largely fictitious...

This legislative assault is moving in a diametrically opposed direction to 200 years of American history, when the arrow of progress pointed toward more political participation by more citizens. Republicans are among the most shrill in self-righteously lecturing other countries about the wonders of democracy; exporting democracy (albeit at the barrel of a gun) to the Middle East was a signature policy of the Bush administration. But domestically, they don't want those people voting.

You can probably guess who those people are. Above all, anyone not likely to vote Republican. As Sarah Palin would imply, the people who are not Real Americans. Racial minorities. Immigrants. Muslims. Gays. Intellectuals. Basically, anyone who doesn't look, think, or talk like the GOP base. This must account, at least to some degree, for their extraordinarily vitriolic hatred of President Obama. I have joked in the past that the main administration policy that Republicans object to is Obama's policy of being black.[2] Among the GOP base, there is constant harping about somebody else, some "other," who is deliberately, assiduously and with malice aforethought subverting the Good, the True and the Beautiful: Subversives. Commies. Socialists. Ragheads. Secular humanists. Blacks. Fags. Feminazis. The list may change with the political needs of the moment, but they always seem to need a scapegoat to hate and fear.

It is not clear to me how many GOP officeholders believe this reactionary and paranoid claptrap. I would bet that most do not. But they cynically feed the worst instincts of their fearful and angry low-information political base with a nod and a wink...

I do not mean to place too much emphasis on racial animus in the GOP. While it surely exists, it is also a fact that Republicans think that no Democratic president could conceivably be legitimate. Republicans also regarded Bill Clinton as somehow, in some manner, twice fraudulently elected (well do I remember the elaborate conspiracy theories that Republicans traded among themselves). Had it been Hillary Clinton, rather than Barack Obama, who had been elected in 2008, I am certain we would now be hearing, in lieu of the birther myths, conspiracy theories about Vince Foster's alleged murder.

McCloskeys have been Republicans in California since 1859, the year before Lincoln's election. My great grandfather, John Henry McCloskey, orphaned in the great Irish potato famine of 1843, came to California in 1853 as a boy of 16, and joined the party just before the Civil War.

By 1890 he and my grandfather, both farmers, made up two of the twelve members of the Republican Central Committee of Merced County. My father's most memorable expletive came when I was a boy of 10 or 11: "That damn Roosevelt is trying to pack the Supreme Court!"

I registered Republican in 1948 after reaching the age of 21. We were the party of civil rights, of free choice for women and fiscal responsibility. Since Teddy Roosevelt, we had favored environmental protection, and most of all we stood for fiscal responsibility, honesty, ethics and limited government intrusion into our personal lives and choices. We accepted that one the duties of wealth was to pay a higher rate of income tax, and that the estates of the wealthy should contribute to the national treasury in reasonable measure.

I was proud to serve with Republicans like Gerry Ford, the first George Bush and Bob Dole.

In 1994, however, Newt Gingrich brought a new kind of Republicanism to power, and the election of George W. Bush in 2000 has led to wholly new concept of governance. The bureaucracy has mushroomed in size and power. The budget deficits have become astronomical. Our historical separation of church and state has been blurred. We have seen a succession of ethical scandals, congressmen taking bribes, and abuse of power by both the Republican House leadership and the highest appointees of the White House.

The single cardinal principle of political science, that power corrupts, has come to apply not only to Republican leaders like Tom DeLay, Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and John Doolittle, but to a succession of White House officials and appointees. The stench of Jack Abramoff has permeated much of the Washington Republican establishment.

The Justice Department, guardian of of our rule of law, has been compromised. It's third ranking official, a graduate of Pat Robertson's dubious law school, has taken the 5th Amendment.

Men who have never felt the fear of combat, and who largely dodged military service in their youth, have led us into grievous wars in far off places with no thought of the diplomacy, grace and respect for other peoples and their cultures which has been an American trademark for at least the last two thirds of a century. We have lost the respect and affection of most of the world outside our borders. My son, Peter, one of the U.S. prosecutors at The Hague of the war crimes in Serbia and elsewhere, tells me that people of other countries no longer look at the country which countenances torture as a beacon for the world and the rule of law.

Earth Day, that bi-partisan concept of Gaylord Nelson in 1970, has become the focus of almost hatred by today's Republican leadership. Many still argue that global warming is a hoax, and that Bush has been right to demean and suppress the arguments of scientists at the E.P.A., Fish & Wildlife and U.S.Geological Survey.

I say a pox on them and their values.

Until the past few weeks, I had hoped that the party could right itself, returning to the values of the Eisenhowers, Fords and George H. W. Bush.

What finally turned me to despair, however, was listening to the reports, or watching on C-Span, a whole series of congressional oversight hearings on C-Span, held by old friends and colleagues like Pat Leahy, Henry Waxman, Norm Dicks, Nick Rahall, Danny Akaka and others, trying to learn the truth on the misdeeds and incompetence of the Bush Administration. Time after time I saw Republican Members of the House and Senate. speak out in scorn or derision about these exercises of Congress oversight responsibility being "witch-hunts" or partisan attempts to distort the actions of people like the head of the General Service Administration and the top political appointees in the Justice and Interior Departments. Disagreement turned into disgust.

I finally concluded that it was a fraud for me to remain a member of this modern Republican Party, that there were only a few like Chuck Hegel, Jack Warner, Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins I could respect.

Two of the best, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and Jim Leach of Iowa, after years of battling for balance and sanity, were defeated last November, and it seems that every Republican presidential candidate is now vying for the support of the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells rather than talking about a return to the values of the party I joined nearly 59 years ago. My favorite spokesmen have beome Senators Jim Webb and Barack Obama.

And so it was, that while at the Woodland courthouse the other day, passing by the registrar's office, I filled out the form to re-register as a Democrat.

The issues Helen (McCloskey) and I care about most, public financing of elections, a reliable paper ballot trail, independent re-districting to replace gerrymandering, the right of a woman to choose not to bring a child into the world, a reversal of the old Proposition 13 and term limits which have so hurt California's once superb education system and the competence of our Legislature, are now almost universally opposed by California's elected Republicans, and the occasional attempts at reform by our Governor are looked on with grim disdain by most of them.

From Helen's and my standpoint, being farmers in Yolo County gives us the opportunity to work for purposes which were once Republican, but can no longer be found at Republican conventions and discussions.

I hope this answers your questions about the party and a government I have served in either civil or military service under ten presidents, five Republican and five Democrat ... I doubt it will be of much interest other than to our friends, but it has been a decision not easily taken.

Respectfully,
Pete McCloskey

Book Review: "Dream in Color", by Loretta and Linda Sanchez

2011-08-30T18:18:00.001-07:00

When I was growing up, one of my dad's favorite sayings was "Don't let anybody ever tell you you're a dumb Mexican."

Our mom definitely taught us that there are times when we must stand up for our convictions and not back down.

Loretta Sanchez became my hero when she defeated the disgusting right wing extremist Bob Dornan in an upset victory in Orange County, California. Several years later, her sister Linda Sanchez was elected to a nearby district and they became the first ever sisters to serve in Congress.

As the children of Mexican immigrants, their story is obviously one of overcoming great odds and prejudice. But they have overcome those odds with grace, intelligence and great skill.

In 2008 Loretta and Linda (along with Richard Buskin) published their story, a book called Dream in Color.

I love the title as much as I love the Sanchez sisters. And I always meant to buy the book. But I tend to read either ancient history or pure escapist science fiction or fantasy. The stupid turn to the discredited and failed right wing Republican agenda in the 2010 midterm election was what made me finally buy the book, because I knew it would be an inspiring story, and I needed an inspiring story. And I was not wrong in my expectation.

Many people work hard to conceal their background, conforming or projecting themselves in ways that are deemed socially acceptable, politically correct, physically desirable, or otherwise in vogue. And women and minorities are often more prone to this, partly because they're taught to aspire to some mythical ideal. Not us.

Growing up in a traditional Mexican family, we learned about the rich cultural values of our heritage, and as Latinas in Congress we draw daily strength from the lessons that our parents instilled in us. One of the strongest examples of such a lesson is the way Mom stood her ground when told by one of our grade school teachers that we should speak only English at home. She knew that being bilingual was an asset, and we have both repeatedly reaped the benefits of her foresight...

In most of the world being bi-, tri- or multi-lingual is not just an asset, it is a requirement. In Europe most people speak three or more languages. In Japan and India at least two. These are the countries America COMPETES with and our failure to recognize the need to speak multiple languages is one of several reasons (all fueled by right wing stupidity) that America is slowly, but surely, losing its competitive edge.

As for hiding one's ethnic identity, currently living in NYC where almost every ethic group has its own parade it amazes me that America would EVER want to abandon or deny its rich, amazing ethnic and immigrant past and present. America is an immigrant nation and has been from day one. And that has been one of our greatest strengths. Yet Republican America wants to DENY that strong, amazing, idealistic immigrant past. I am descended from German refugees from economic and political problems in the wake of the 1848 Revolutions. And I am descended from Jewish refugees from pogroms. I am interested in, shaped by and proud of those roots. Why would I expect Mexican-Americans to be any less interested in, shaped by or proud of THEIR roots?

Dream in Color is the story of these daughters of Mexican immigrants (that word, "immigrant" that is supposed to be so horrible, but in reality describes all of our ancestries unless you happen to be pure Native American) who rose from tough, though not poverty, circumstances to become Congresswomen. What most right wingers could never, NEVER admit, is that in many ways this book is the ultimate story of the American Dream. The American Dream was, is and always will be the story of the immigrant family that came to America with nothing but dreamed big, worked hard, and achieved great things. THAT is the American dream and the Honorable Sanchez sisters are a perfect example of that dream.

I grew up in California and always found it somewhat amusing and disturbing that people saw my state as so liberal. I lived in Los Angeles where the stereotype largely held, but neighboring Orange County was one of the most conservative districts in the nation and was represented by right wing crazies like Bob Dornan, who wound up so batshit crazy even Newt Gingrich hesitated to openly support him for awhile.

So when, in 1996, a young woman named Loretta Sanchez had the huevos to run against Bob Dornan, I eagerly donated to her campaign, though I had little hope she could pull it off. But that donation was one of my most enthusiastic donations.

Loretta's reason for running, which I didn't know until reading Dream in Color, was basically because when she was pushing hard for improved education in her district, her Congressman Bob Dornan blew her off.

I next tried to make an appointment to see my Congress member, Bob Dornan, but he refused to meet with me. If I had wanted to meet with him about a defense project, he would have been all over it, but as far as I could tell, education held no interest for him. So, at that point, I went home and said, "I'm going to run for Congress..."

The first person I called was mu mom. When I told her what I wanted to do, she said, "Okay, we can do that..."

The fight was hard and Bob Dornan, a truely miserable human being in my opinion, was as nasty as could be, demonstrating just what true Republican "values" are these days.

When I won the pirmary...no one even knew who I was...I'd appeared out of nowhere to beat the candidates and now I was the opponent to Bob Dornan. Well, when he found out who I was he described me as a dream candidate to run against. "She can't beat me," he told the Orange County newspaper, the OC Weekly. "Bob Dornan [I guess like Bob Dole Dornan refers to himself in the third person] is a father of five, grandfather of ten, military man, been married forty-one years. She has no kids, no military, no track record. I win."

WRONG.

Dismissing me resulted in his defeat. And when we had a rematch two years later, Dornan turned extremely nasty.

To my utter astonishment, moderate Democrat (former moderate Republican) Loretta Sanchez beat right wing extremist Bob Dornan. Bob Dornan, who would make today's Teabaggers (remember, THEY came up with that term!) like Carl Paladino seem reasonable, was ousted by an upstart Latina. Dornan spent the next year showing up to Congress anyway, claiming Loretta hadn't really won. He demanded a rematch two years later and was soundly defeated by the now incumbent Loretta Sanchez. I vaguely remember getting drunk in celebration of Loretta's second, absolutely definitive, win. I was immensely proud to have donated to Loretta's first two runs for Congress. The only reason I have not donated since is because she doesn't need my money and other great candidates do.

Within her first year in Congress, Loretta Sanchez proved her worth, despite being resented by many Republicans and despite being a freshman, in the passage of changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (that book that features so prominently in the movie "A Few Good Men) to address the problem of rape of women in military service. In many ways the Uniform Code of Military Justice had failed to keep up with changes in civilian law regarding rape and so wound up protecting rapists and victimizing rape victims. Loretta Sanchez saw this problem for women in the military and sought to change it. She was, of course, solidly opposed by the good-old-boys network of the military and initially by the good-old-boys network of Congress. But she refused to let what was clearly an important issue get pushed aside, and to give credit where credit is due, she was helped by a Republican, John McHugh. Now I never really liked McHugh, but in this case he did the right thing, even to the point, according to Loretta Sanchez, of standing up to fellow Republican Duncan Hunter who wanted to let Loretta's bill die. John McHugh decided Loretta's bill was worth supporting and he went the extra mile for it. Together Sanchez and McHugh, against the inertia of the military, revised the military law codes to better handle rape cases. This all happened, from start to finish, within Loretta's first two years in Congress while Bob Dornan was still showing up and claiming he still represented the district.

I think this experience shaped Loretta Sachez's entire approach towards Congress. Loretta Sanchez is a Blue Dog Dem, which usually means bad things in my book, but Loretta represents a relatively conservative district and, though a Blue Dog, votes well and stands up on fights few other Dems stand up on. So I have always liked her. And her unconventional image, drawn from her Hispanic, hard working, immigrant background, has always endeared her to me.

As a Blue Dog, Loretta tends to be one of those compromisers in Congress that many progressives hate. But in judging Loretta one has to take into account her district (which is conservative) and her experience with Republican John McHugh, where through patience and determination she was able to find common ground and compromise and so pass a much needed bill. She learned the lesson then and there that compromise was possible and could accomplish important things. I think she has stuck to that view, though she has also never been one of the more conservative members of the Blue Dogs. I feel she remains true to progressive ideals though she also maintains a cooperative stance with conservatives. If all Blue Dogs were like Loretta Sanchez, we'd be much better off both as a party and as a country.

Loretta also, like Arianna Huffington, left the Republican party because of the realization that the Republicans did NOT represent her true values...didn't even represent the values they claimed to represent. Loretta Sanchez grew up in a family where one parent was a Democrat and one a Republican, so the choice between the two seemed a reasonable one...at first:

Whereas Mom was a compassionate Democrat, Dad ended up running his own business and reading the libertarian Orange County Register, so he was very antitax and pro-Republican. Neither of them voted back then...they didn't become US citizens until [1996]. By then, like me, Dad had converted from Republican to Democrat...

I remained registered as a Republican and never really thought about it much. That was, until one night when I was flicking through the TV channels at home and just happened to catch Pat Buchanan making an inflammatory speech, calling for an end to immigrants coming to America. I was so angry that a high-profile Republican was allowed to spew that kind of hatred on national television, the very next day I registered as a Democrat.

When Loretta's younger sister, Linda, ran for Congress in 2003, I considered it a given I would donate. If she was HALF as kick ass as Loretta, it was worth supporting her. And she won, making Loretta and Linda Sanchez not only rare in Congress as Latinas (I personally know and like Nydia Velasquez, one of the other rare Latinas in Congress), but literally unique as being the first and so far ONLY sisters to serve in Congress.

Linda Sanchez, partly because she represents a solidly Democratic district and partly because of her own personality, is a more liberal Democrat than her sister. Linda, in fact, is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus while Loretta is a member of the Blue Dog Caucus. Loretta grew up with more to prove, as an older sibling, and I think it is reflected in her more conservative attitude, shaped by a greater need for financial security than social activism. They both make clear that the older siblings had a rougher time and were raised with a more traditional philosophy, but by the time Linda was growing up this was somewhat relaxed and Linda, from an early age, recognized that there were inequities in the world and that becoming a lawyer was a path towards solving those inequities. She was encouraged to become a lawyer by her older sister, but Loretta had imagined Linda using her law degree more practically, getting a higher paying job. Instead, Linda went into labor law and became a union organizer. And she was kick ass in pushing for labor reforms. When a new Congressional district was created in Southern California, Linda decided to run for it...and won. She started as the longshot, as a young Latina, but when she proved so effective that she rapidly became the frontrunner, she became the target for attacks by all the other campaigns in the primary. I get the feeling from her description in the book that this may have been one of the toughest things she had faced: a concerted attack from several other fellow Democrats.

And yet she won. I think this shows the strength of the Sanchez family, that they could turn not just one, but TWO long-shot runs for office into wins.

Like Loretta, Linda Sanchez also proved her worth within the first year, though in a more locally focused way.

One of the smaller cities I represent desperately needed funding to renovate and repave its major street, which was old and falling into disrepair. For ten years the city had been begging its former congressman to try to help get federal funds for the roadwork, but he never secured any real funding for the project. Well, when the time came, and [Congressman] Obey asked for projects, that was one of the projects I submitted. It made it into the omnibus bill, and the omnibus bill passed. That meant that after being in Congress for only six weeks I had gotten it the funding! And wheras before the city had been skeptical, I now had a victory to show them, and it was grateful.

And then, of course, Linda had to face the same obstacles that Loretta had to face as a rare Latina in Congress as well as a freshman. She relates how she frequently felt like asking people (I assume she never actually did!):

Excuse me, but did you just blow me off because I'm a woman, because I'm Hispanic, or because I'm young? Could you let me know?

Linda Sanchez has some of the best lines in the book, the lines that make me think, "YES! That is how I always wanted to say it!" For example:

Sometimes I've encountered Republicans who seem to believe that people are poor because they choose to be poor, and that this wouldn't be the case if they just worked harder. Well, that isn't true. A lot of people start with advantages that they don't even consider to be advantages and I always point this out when I get into fights...

I believe there are two kinds of people in this life. There are those who succeed and attribute all the success to themselves--"I've got mine, you guys have to get yours." And then there are those who succeed and not only credit the teachers who cared, the mentors who helped them, the bosses who took them under their wing, and the parents who pushed them to do well, but also the resolve to help the next group of people who are struggling. For the life of me, I don't understand those who fall into the former category, because the belief that they did it all on their own is just nonsense.

And right there a major FALSE Republican talking point falls by the wayside.

Dream in Color is interesting on several levels. It may not be high literature in style, but it is a very readable, straightforward description of what life is like for Latinas in America and what people can accomplish if they work REALLY hard and take calculated risks. It also provides very interesting perspectives on how Congress works...and doesn't always work. It also provides a much needed counterpoint to the hostile and nasty Republican anti-immigrant rhetoric we hear all too much, instilling a respect for hard working immigrants of ALL ethnicities.

Overall Dream in Color is a quick read, and, though perhaps not immensely profound, is very inspiring, particularly now when Democrats seem a tad demoralized.

Return to Mole's Book Page.

Return to I Had a Thought

What about those Bed Bugs!

2011-08-29T13:57:00.001-07:00

About 5 years ago I wrote an article about a relatively new but spreading problem: bed bugs. Since I wrote that the problem has gotten bad enough that it has sparked a whole industry of detection and extermination of bed bugs and has led to hundreds of articles all over the mainstream media reporting on this growing problem. But this has led to misunderstandings and some shady businesses as well. This article is designed to help you avoid bedbugs if possible and get rid of them if you do get them.

Last summer the building I live in had a bed bug scare. Turns out only one apartment ever had them, but had the building's managing board not acted rapidly it would have spread. As it was the managing board spent tens of thousands of dollars to pinpoint possibly affected apartments and proactively treat them. During that time we became quite informed about the pests. The bad news is the problem continues to spread and a lot of what is being done about it is the wrong approach. The good news is there are some very simple things you can do that will prevent them from coming into your living space.

From the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene website:

Bed bugs are small insects that feed on the blood of mammals and birds. Adult bed bugs are oval, wingless and rusty red colored, and have flat bodies, antennae and small eyes. They are visible to the naked eye, but often hide in cracks and crevices. When bed bugs feed, their bodies swell and become a brighter red. In homes, bed bugs feed primarily on the blood of humans, usually at night when people are sleeping...

Typically, the bite is painless and rarely awakens a sleeping person. However, it can produce large, itchy welts on the skin. Welts from bed bug bites do not have a red spot in the center--those welts are more characteristic of flea bites...

Although bed bugs may be a nuisance to people, they are not known to spread disease.

Dealing with Mold and Mildew in Your Home

2011-08-29T13:44:00.000-07:00

This is particularly critical after Hurricane Irene, as I can attest with added moisture in my apartment.

My apartment building, including my own apartment, has had ongoing moisture problems, including leaks, floods, and general humidity. This brings mold and mildew...we have even had areas with that deadly black mold that can ruin a home if you don't catch it early enough.

I also want to draw your attention to my earlier article regarding the role of mold and mildew in the allergy and asthma epidemic. Keeping your home free of mold and mildew can reduce (not eliminate) your allergy, asthma and other respiratory problems. I know I used to get a respiratory infection every cold season that wouldn't go away. Once my building solved the leak and moisture problems and I got on top of cleaning and preventing mold, my respiratory problems largely went away.

So over the years I have spent a fair amount of time battling mold and mildew. I would like to pass along the more successful treatments I have found.

MOISTURE:

Mold and mildew grows where moisture collects. Areas that get damp are likely to get mold. Areas where dampness is chronic, mold will take strong hold and may be hard to get rid of. These are the conditions, particularly within walls, that can cause the deadly black mold that has closed down entire buildings in worst case scenarios.

If you see wet areas, look for leaks and get them fixed. Particularly near walls because moisture within walls are the hardest to deal with and the most common source of mold infestations. If there is a wet area, treat it for mold ASAP...see below for ways to kill and prevent mold. Apply where you can when you see a damp area. Note that bleach is what I list below as the most effective mold killer...be careful using this on carpets or fabric since it can damage the color and the fabric.

Dehumidifiers can be useful when moisture has built up. Sometimes, particularly in humid weather, moisture just stays put for days or weeks, which is a guaranteed mold environment. A dehumidifier can help. These are noisy, energy hogs, generate tons of heat, and need frequent emptying. But sometimes they are what you need to do the job. We have only had to use them when there was like a foot of water in our apartment, ruining our floors, during humid weather. But my building uses them in a common carpeted area to deal with moisture and they definitely help. Here's one that is Energy Star Rated, so that would limit the energy use, something you will appreciate if you need to use it for any length of time:

Deal with leaks and dry out damp spots...these are the first line of defense against mold and mildew. But you can also reduce the chances of mold growing by one simple treatment.

PREVENTING MOLD:

There is a safe, simple product that helps prevent mold and mildew. Many products make this claim, but this is the ONLY one I have found that seems to actually help. It is based on sodium carbonate, a simple compound not to be confused with sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) which is a related but different compound. Sodium Carbonate (probably the carbonate itself) keeps the mold from being able to germinate and grow. If not washed off it can be effective for weeks. But even if used on shower surfaces it helps reduce mildew growth when used after some bleach treatment (see below under killing mold).

If you can get sodium carbonate itself, you can mix your own solution (see how on How.com).

But I found a product I find very effective where everything is pre-mixed: Concrobium Mold Control. Of course this is a more pricey option than mixing your own as described in the How.com link above, but it is easier and I know it works.

Apply this from time to time anywhere that is damp or where you have seen mold before. When mold grows this won't work well alone. Use it AFTER you kill mold as indicated below.

KILLING MOLD:

X-14 Professional Instant Mildew Stain Remover is the most effective treatment for killing mold and mildew that has gotten established. This is nasty, bleach-based stuff. But it works!

Generally when I see any mold or mildew on a surface, I hit it with this, let it sit a few minutes, then wipe it off. In general this single treatment gets rid of it. Sometimes a second, longer treatment is needed. NO OTHER CLEANER I have tried works as well as this one for killing mold.

On a more routine level, when the weather is hot and humid and I know of surfaces that we get mold or mildew on, I do a preventative treatment with a plain bleach solution. Take regular laundry bleach, dilute around 1:5 to 1:10 in a spray bottle (be careful what you use...do not reuse a spray bottle that had previously held a non-bleach based cleaner!). Then just spray this on a site you are concerned about, let sit a few minutes, then wipe off. This is far cheaper than the X-14 Professional Instant Mildew Stain Remover. It doesn't work as well once mold or mildew gets established, but it can help prevent mold or clean up the very first growth. Usually I use a more gentle cleaner, like are available through Seventh Generation/Gaiam.com.

These gentler cleaners do basic cleaning on all surfaces, get grease, smell better and are safer for kids and pets.

But when it comes to getting mold and mildew, I break out the bleach or the X-14 Professional Instant Mildew Stain Remover because they work!

After you have used one of these treatments to kill mold or mildew and have washed it away, you can increase the time before mold or mildew comes back by applying Concrobium Mold Control or homemade sodium carbonate solutions (not as effective, I think, but cheaper) and letting it sit. Together these treatments are very effective. You still have to repeat from time to time (at least once a year when things get hot and humid, often every month or so in humid weather), but in combination these work better than anything else.

GO HERE FOR ALLERGY TREATMENT NEEDS.

Return to the Health and Wellness Blog

Return to I Had a Thought

Gowanus Canal Luxury

2011-08-28T13:11:00.000-07:00

Gowanus Canal SuperFUNd Site

2011-08-28T13:07:00.001-07:00

Honoring the First Black Nobel Prize Winner: Ralph Bunche

2011-06-02T18:44:00.000-07:00

When I was a young child, my mother had an office in the Antro department at UCLA. Her office was in Bunche Hall, a building I always knew as "the waffle" because of its appearance at a distance. Outside the building is kind of bland: rectangular with regularly spaced square windows (hence our seeing it as "the waffle" as kids...and I admit even today). The interior courtyard contains lush plants rising up through the center of the building...something I fondly remembered in dreams for many years before rediscovering the building that contained it. I remember wondering for years if that memory of plants growing inside a building (really in a courtyard) was real or a kid's imagination. Nearby is the UCLA sculpture garden where my brother and I played while my mother worked back in those days where leaving kids alone to play was common.

Memories of Bunche Hall and the sculpture garden have always remained with me. Now, every other year, when my field has an international conference at UCLA, I stay in the UCLA guest house right across the street from these memories so I can reconnect with my earliest association with the place. I have many other associations with UCLA (including getting my doctorate there) but those earliest days of "the waffle" and rolling down the hill of the sculpture garden are the root of my love for the place.

All those years I barely knew who Bunche Hall was named after. Barely even thought of it. These days places are often named for donors, not people of genuine accomplishment. So I never really wondered who was the Bunche that "the waffle" was named after.

Ralph Bunche was, I learned far more recently, one amazing person. In the days when separate but equal was still accepted in the United States, Ralph Bunche mediated the first peace between Israel and the Arab nations, was the first black person to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and received the Medal of Freedom from President John F. Kennedy. All before Jim Crow was officially dead.

Here is the biography of Ralph Bunche on the Nobel Prize website.

He won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work negotiating peace in the Middle East in the late 1940's. After the assassination of the chief UN negotiator, Folke Bernadotte, by the radical (and rather disgusting) Jewish militant group Lehi, Ralph Bunche became the chief UN negotiator to end the war that followed the withdrawal of the British from Palestine/Israel. His efforts brought about the 1949 Armistice Agreements. Israeli representative Moshe Dayan remembers Ralph Bunche making commemorative plates for each negotiator long before the final agreement was reached. Taken aback by this optimism, Moshe Dayan asked what Bunche would have done had the talks fallen apart. Ralph Bunche replied, "I'd have broken the plates over your damn heads."

Later Bunche also served as mediator in conflicts in the Congo, Yemen, Kashmir, and Cyprus.

All while Jim Crow was alive and well in the United States. It is hard for me to imagine that the United States clung so tightly to racism at a time when someone like Ralph Bunche was winning the Nobel Peace prize for such a public and difficult endeavor.

Here is Bunche's acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize:

To be honored by one's fellow men is a rich and pleasant experience. But to receive the uniquely high honor here bestowed today, because of the world view of Alfred Nobel long ago, is an overwhelming experience. To the President and members of the Nobel Committee I may say of their action, which at this hour finds its culmination, only that I am appreciative beyond the puny power of words to convey. I am inspired by your confidence.

I am not unaware, of course, of the special and broad significance of this award - far transcending its importance or significance to me as an individual - in an imperfect and restive World in which inequalities among peoples, racial and religious bigotries, prejudices and taboos are endemic and stubbornly persistent. From this northern land has come a vibrant note of hope and inspiration for vast millions of people whose bitter experience has impressed upon them that color and inequality are inexorably concomitant.

There are many who figuratively stand beside me today and who are also honored here. I am but one of many cogs in the United Nations, the greatest peace organization ever dedicated to the salvation of mankind's future on earth. It is, indeed, itself an honor to be enabled to practise the arts of peace under the aegis of the United Nations.

As I now stand before you, I cannot help but reflect on the never-failing support and encouragement afforded me, during my difficult assignment in the Near East, by Trygve Lie:, and by his Executive Assistant, Andrew Cordier. Nor can I forget any of the more than 700 valiant men and women of the United Nations Palestine Mission who loyally served with Count Bernadotte and me, who were devoted servants of the cause of peace, and without whose tireless and fearless assistance our mission must surely have failed. At this moment, too, I recall, all too vividly and sorrowfully, that ten members of that mission gave their lives in the noble cause of peace-making.

But above all, there was my treasured friend and former chief, Count Folke Bernadotte, who made the supreme sacrifice to the end that Arabs and Jews should be returned to the ways of peace. Scandinavia, and the peaceloving world at large, may long revere his memory, as I shall do, as shall all of those who participated in the Palestine peace effort under his inspiring command.

In a dark and perilous hour of human history, when the future of all mankind hangs fatefully in the balance, it is of special symbolic significance that in Norway, this traditionally peace-loving nation, and among such friendly and kindly people of great good-will, this ceremony should be held for the exclusive purpose of paying high tribute to the sacred cause of peace on earth, good-will among men.

May there be freedom, equality and brotherhood among all men. May there be morality in the relations among nations. May there be, in our time, at long last, a world at peace in which we, the people, may for once begin to make full use of the great good that is in us.

From Les Prix Nobel en 1950, Editor Arne Holmberg, [Nobel Foundation], Stockholm, 1951

It was ten years before another black person won a Nobel Prize and 43 years before a black woman won a Nobel Prize.

A somewhat bland, but informative, video about Ralph Bunche:

Part 1:

Part 2:

It is a shame that so few people know about this remarkable man. Now I will remember him each time I look up at "the waffle" at UCLA as I walk towards the sculpture garden. It is hard for me to imagine how it felt to be right there at the center of history as a black American in 1950.

Brooklyn Primary Election 2011: First Round of Endorsements

2011-05-27T14:53:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 is the primary election for Civil Court judge in Brooklyn. This is an election that will be extremely low turnout, yet actually the quality of our judges is something that is extremely important. If you or someone you know has to go before a judge, you damned well want that judge to be good, and yet most people ignore these races. I make it a point to get involved, learn about the candidates, and help some good candidates. Remember, a number of Brooklyn judges have been indicted and even convicted of corruption. The more people pay attention to these low turnout elections, the more likely we will have GOOD judges and avoid having judicial seats be nothing more than a political plum awarded by the corrupt Vito Lopez machine.

I want to report on two endorsement meetings that have been held by reform organizations in Brooklyn: the 52nd Assembly District County Committee and Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats.

Within Brooklyn there is one district, the 52nd Assembly district, that is best known as a "reform" district opposed to the corruption of Vito Lopez. The reformers don't always agree, but as a whole the district is one of the strongest voices for reform. This year the two district leaders from the 52nd Assembly district, Chris Owens and Jo Anne Simon, organized a 52nd Assembly District Democratic County Committee forum to help choose the best judicial candidates to support. The forum covered Civil Court Judge (2 seats open, determined by primary election on September 13) and Supreme Court (6 seats open, determined by the county Judicial Committee).

Most candidates for these seats turned in detailed questionnaires developed by District Leaders Chris Owens and Jo Anne Simon. These questionnaires were available in three notebooks circulating at the forum for anyone to read, and are available for all voters on Chris Owens' website. I urge all Brooklyn voters to read the questionnaires for Civil Court judge before voting in September. And anyone who wants to keep an eye on the Vito Lopez dominated Judicial Committee should read the Supreme Court questionnaires as well. The questionnaires include things like judicial philosophy, background, key cases judged, cases overturned or upheld by appellate courts, etc. Good info!

Candidates also gave presentations and faced questions by county committee members as well as other attendees. Joy and I were there and everyone was very carefully considering who to endorse. Most candidates came off well in their presentations, though styles varied quite a bit. I think most people felt the candidate who came off least well particularly under questioning was Shawndya Simpson. She won major points for questions on LGBT issues, but lost points on just about everything else. She also is well known as being a Vito Lopez picked candidate which also lost her points.

My impression was that ALL of the candidates were at least adequately qualified. None came off terribly in either their questionnaire or their presentations. Some did come off much better than others, though.

Here are the suggested endorsements of the 52nd Assembly District Democratic County Committee members for consideration by their District Leaders (fine print and caveat to follow in a statement by District Leader Chris Owens).

Suggested Endorsements for CIVIL COURT JUDGE (2 seats)
Cheryl Gonzalez, Peter Sweeney (incumbent)

I should note that Cheryl Gonzalez came off particularly well and most people were quite impressed with her. I think the care she takes preparing for cases was a particularly good point in her favor. Her questionnaire indicated past "qualified" ratings by several screening committees in past years. Her main experience is in housing court and as an arbitrator in small claims court. She is a member of the Women in Prison committee of the National Assn. of Women Judges.

Again, note that civil court judge will ultimately be determined by YOU the voter, so please take note of these recommendations and again, please read the questionnaires on Chris Owen's website to better inform your decision.

Suggested Endorsements for SUPREME COURT JUDGE (6 seats)
Rachel Amy Adams, Betsy Barros (incumbent), David Friedman (incumbent), Bernard Graham, Lawrence Knipel (incumbent), Betty Williams

I should note that Betty Williams came off particularly well. David Friedman came off exceptionally scholarly. Interestingly Peter Sweeney is running for both seats (not uncommon) and the County Committee members endorsed him for Civil Court (where he is an incumbent) but not for Supreme Court, even though he is acting Supreme right now. I am not clear on why except some people seemed wary of his running for two seats (note: at least one other candidate was doing the same and it is not unusual).

Again let me note that Supreme Court judges are not elected so this information is for the benefit of Judicial Committee members and for those keeping an eye on the the courts.

Here is Chris Owens' statement on the endorsement meeting:

These results are not final until all of the judicial screening panel ratings are completed and JoAnne and I have reviewed those results. Each of the top votegetters must receive a rating of Satisfactory or better from two critical panels in order to formally receive the "recommendation" of the County Committee.

We were happy with the level of participation (72 ballots cast of just over 400 County Committee members) since it was a representative sample, though there should have been even more County Committee members represented. Our outreach was limited and we will do better next time.

Most candidates submitted questionnaires, which was gratifying and helpful. We will keep them posted for the public to review on an ongoing basis.

To the extent that the incumbent judges seeking re-election may all be recommended, we feel that the voters took their recommendations seriously and recognized quality service. And, equally important, the voters did not automatically provide support to candidates with the most seniority on the bench, nor did they ignore the enduring need for greater diversity -- particularly on the Supreme Court.

Now on to the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats (CBID). This club is one of the strongest voices in the reform movement and takes its role as a reform club very seriously.

Fewer candidates came to CBID than to the 52nd County Committee Forum and CBID did not do a questionnaire this year. CBID only endorsed for the two Civil Court seats since Supreme is not an elected position. Some questioned the validity of making an endorsement on what mainly amounted to the candidates' presentations. Some of us had been at the 52nd County Committee Forum and so could give further details based on that event. There was also some input from lawyers familiar with some of the candidates.

CBID's endorsements:

Endorsements for CIVIL COURT JUDGE (2 seats)
Cheryl Gonzalez, Peter Sweeney (incumbent)

Same as the 52nd. In some ways this is not surprising given the overlap of participants. However, the discussion was also enlightening and I think the outcome not a forgone conclusion. Peter Sweeney claims to be unopposed and came off very well. Most input on this year's incumbents is that they are all qualified and good judges, including Sweeney. Two people I know who very much dislike Sweeney's original patron, John O'Hara, nevertheless felt Sweeney is good.

Again Cheryl Gonzalez came off good, though I felt she came off better at the 52nd Forum. Her excellent record in housing court was cited, including the fact that she was one of the few housing court judges who treated lawyers representing tenants with respect. Her main rival for the spot, Lorna McAllister, did not come off nearly as well at either forum. Impressions of Lorna McAllister ranged from very negative (links to the machine through her husband, District Leader Jesse Hamilton, being cited as her only qualification) to more forgiving. I think Lorna basically is okay, probably qualified, but far less experienced and impressive than Cheryl Gonzalez. With less of a record to judge her on, only a handful of people spoke on Lorna's behalf. I am told people start running for these judicial seats before they are ready mainly to get their names out. It may be that is what Lorna is doing. Regardless, Cheryl Gonzalez was the favorite.

Above all else I really urge voters not to ignore this one. Brooklyn needs more scrutiny of their judges and the process by which they become judges. I hope these endorsements and the questionnaires on Chris Owens' website will help people judge the judges and elect better ones.

Book Review: Dream in Color, by the Honorable Loretta and Linda Sanchez

2010-11-22T05:13:00.000-08:00

When I was growing up, one of my dad's favorite sayings was "Don't let anybody ever tell you you're a dumb Mexican."

Our mom definitely taught us that there are times when we must stand up for our convictions and not back down.

Loretta Sanchez became my hero when she defeated the disgusting right wing extremist Bob Dornan in an upset victory in Orange County, California. Several years later, her sister Linda Sanchez was elected to a nearby district and they became the first ever sisters to serve in Congress.

As the children of Mexican immigrants, their story is obviously one of overcoming great odds and prejudice. But they have overcome those odds with grace, intelligence and great skill.

In 2008 Loretta and Linda (along with Richard Buskin) published their story, a book called Dream in Color. I love the title as much as I love the Sanchez sisters. And I always meant to buy the book. But I tend to read either ancient history or pure escapist science fiction or fantasy. The stupid turn to the discredited and failed right wing Republican agenda in the 2010 midterm election was what made me finally buy the book, because I knew it would be an inspiring story, and I needed an inspiring story. And I was not wrong in my expectation.

Many people work hard to conceal their background, conforming or projecting themselves in ways that are deemed socially acceptable, politically correct, physically desirable, or otherwise in vogue. And women and minorities are often more prone to this, partly because they're taught to aspire to some mythical ideal. Not us.

Growing up in a traditional Mexican family, we learned about the rich cultural values of our heritage, and as Latinas in Congress we draw daily strength from the lessons that our parents instilled in us. One of the strongest examples of such a lesson is the way Mom stood her ground when told by one of our grade school teachers that we should speak only English at home. She knew that being bilingual was an asset, and we have both repeatedly reaped the benefits of her foresight...

In most of the world being bi-, tri- or multi-lingual is not just an asset, it is a requirement. In Europe most people speak three or more languages. In Japan and India at least two. These are the countries America COMPETES with and our failure to recognize the need to speak multiple languages is one of several reasons (all fueled by right wing stupidity) that America is slowly, but surely, losing its competitive edge.

As for hiding one's ethnic identity, currently living in NYC where almost every ethic group has its own parade it amazes me that America would EVER want to abandon or deny its rich, amazing ethic and immigrant past and present. We are an immigrant nation and have been from day one. And that has been one of our greatest strengths. Yet Republican America wants to DENY that strong, amazing, idealistic immigrant past. I am descended from German refugees from economic and political problems in the wake of the 1848 Revolutions. And I am descended from Jewish refugees from pogroms. I am interested in, shaped by and proud of those roots. Why would I expect Mexican-Americans to be any less interested in, shaped by or proud of THEIR roots?

Dream in Color is the story of these daughters of Mexican immigrants (that word, "immigrant" that is supposed to be so horrible, but in reality describes all of our ancestries unless you happen to be pure Native American) who rose from tough, though not poverty, circumstances to become Congresswomen. What most right wingers could never, NEVER admit, is that in many ways this book is the ultimate story of the American Dream. The American Dream was, is and always will be the story of the immigrant family that came to America with nothing but dreamed big, worked hard, and achieved great things. THAT is the American dream and the Honorable Sanchez sisters are a perfect example of that dream.

I grew up in California and always found it somewhat amusing and disturbing that people saw my state as so liberal. I lived in Los Angeles where the stereotype largely held, but neighboring Orange County was one of the most conservative districts in the nation and was represented by right wing crazies like Bob Dornan, who wound up so batshit crazy even Newt Gingrich hesitated to openly support him for awhile.

So when, in 1996, a young woman named Loretta Sanchez had the huevos to run against Bob Dornan, I eagerly donated to her campaign, though I had little hope she could pull it off. But that donation was one of my most enthusiastic donations.

Loretta's reason for running, which I didn't know until reading Dream in Color, was basically because when she was pushing hard for improved education in her district, her Congressman Bob Dornan blew her off.

I next tried to make an appointment to see my Congress member, Bob Dornan, but he refused to meet with me. If I had wanted to meet with him about a defense project, he would have been all over it, but as far as I could tell, education held no interest for him. So, at that point, I went home and said, "I'm going to run for Congress..."

The first person I called was mu mom. When I told her what I wanted to do, she said, "Okay, we can do that..."

The fight was hard and Bob Dornan, a truely miserable human being in my opinion, was as nasty as could be, demonstrating just what true Republican "values" are these days.

When I won the pirmary...no one even knew who I was...I'd appeared out of nowhere to beat the candidates and now I was the opponent to Bob Dornan. Well, when he found out who I was he described me as a dream candidate to run against. "She can't beat me," he told the Orange County newspaper, the
OC Weekly
. "Bob Dornan [I guess like Bob Dole Dornan refers to himself in the third person] is a father of five, grandfather of ten, military man, been farried forty-one years. She has no kids, no military, no track record. I win."

WRONG.

Dismissing me resulted in his defeat. And when we had a rematch two years later, Dornan turned extremely nasty.

To my utter astonishment, moderate Democrat (former moderate Republican) Loretta Sanchez beat right wing extremist Bob Dornan. Bob Dornan, who would make today's Teabaggers (remember, THEY came up with that term!) like Carl Paladino seem reasonable, was ousted by an upstart Latina. Dornan spent the next year showing up to Congress anyway, claiming Loretta hadn't really won. He demanded a rematch two years later and was soundly defeated by the now incumbent Loretta Sanchez. I vaguely remember getting drunk in celebration of Loretta's second, absolutely definitive, win. I was immensely proud to have donated to Loretta's first two runs for Congress. The only reason I have not donated since is because she doesn't need my money and other great candidates do.

Within her first year in Congress, Loretta Sanchez proved her worth, despite being resented by many Republicans and despite being a freshman, in the passage of changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (that book that features so prominantly in the movie "A Few Good Men) to address the problem of rape of women in military service. In many ways the Uniform Code of Military Justice had failed to keep up with changes in civilian law regarding rape and so wound up protecting rapists and victimizing rape victims. Loretta Sanchez saw this problem for women in the military and sought to change it. She was, of course, solidly opposed by the good-old-boys network of the military and initially by the good-old-boys network of Congress. But she refused to let what was clearly an important issue get pushed aside, and to give credit where credit is due, she was helped by a Republican, John McHugh. Now I never really liked McHugh, but in this case he did the right thing, even to the point, according to Loretta Sanchez, of standing up to fellow Republican Duncan Hunter who wanted to let Loretta's bill die. John McHugh decided Loretta's bill was worth supporting and he went the extra mile for it. Together Sanchez and McHugh, against the inertia of the military, revised the military law codes to better handle rape cases. This all happened, from start to finish, within Loretta's first two years in Congress while Bob Dornan was still showing up and claiming he still represented the district.

I think this experience shaped Loretta Sachez's entire approach towards Congress. Loretta Sanchez is a Blue Dog Dem, which usually means bad things in my book, but Loretta, who, like Hillary Clinton, was once a Republican, represents a relatively conservative district and, though a Blue Dog, votes well and stands up on fights few other Dems stand up on. So I have always liked her. And her unconventional image, drawn from her Hispanic, hard working, immigrant background, has always endeared her to me.

As a Blue Dog, Loretta tends to be one of those compromisers in Congress that many progressives hate. But in judging Loretta one has to take into account her district (which is conservative) and her experience with Republican John McHugh, where through patience and determination she was able to find common ground and compromise and so pass a much needed bill. She learned the lesson then and there that compromise was possible and could accomplish important things. I think she has stuck to that view, though she has also never been one of the more conservative members of the Blue Dogs. I feel she remains true to progressive ideals though she also maintains a cooperative stance with conservatives. If all Blue Dogs were like Loretta Sanchez, we'd be much better off both as a party and as a country.

Loretta also, like Arianna Huffington, left the Republican party because of the realization that the Republicans did NOT represent her true values...didn't even represent the values they claimed to represent. Loretta Sanchez grew up in a family where one parent was a Democrat and one a Republican, so the choice between the two seemed a reasonable one...at first:

Whereas Mom was a compassionate Democrat, Dad ended up running his own business and reading the libertarian Orange County Register, so he was very antitax and pro-Republican. Neither of them voted back then...they didn't become US citizens until [1996]. By then, like me, Dad had converted from Republican to Democrat...

I remained registered as a Republican and never really thought about it much. That was, until one night when I was flicking through the TV channels at home and just happened to catch Pat Buchanan making an inflammatory speech, calling for an end to immigrants coming to America. I was so angry that a high-profile Republican was allowed to spew that kind of hatred on national television, the very next day I registered as a Democrat.

When Loretta's younger sister, Linda, ran for Congress in 2003, I considered it a given I would donate. If she was HALF as kick ass as Loretta, it was worth supporting her. And she won, making Loretta and Linda Sanchez not only rare in Congress as Latinas (I personally know and like Nydia Velasquez, one of the other rare Latinas in Congress), but literally unique as being the first and so far ONLY sisters to serve in Congress.

Linda Sanchez, partly because she represents a solidly Democratic district and partly because of her own personality, is a more liberal Democrat than her sister. Loretta grew up with more to prove, as an older sibling, and I think it is reflected in her more conservative attitude, shaped by a greater need for financial security than social activism. They both make clear that the older siblings had a rougher time and were raised with a more traditional philosophy, but by the time Linda was growing up this was somewhat relaxed and Linda, from an early age, recognized that there were inequities in the world and that becoming a lawyer was a path towards solving those inequities. She was encouraged to become a lawyer by her older sister, but Loretta had imagined Linda using her law degree more practically, getting a higher paying job. Instead, Linda went into labor law and became a union organizer. And she was kick ass in pushing for labor reforms. When a new Congressional district was created in Southern California, Linda decided to run for it...and won. She started as the longshot, as a young Latina, but when she proved so effective that she rapidly became the frontrunner, she became the target for attacks by all the other campaigns in the primary. I get the feeling from her description in the book that this may have been one of the toughest things she had faced: a concerted attack from several other fellow Democrats.

And yet she won. I think this shows the strength of the Sanchez family, that they could turn not just one, but TWO long-shot runs for office into wins.

Like Loretta, Linda Sanchez also proved her worth within the first year, though in a more locally focused way.

One of the smaller cities I represent desperately needed funding to renovate and repave its major street, which was old and falling into disrepair. For ten years the city had been begging its former congressman to try to help get federal funds for the roadwork, but he never secured any real funding for the project. Well, when the time came, and [Congressman] Obey asked for projects, that was one of the projects I submitted. It made it into the omnibus bill, and the omnibus bill passed. That meant that after being in Congress for only six weeks I had gotten it the funding! And wheras before the city had been skeptical, I now had a victory to show them, and it was grateful.

Excuse me, but did you just blow me off because I'm a woman, because I'm Hispanic, or because I'm young? Could you let me know?

Linda Sanchez has some of the best lines in the book, the lines that make me think, "YES! That is how I always wanted to say it!" For example:

Sometimes I've encountered Republicans who seem to believe that people are poor because they choose to be poor, and that this wouldn't be the case if they just worked harder. Well, that isn't true. A lot of people start with advantages that they don't even consider to be advantages and I always point this out when I get into fights...

I believe there are two kinds of people in this life. There are those who succeed and attribute all the success to themselves--"I've got mine, you guys have to get yours." And then there are those who succeed and not only credit the teachers who cared, the mentors who helped them, the bosses who took them under their wing, and the parents who pushed them to do well, but also the resolve to help the next group of people who are struggling. For the life of me, I don't understand those who fall into the former category, because the belief that they did it all on their own is just nonsense.

The Economy

2010-10-31T07:22:00.001-07:00

I recently highlighted actual facts and figures showing that in pretty much every possible way, from job growth to keeping the deficit down to stock market performance, the economy does much better under Democrats than Republicans. I want to look a little more closely at why.

What makes an economy strong? It isn't money circulating among the top 10% which is how Republican trickle down economics (aka "Voodoo Economics") believes it works. Nor is it money pouring into the biggest corporations, again the way Republican policies assume. What makes an economy strong is money circulating among working and middle class Americans and small to medium sized businesses. THOSE areas are the backbone of our economy. Our economy doesn't grow because a CEO can buy another yacht, big business can outsource more jobs, and BP and Exxon/Mobil make massive profits that go to bonuses for their executives. Our economy grows because you and I are buying what we need for our families, local Green Energy projects are being built, and small and medium sized businesses are growing and able to hire another person or two.

Republicans favor the BIG GUYS. The top 10% get the tax cuts...and Capital Gains cuts...and tax loopholes. You and I can't take advantage of Off Shore Banking. The BIG GUYS can. So they get richer and we get poorer under Republican policies. In essence Republicans are redistributing wealth to the richest Americans. And Republicans favor BIG BUSINESS, the companies that outsource jobs and buy from overseas. This all means money circulates among fewer people and jobs flow overseas. THAT is what Republicans do.

Democratic policies favor working and middle class Americans and small to medium sized businesses. Democratic policies get money circulating among a much wider ranger of people and businesses. This keeps more money circulating within the United States' economy and favors job growth here in America. Republicans accuse Democrats of wanting to redistribute the wealth, but that is BS. Democrats get money flowing more equitably through our economy while Republicans actively redistribute the wealth to the very richest, following the same failed trickle down policies that they have since Herbert Hoover.

Here's the proof. Looking at Average Annual Income growth and comparing the average for Republican (in red) and Democratic (in blue) Presidents, under Democrats average annual income grows for ALL AMERICANS. Under Republicans average annual income goes up for the very rich and barely at all for most of us:

Under Democrats the money is flowing through a much wider range of the economy than under Republicans and THAT means the economy is stronger under Democrats than under Republicans. You and I have more money to buy stuff or save or invest or pay off debt under Democrats. Under Republicans only the very rich can do these things. Under Democrats MORE PEOPLE can spend, save, invest and pay of debt than under Republicans.

The circulation of more money (for spending, saving, investing, etc) among more people means better stock market returns: Average rowth in the stock market under Republicans average (excluding Hoover, to be fair) is 4.3% growth...Democratic Average is 9.6%.

Note this: the BEST STOCK MARKET GROWTH has been under Clinton and Obama. The WORST stock market declines (excluding Hoover) were under Nixon and the younger Bush. Clinton and Obama have been the best Presidents in modern American history for stock growth.

What else comes of Democrats getting more money circulating around a larger segment of the American economy rather than Republicans favoring the very rich and companies that outsource? More job growth. There is more real job growth under Democrats than Republicans...without fail!

Look at that graph. EVERY Democratic President has done better than EVERY Republican President since Hoover in creating jobs. You want job growth, vote Democratic. And job growth means yet MORE money circulating through the American economy.

More jobs and more money circulating through the economy means a higher GDP under Democrats. Average Growth in GDP: Again Democrats match or beat all Republicans

You can't argue with these numbers. Better job growth and better growth in GDP and a fairer average annual income growth under ALL Democrats compared with ALL Republicans.

Then we come to the deficit. Again Republicans repeat the lie over and over that Democrats run up the deficits. Well, the worst deficits in American history were under three names: Reagan and two Bushes.

Republicans do FAR more deficit spending that Democrats. I think there are three reasons for this. First, because there is better economic growth under Democrats (see all the above graphs) there are more tax revenues. Second, because Republicans give massive tax breaks to the rich, they reduce the money coming in. Third, at the same time Republicans are cutting down the income to the government, they favor massive spending programs like expanding the military, building a fence around the country, expanding surveillance, invading Iraq...all things that cost massive amounts of money. Democrats favor programs like infrastructure, education, alternative energy that not only are cheaper than invading Iraq but actually in the long run can save money and/or create jobs. So Republicans have a weaker economy, cut income and increase outflow. Democrats produce a stronger economy (thus increase tax income), don't give massive tax breaks to the rich and spend money more wisely in ways that better help average Americans.

The net result is a stronger America under Democrats than Republicans by almost any measure you can think of.

Look, any one of these things could be coincidence. But ALL of these measures of economic strength doing better under Democrats compared to Republicans over such a long period is really hard to argue with. DEMOCRATS DO BETTER.

The Bottom Line: Democrats are Better for the Economy

2010-10-30T06:49:00.001-07:00

Daily Kos has the following graph illustrating the bottom line for economic growth: Republicans are lousy for the economy and Democrats are better:

Economic Growth:

What Bush did:

What Obama did:

This isn't isolated. If you look at almost any economic indicator, it will do better under Democrats than under Republicans. No matter how much they lie about it, Republicans can't deny the actual numbers show that they are terrible for the economy compared with Democrats.

Let's look at the bottom line for most people: JOBS. Job Growth is always better under Democrats than Republicans:

Growth in the stock market: Republican average (excluding Hoover, to be fair) is 4.3% growth...Democratic Average is 9.4%.

Note this: the BEST STOCK MARKET GROWTH has been under Clinton and Obama. The WORST stock market declines (excluding Hoover) were under Nixon and the younger Bush.

Average Growth in GDP: Again Democrats match or beat all Republicans

Average annual income grows for ALL AMERICANS under Democrats, while it mainly grows for the very rich under Republicans:

You can read more about the fact that the American economy does better under Democrats than Republicans here.

Even fiscal responsibility, that thing Republicans like to claim, is really a Democratic value as proven by the numbers:

Republicans do FAR more deficit spending that Democrats.

I will never understand why ANYONE would vote for Republicans. They are more corrupt, run up higher deficits, and are worse for the economy than Democrats. Why vote Republican? Ever?

State by State Roundup of Endorsements

2010-10-24T17:07:00.000-07:00

Pierce County, WA Endorsements

2010-10-16T10:15:00.000-07:00

Derived from local endorsements, AARP, Democracy for America, Indinegous Democratic Network, and Progressive Majority, here are my endorsements for Pierce County, WA

US SENATE: Patty Murray
US CONGRESS CD 8: Suzan DelBene

State House - District 26: Sumner Schoenike
State House - District 27: Laurie Jinkins
State House - District 28: Tami Green

Pierce County Auditor: Julie Anderson
Pierce County Prosecutor: Mark Lindquist

For more information on candidates, please go here:
http://moleinfoblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/washington-state-endorsements.html

Ballot Initiatives:
I-1053 NO

I-1100 NO

I-1105 NO

I-1107 NO

I-1082 NO

I-1098 YES

Ref Bill 52 YES

SJR 8225 YES

King County Ballot Measures

Proposition 1 YES

Charter Amendment 1 YES

Charter Amendment 2 YES

Charter Amendment 3 YES

Seattle Public Schools Levy YES

Snohomish County, WA Endorsement List

2010-10-16T10:07:00.000-07:00

Derived from local endorsements, AARP, Democracy for America, Indinegous Democratic Network, and Progressive Majority, here are my endorsements for Snohomish County, WA

US SENATE: Patty Murray
US CONGRESS CD 2: Rick Larsen

State House - District 1: Derek Stanford
State House - District 32: Cindy Ryu
State House - District 38: Nick Harper

Ballot Initiatives:
I-1053 NO

I-1100 NO

I-1105 NO

I-1107 NO

I-1082 NO

I-1098 YES

Ref Bill 52 YES

SJR 8225 YES

King County Ballot Measures

Proposition 1 YES

Charter Amendment 1 YES

Charter Amendment 2 YES

Charter Amendment 3 YES

Seattle Public Schools Levy YES

Seattle/King County, WA Endorsement List

2010-10-16T09:24:00.000-07:00

Derived from local endorsements, AARP, Democracy for America, Indinegous Democratic Network, and Progressive Majority, here are my endorsements for Seattle and King County, WA

US SENATE: Patty Murray
US CONGRESS CD 2: Rick Larsen
US CONGRESS CD 8: Suzan DelBene

State House - District 1: Luis Moscoso
State House - District 30: Carol Gregory
State House - District 32: Cindy Ryu
State House - District 34: Joe Fitzgibbon

State Senate - District 34: Sharon Nelson
State Senate - District 41: Randy Gordon
State Senate - District 45: Eric Oemig

King County Council - District 8: Joe McDermott

For more information on candidates, please visit:
http://moleinfoblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/washington-state-endorsements.html

Ballot Initiatives:
I-1053 NO

I-1100 NO

I-1105 NO

I-1107 NO

I-1082 NO

I-1098 YES

Ref Bill 52 YES

SJR 8225 YES

King County Ballot Measures

Proposition 1 YES

Charter Amendment 1 YES

Charter Amendment 2 YES

Charter Amendment 3 YES

Seattle Public Schools Levy YES

Olympia/Thurston County, WA Endorsement List

2010-10-16T09:12:00.000-07:00

Derived from local endorsements, AARP, Democracy for America, Indinegous Democratic Network, and Progressive Majority, here are my endorsements for Thurston County, WA

US SENATE: Patty Murray
CONGRESS (WA-3): Denny Heck
State House - District 22: Chris Reykdal

For more information on candidates, please go here: http://moleinfoblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/washington-state-endorsements.html

Ballot Initiatives:
I-1053 NO

I-1100 NO

I-1105 NO

I-1107 NO

I-1082 NO

I-1098 YES

Ref Bill 52 YES

SJR 8225 YES

Virginia Focus: Three Important Congressional Races

2010-10-14T06:18:00.000-07:00

There are three particularly important Congressional candidates in Virginia. Two are challenging particularly awful, Bush-style Republicans (VA-1 and VA-7) and one is defending one of the best, most capable people in Congress (VA-5).

Tom Perriello for Congress (VA-5)

Tom Perriello, though a Blue Dog, is one of the best Congressmen elected from either party. I was proud to endorse such an accomplished person when he first ran and I am proud to endorse him for re-election.

Democrat Tom Periello on Keith Olbermann: "We Need to Fight for the Working and Middle Class"

Tom Perriello endorsed by Veterans of Foreign Wars: (from the Danville Register & Bee)

More than a dozen veterans from the Danville chapter of the VFW were on hand to deliver the endorsement at the Danville/Pittsylvania Veterans Memorial inDanville. The decision was based on Perriello’s strong support for veteran’s affairs, including expanding health care and economic benefits for them, according to the VFW.

Perriello is campaigning for re-election in 5th District against state senator Robert Hurt, of Chatham and Jeff Clark, of Danville.

The small event started off with a brief introduction from U.S. Navy veteran Kevin Cramton, of Danville, who emphasized Perriello’s accessibility.

“To me, he’s for us,” Cramton said in an interview. “He could have hid up in Washington, but he’s been here talking to us.”

Phone bank from your home to help re-elect Tom Perriello

From his website:

Fighting for Solutions in Conflict Zones

After receiving his law degree from Yale University, Tom accepted an assignment working to end atrocities in the West African countries of Liberia and Sierra Leone, which had suffered long civil wars fueled by blood diamonds. Tom’s work with child soldiers, amputees, and local pro-democracy groups in Sierra Leone played a significant role in the peace and reconciliation process that ended twelve years of violence in that country. Tom then became Special Advisor and spokesperson for the International Prosecutor during the showdown that forced Liberian dictator Charles Taylor from power without firing a shot. After this success, Tom served as a national security analyst for the Century Foundation. He has worked inside Darfur and twice in Afghanistan.

After Bush's disastrous policies, this is PRECISELY the kind of person we need in our government.

Tom Perriello on Job Creation:

Phone bank from your home to help re-elect Tom Perriello

Check out Perriello's website for more information on how you can help one of America's best Congressmen get re-elected.

Krystal Ball for Congress (VA-1)

KB from Shannon Prasad on Vimeo.

From Bloggers for Ball:

This year, Democrats will select a nominee to take on Rep. Rob Wittman, a politician who has voted 92% of the time with Eric Cantor and John Boehner, against the economic recovery act, against the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, and against strong health care reform legislation. In short, Wittman is a cookie-cutter, lockstep, knee-jerk Republican loyalist who apparently has lost the ability to think and reason for himself. Instead, Wittman just votes "no," "no," and "no" to everything, along with the rest of his party.

Obviously, it's time for a change in the 1st CD. Fortunately, there's an excellent Democrat running who will work to bring that change. Her name is Krystal Ball, the clear choice for a large number of reasons. Aside from her energy, enthusiasm, and intelligence, Krystal Ball is a strong "pro-growth progressive" who I believe is clearly "from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." Among other things, Krystal believes in "strong environmental and financial regulation," "a robust public option," "strong unions," "government’s basic role as a social equalizer, " "civil liberties, the right to choose for ourselves in marriage, reproduction and self-defense," " full LGBT equality at every level," and "aggressive mandatory renewable energy standards for vehicles, appliances, etc."

Krystal Ball: Gen Y Does Politics:

Krystal Ball Interview on Young Turks:

Meanwhile, Krystal's Republican opponent also seems to be hiding from the voters:

Find out more about Krystal Ball at her campaign website.

Rick Waugh for Congress (VA-7):

Eric Cantor is one of the most obstructionist of the Republicans in Congress and has made the elimination of Medicare part of the Republican agenda:

Rick Waugh is challenging one of the most obstructionist of Republicans, Eric Cantor. Here is Rick Waugh's statement on running:

My name is Rick Waugh, and I’m running for Congress in the 7th Congressional District of Virginia. I am a pragmatic progresive, and I am running for one simple reason – I feel that my voice and the voices of many of my fellow citizens are not being heard in Washington. While there are once again record profits on Wall Street, Main Street has been left high and dry. Even worse, I can think of little Eric Cantor has done in his 10 years in Washington to support the regular folks of this district...

I am running for Congress because I believe the citizens of Virginia have not been getting a fair shake from Washington, D.C. I am running because of the clients whom I have seen as a counselor. I am running because I know that our education system is still leaving children behind; I am running for the citizens of our District who cannot find the work they need to support their families; and for the citizens who have gone to Eric Cantor for help only to feel ignored. I am running because I know we can do better.

I am proud to have the nomination of the Democratic party. I believe that the Democratic Party is more about solving problems than blind partisanship and ideology. The attitude I intend to bring to Washington is that of listening to the voters; not party bosses, special interests, or those who are entrenched in Washington. I will bring solutions to the daily struggles we all endure.

This campaign isn’t about me, it is about every citizen of the 7th district. We are building a movement, but we need your help. If you believe, like I do, that we need a government in Washington of, by and for the people, and not a government of, by and for the lobbyists and special interests, I need your support. I need you to sign up to volunteer with this campaign, I need to tell your friends and neighbors about what we are doing here, and I need you to write a check. Together, we can build a campaign that will make us all proud!

Meet Rick Waugh from Rick Waugh for Congress on Vimeo.

Visit Rick Waugh's website for more information.

Listening to Our Veterans: VoteVet.org endorsements

2010-10-14T06:06:00.001-07:00

The mission of VoteVets.org Political Action Committee is to elect Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to public office; hold public officials accountable for their words and actions that impact America’s 21st century servicemembers; and fully support our men and women in uniform.

Here are their endorsed candidates for 2010:

PENNSYLVANIA:

Pennsylvania has the great opportunity to elect SIX Veterans to office this year. Each of them have proven their worth both in the armed forces and in serving their community at home.

Joe Sestak--US Senate

Joe Sestak represents Pennsylvania's 7th Congressional District and is currently [running] to be Senator from Pennsylvania. Sestak is a retired United States Navy vice admiral and is the highest ranking military official to serve in Congress.

From the Philadelphia Tribune:

Sestak, 58, a second-term congressman from a suburban Philadelphia district, is an unusual Democrat.

He hails from the military, an institution that might be expected to produce conservative Democrats. But Sestak has not only staunchly supported the major elements of Obama's liberal agenda, he often has advocated going beyond it.

Along the way, he has compiled one of the most liberal voting records among Pennsylvania's members of Congress, according AFL-CIO ratings.

He's also an unusual military man: He earned a master's degree and a Ph.D. from Harvard University during his 31 years in the Navy. He commanded an entire aircraft battle group in war — something only a few Navy admirals do — after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. His reputation as a hard worker and superb analyst preceded him in the Navy: He was asked to create the Navy's anti-terrorism unit and was picked to serve on President Bill Clinton's National Security Council.

Find out more from his Campaign Website: http://www.joesestak.com

Manan Trivedi - Candidate Pennsylvania-6

Dr. Manan Trivedi is a combat veteran of the Iraq war veteran and a primary care doctor from Reading, PA. He was commissioned in the US Navy in 1996.

His unit was one of the first US ground forces to enter Iraq during the initial invasion in 2003. As commander of the medical team, he led his staff in treating Marines and Iraqi civilians who suffered over 300 traumatic injuries during the first three months of the war. For his service, Dr. Trivedi earned the Combat Action Ribbon, Navy Commendation Medal and his entire unit was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.

He served as a health policy advisor to the Navy Surgeon General and the Department Head of Emerging Health Policy for Navy Medicine's Bureau of Medicine and Surgery. He also was an Assistant Professor of Medicine at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences.

Dr. Trivedi has conducted research in the areas of military and veterans' health, pharmacoeconomics and access to mental health care. He has also advised political leaders on heath care issues, most recently serving as a health policy advisor to President Barack Obama during the 2008 elections.

Dr. Trivedi currently holds privileges as a board-certified internal medicine physician at Reading Hospital and Medical Center.

Website: www.trivediforcongress.com

Bryan Lentz - Candidate Pennsylvania-7

Representative Bryan R. Lentz (D-161, Delaware Co.) was first elected to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in 2006. He is a fourth generation Army veteran and a graduate of Valley Forge Military College. After leaving Valley Forge, Bryan attended Georgetown University on a full Army scholarship.

Bryan was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Infantry in 1986. After completing the Infantry Officers Basic Course (IOBC) and U.S. Army Ranger School, Bryan was assigned to the Second Battalion of the 325th Airborne Infantry Regiment of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, NC. Lentz held leadership positions throughout his service in the 82nd Airborne Division, including the command of two rifle platoons and an 81mm mortar platoon. Lentz also served as an officer in the Army reserves. His overseas military assignments include the recent war in Iraq, as well as tours with Multi-National Force and Observers (MFO) and NATO peacekeeping missions in the Sinai Peninsula and Bosnia. His official commendations include the War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal and the Bronze Star for Service. In Bosnia he oversaw millions of dollars in infrastructure development, including the first-ever Russian, Romanian, Muslim and Serbian joint bridge. In 2003 Lentz volunteered to return to active reserve service to command a Civil Affairs unit responsible for infrastructure repair and developing civil governance in the northern city of Mosul.

In 1993, following his active service in the 82nd Airborne, Lentz attending Temple University Law School and graduated Cum Laude with a Juris Doctorate. His first job out of law school was as an assistant prosecutor at the Philadelphia District Attorney's office. Lentz served there for six years prosecuting gang members and other violent offenders.

Since 1999, he has worked as an attorney in the private sector.

Website: www.lentz2010.com

Congressman Patrick Murphy, PA-8

Patrick Murphy was elected to Congress in November 2006. Patrick Murphy represents Pennsylvania's 8th Congressional District. After working as an instructor at West Point, Murphy deployed overseas twice, serving in Bosnia (2002) and in Baghdad during the Iraq War (2003-2004). While in Baghdad as a paratrooper and JAG Corps attorney with the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division.

Congressional Website: http://patrickmurphy.house.gov/
Campaign Website: http://patrickmurphy.house.gov/

Congressman Chris Carney, PA-10

Chris Carney represents Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District.
A Lieutenant Commander in the United States Naval Reserve, Carney served multiple tours overseas and was activated for operations Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle. He was direct commissioned as an Ensign in 1995. He served as Senior Terrorism and Intelligence Advisor at the Pentagon.

He is the recipient of the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, three joint Service Achievement Medals, the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, and the Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal. His awards also include the Naval Rifle Marksman ribbon and the Naval Pistol Expert Medal.

Congressional Website: http://carney.house.gov/
Campaign Website: http://www.carneyforcongress.com/

Shannon Meehan - Candidate for Pennsylvania State Representative, District 163

Born and raised in Delaware County, Shannon attended Upper Darby High School, where he was inducted into the Hall of Fame for his accomplishments in wrestling. He continued his success in college by lettering in a Division 1 wrestling program and graduating as a Distinguished Military graduate and president of an honor society.

While serving in the military, Meehan led over 700 combat and civil operations while commanding an area spanning 300 square miles and containing over 100,000 people. Meehan initiated an innovative program of council meetings with local leaders that resulted in significant civil and economic growth. He also developed and secured intelligence that led to the capture of more enemy insurgents and corrupt officials than any of his peers combined. He also managed and oversaw the investment of $800,000 to improve infrastructures and was rated his battalion's Top Platoon Leader. Meehan was injured in an IED strike, resulting in his medical retirement and being awarded the Purple Heart.

After his injury, Shannon completed rehabilitation at Fort Hood and wrote the nationally-acclaimed memoir, Beyond Duty (Polity Press), which chronicles firsthand the challenges facing soldiers in today's wars. Beyond Duty has become the fastest-selling book in the press's history, is an international bestseller, and was named Military Writers Society of America's Book of the Month the month of its international release.

Shannon has traveled the country sharing his story, speaking at places such as U.S.C. Law School, University of Virginia, Syracuse University, and Upper Darby High School, and discussing his journey on CNN, NBC, and in The New York Times, where his own Op-Ed piece, "Distant Wars, Constant Ghosts," became the most-viewed Op-Ed of that week.

Since Captain Meehan's medical retirement in November 2009, he has dedicated himself to continuing his service by seeking to represent the people of Pennsylvania's 163rd District, which includes Lansdowne Borough, Aldan Borough, Clifton Heights Borough, and parts of Upper Darby and Ridley townships. Here, as State Representative, he will bring the same work ethic and passion that led to success in Iraq, where he significantly improved the conditions and quality of life for the people within his area. Shannon resides back home in Delaware County with his wife, Amanda Jane, and new-born son, Brady Cole.

Website: www.shannonpmeehan.com

MISSOURI:

Tommy Sowers, Candidate Missouri-8

A fourth-generation Missourian, Tommy was born and raised in Rolla where his family has lived since his grandfather started the local newspaper. Educated in the public school system, he graduated Rolla High School.

After attending Duke on an Army ROTC scholarship, Tommy began his 11 year career in the U.S. Army, commissioned in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He graduated Airborne, Air Assault, Ranger and Belgian Commando Schools. Tommy led a combat engineering platoon in Kosovo and represented the 1st Infantry Division in the Best Ranger Competition.

Following graduate studies at the London School of Economics as a Rotary Ambassadorial Scholar for Missouri District 6080, Tommy attended the Special Forces Qualification Course graduating 1st in his class. At 10th Special Forces Group, Tommy led a team of Green Berets. In two deployments to Iraq, he conducted a wide range of counterinsurgency operations and was awarded the Combat Infantryman's Badge and two Bronze Stars.

Tommy most recently served as an Assistant Professor at the United States Military Academy at West Point. He is currently teaching in the History and Political Science Department at the Missouri University of Science and Technology in Rolla.

Website: http://www.sowersforcongress.com

Jason Kander – Candidate for Missouri State Legislature (HD-44)

Website: http://www.jasonkander.com

A fifth generation Kansas Citian, Jason Kander learned early in life about his family's ethic of community service. His mother was a social worker and his father was a police officer and a small business owner.

After graduating with his brothers from Bishop Miege High School, Jason headed to college and law school in Washington, DC. He graduated with honors from American University, where he majored in political science. He married his high school sweetheart, Diana, and together they graduated from Georgetown Law School, returning home to Kansas City the very next day.

A former Political Science Instructor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Jason has debated politics and foreign affairs on local and national radio with some of America's most notable pundits. He has advised Members of Congress regarding foreign policy and has volunteered for countless Democratic candidates in Missouri.

After the 2004 elections, Jason and Diana founded Heartland Democrats of America, an organization that promotes progressive values in rural and suburban Missouri.

Today, Jason is a civil justice attorney with pro bono experience representing victims of domestic violence.

Though he opposed the war in Iraq, Jason enlisted in the Army Reserve after 9/11 and volunteered for combat duty in Afghanistan.

A decorated veteran, Jason served in an infantry unit before receiving his commission as a Military Intelligence Officer. In 2006, he left his home and his legal practice to deploy to Afghanistan, where he conducted classified intelligence investigations regarding groups and individuals suspected of espionage, narcotics trafficking, corruption, and facilitating Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

As the Political-Military Intelligence Officer for U.S. Forces, he became an expert regarding all political and military threats to Afghan democracy. After he returned from Afghanistan in 2007, Jason began to think seriously about the human consequences of policies implemented for political reasons and the examples he witnessed overseas. Concluding that this same "politics first" mentality was to blame for Missouri's healthcare, education, and environmental challenges, he finalized his decision to run for State Representative.

In addition to the campaign, Jason practices law out of his office in Waldo. He is still in the Army Reserve and serves as an Instructor one weekend per month at Fort Leonard Wood, where he prepares new Army officers for leadership in combat.

Though Jason's family has been in Kansas City for over a century, Diana came to Kansas City in 1990 as a refugee from the Soviet Union. An attorney and business executive, she is heavily involved in several local organizations that promote equal rights.

Stephen Webber - Candidate for Missouri State Legislature (HD-23)

Website: http://www.votewebber.com

Stephen Webber is currently running for the 23rd District in the Missouri House of Representatives. He most recently served as an aide to U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) in Washington, D.C.

Stephen joined the Marine Corps Reserves after his freshman year at Saint Louis University during the summer of 2002. In January 2004, Stephen was pulled out of school when his infantry battalion was mobilized and sent to Anbar province.

After a year-long activation Stephen returned to college and graduated in the spring of 2006 with a B.A. in Economics. Before the graduation ceremony Stephen was already back at Camp Pendleton, CA preparing for his second tour in Iraq. As an NCO, he lead a 12-man infantry squad as his company fought to hold the center of Fallujah during the fall of 2006 and spring of 2007.

While he had always been active local politics Stephen credits his time in Iraq and the sacrifices of his buddies for giving him a renewed belief in “the fierce urgency of now.” Stephen is a volunteer for the American Legion Missouri Boys State program. Prior to enlisting in the Marines he completed a year of service with the AmeriCorps JumpStart program in St. Louis.

OHIO

Congressman John Boccieri, Ohio-16

John Boccieri, is in his first term as a member of the Ohio State Senate. Boccieri served our country by enlisting in the U.S. Air Force. He is an Air Force Reserve Major and aircraft commander aboard the C-130 aircraft, and was stationed at Youngstown Joint Air Reserve Station. He recently deployed in 4 rotations to support our troops in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. Boccieri has served our nation in over 40 countries and has eleven years of service in the U.S. Military.

Previously, in his role as staff officer, he supported Presidential visits to Arkansas and also worked on base-wide support of three treaties- Open Skies, Chemical Weapons Compliance, and START II Treaties. As a commissioned Lieutenant in the military, he worked with base-wide support for the Department of Defense, Department of the Air Force, the State Department, the White House Communications Staff, the Secret Service, and Air Force and Marine Advance Agents.

John has a tremendous opportunity to take this district. Republican Congressman Ralph Regula, an 18-term incumbent, was only able to get 58 percent of the vote last election, so this is a very winnable district for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans!

Campaign Website: http://www.johnforcongress.com

NEVADA:

Elliot Anderson - Candidate for Nevada State Asembly, District 15

Website: http://andersonforassembly.com

Before graduating from high school, Elliot Anderson signed up for the U.S. Marine Corps. Serving as a machine gunner for four years on active duty and three years in the inactive reserve (including a combat deployment to Afghanistan), he returned a decorated marine. He received numerous medals awarding his service, including the Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, three Sea Service Deployment Ribbons, a Combat Action Ribbon, and the Rifle Expert Badge. After his return from duty, Elliot began searching for a place to call home and build his future. Nevada turned out to be the perfect fit.

Once moving to Nevada in 2005, Elliot immediately became recognized by many as an individual with a strong work ethic who was dedicated to improving our community. While serving as the Interim Chair of the Nevada Democratic Veterans and Military Families Caucus, he helped to raise funds in order to send care packages to America's men and women overseas.

Currently serving as the Nevada State Captain for VoteVets.org, Elliot works to empower and elect to office America's veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Elliot has also worked hard with the community to address our service men and women's needs. Recently, Elliot has successfully fought for the people in Assembly District 15 at the Nevada legislature. While working for our current Assemblywoman, Kathy McClain, Elliot was able to develop and present language for a Bipartisan veterans bill that passed unanimously in both the Senate and the Assembly. Elliot not only continues to work hard at all he does, but has made a commitment to use these experiences in order to advocate for better communication between residents and the elected officials who represent them.

In the military, in school, and in his civilian life, Elliot gained unique qualifications which differentiate him from others. While serving our country, he learned how to negotiate in order to find common ground between disagreeing parties, and also the importance of fighting for those who don't have a voice of their own. While attending UNLV and being employed full time, he earned a B.A. in Political Science Magna Cum Laude, finishing with a 3.9 grade point average. While working for Assembly 15, he quickly grasped the ins and outs of the legislative process, while proving himself as someone who listens and believes in working towards a goal that benefits the people. His involvement with numerous community organizations established him as a leader in grassroots and community outreach. Elliot has become the perfect choice to represent the people of Assembly District 15, and connect them to Carson City.

As a Nevada Assemblyman, Elliot will work hard to encourage an atmosphere of political involvement within our neighborhoods, as well as focus on improving our education system throughout Nevada.

Website: www.andersonforassembly.com

WASHINGTON STATE:

Steve Hobbs - Washington State Senator (44th District)

Website: http://www.electhobbs.com

Steve Hobbs was elected to the Washington State Senate in 2006, and represents the 44th Legislative District – a suburban area north of Seattle where he has been involved in political and community activities in for many years.

Although Hobbs has always been involved in civic life and has a bachelor’s degree in political science, his military experience exerts a significant influence on his political career.

Hobbs enlisted in the Army Reserve in 1988. After attending the University of Washington, he went on active duty with the U.S. Army in 1996, where he rose to the rank of captain. He served as an Infantry Platoon Leader in Kosovo in 2000, and was deployed to Iraq in 2004 where he was assigned to an anti-terrorism unit. He left active duty in 2005, and continues to serve in the Army National Guard.

As a member of the Legislature, Hobbs has been especially devoted to veterans’ issues, sponsoring numerous bills to ensure that former members of the military have access to services and benefits that they require. His more formal assignments include serving as the vice-chair of the Senate Financial Institutions & Insurance Committee, and seats on the Early Learning & K-12 Education Committee and the Ways & Means Committee.

In addition to serving in the Washington Senate, Hobbs maintains memberships in many community groups, including the Lake Stevens Rotary, and Southeast Snohomish YMCA. He is also involved in veterans’ activities with the Army and Air Force Mutual Aid Association, the American Legion, and the Nisei Veterans Chapter of Seattle. He is also a member of the Commission on Asian Pacific American Affairs.

MINNESOTA:

Congressman Tim Walz, MN-1

Tim Walz represents Minnestoa's 1st Congressional district. Walz served 24 years and attained the rank of Command Sergeant Major in the National Guard, most recently deployed to Italy with his unit as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. Walz is a member of the Commitee on Veterans affiars.

Congressional Website: http://walz.house.gov/
Campaign Website: http://www.timwalz.org/

IOWA:

McKinley Bailey - Iowa State Representative (HD-9)

Website: http://www.baileyforstatehouse.org/

McKinley Bailey is serving in his first term as a State Representative in Iowa’s 9th House District. As a Representative, he sits on the Commerce Committee, the Economic Growth Committee, the Natural Resources Committee, the Veterans Affairs Committee, and he is Vice Chair of the Agriculture & Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee.

McKinley resides in Webster City where he also serves on the executive committee of American Legion Post 191. He is a member of the VFW, Disabled Veterans of America, and the Hamilton County League of Women Voters. McKinley has been active in Webster City Community Theatre productions and is a member of Faith United Methodist Church.

McKinley was raised in Webster City, Iowa, graduating from Webster City High School in 1999. During that time, McKinley attended school for one year in Arequipa, Peru, where he was a Rotary Foreign Exchange Student.

McKinley served on active duty for five years in the U.S. Army. As a paratrooper with the elite 82nd Airborne Division, he led a Tactical Signals Intelligence Intercept Team into combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. McKinley served in Joint Operations with the Colombian Military, Iraqi Civil Defense Forces and Police and the Afghan, Italian, and Romanian Armies. He was decorated twice for meritorious service in a combat zone.

In 2004, McKinley received an Associate’s Degree from Methodist College in Fayetteville, NC, which he attended at night between deployments. He later earned a B.A. in International Studies from the University of Iowa in May of 2006. During the summer of 2005, he served as a marketing intern with Bentonisa S.A. in Joao Pessoa, Brazil. McKinley is fluent in Spanish and Portuguese.

In March of 2005, McKinley founded and served as President of the University of Iowa Veterans Association. He also worked as a veteran's advisor in the University of Iowa Veterans Center, an entity that the university created, in part, due to lobbying by the newly formed Veterans Association.

COLORADO:

Joe Rice - Colorado State Representative (HD-38)

Website: www.joericecolorado.com

Joe Rice (D-Littleton) was elected in November 2006 to represent District 38 in the Colorado State House of Representatives. House District 38 is mostly in Arapahoe County, and includes the cities of Littleton, Greenwood Village, and Englewood (generally south of Oxford), and the towns of Bow Mar and Columbine Valley.

In his first session of the legislature (2007), Representative Rice served as Vice-Chair of the Committee on Business Affairs and Labor, and was a member of the Committee on Transportation and Energy. Representative Rice was recognized as being one of the most effective representatives in the legislature, passing 18 bills in his first session. These measures included establishing a state wide Cold Case unit for unsolved homicides, and a number of measures that benefit citizens, consumers, businesses, military personnel, and veterans.

Representative Rice served as the mayor of Glendale, which is also in Arapahoe County, from 1996 to 2003. As mayor, he promoted the city’s economic development by balancing the budget, cutting taxes, and attracting quality businesses. He also tripled the amount of parks, trails, and open space in the city, and built Glendale’s first preschool and recreation center.

Representative Rice has served in the military for over 23 years, mostly in the Army Reserve, and presently holds the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. He’s served several tours on active duty, including peacekeeping in Bosnia-Herzegovina and two combat tours in Iraq. Lt. Col. Rice was awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq, that included among other duties, establishing the first post-Saddam Baghdad City Council. He has also been awarded the Combat Action Badge for actions under enemy fire, and numerous other awards and decorations. Lt. Col Rice was recently selected by the Army for promotion to full Colonel, effective as early as January 2008.

Joe has over 10 years of private sector business experience, primarily as a Customer Service Supervisor, Manager, and Trainer with MCI, JDEdwards, and Wells Fargo Bank. He presently works as a consultant, mostly in the areas of management, training, meeting facilitation. Joe is also active with a number of international education and exchange organizations including Sister Cities International and the Orbis International Institute.

TEXAS:

Allen Vaught - Texas State Representative (HD-107)

Website: http://www.allenvaught.com/

Allen Vaught, his wife Donna, and son Jonathan live in Lakewood Heights in Dallas. Allen was elected to the Texas House of Representatives for his first time on November 7th, 2006 to represent District 107, which covers the area in east Dallas surrounding White Rock Lake--including Lakewood and parts of Lake Highlands, Garland, and Mesquite. Allen and his family attend St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Church.

When he took office on January 9th, 2007, Allen was appointed Vice Chairman of the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence and also served on the committee on Juvenile Justice & Family Issues.

Having grown up on a ranch west of Fort Worth in Wise County, Allen graduated from Bridgeport High School in 1990, and Baylor University in 1995 with a B.B.A. in accounting. He obtained his law degree from the South Texas College of Law in 1997.

Allen is the managing attorney of the Dallas office of Franklin, Cardwell, & Jones, P.C., and has a diverse practice which ranges from defending doctors in medical malpractice cases to representing cancer victims in environmental toxin cases. A national leader in protecting victims of environmental pollution and corporate misconduct, he focuses on helping oilfield workers with cancer and other health problems related to exposure to environmental toxins. Allen was himself a roughneck on drilling rigs in the early 1990's while working to pay for college, and his family has a long history of working in the oilfields of north Texas. So it is with much pride that he fights for oilfield workers today.

Allen attended the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, NC, graduating in 2001. As a reserve Captain, he was assigned to the U.S. Army Special Operations Command, performing civil affairs and psychological operations missions. Allen served in Iraq from April 2003 to March 2004. He commanded one of the first units to enter Fallujah, assigned to rebuild that city and win the hearts and minds of its citizens. He was responsible for operating the local government and supervising programs to help its people. Allen served as the de facto mayor of Fallujah.

After six months of operations in Fallujah while under fire from insurgents, Allen was transferred to Sadr City, Baghdad, to teach legislative process to multiple tribal/neighborhood councils, each of which was designed to operate much like an American city. While transporting two daughters of a local tribal leader to an American hospital, Allen's convoy was hit by an improvised explosive device and small arms ambush. His back was fractured in the fight.

Allen was awarded the Purple Heart for his injuries and was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve. In addition, Allen was awarded the Combat Action Badge, Valorous Unit Award and numerous other awards for his service.

MICHIGAN

Congressman Gary Peters, Michigan-9

Gary Peters served as a Lieutenant Commander and a Seabee Combat Warfare Specialist in the United States Navy Reserve. His reserve duty included time in the Persian Gulf supporting Operation Southern Watch, and he served overseas during increased military activity following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. During his service he received numerous awards and citations, including the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal and the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal.

Elected to the State Senate in 1994, Peters was voted by his Senate colleagues to serve as Chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus. While in the Senate, he served as the ranking Democrat on the Finance, Education, Judiciary, Natural Resources, and Families and Mental Health Committees. He later was appointed by the Governor to run the Michigan State Lottery. Prior to his appointment as Commissioner, Lottery revenues were in a four-year slump and sales had declined by nearly $50 million per year. Under Peters' leadership, the Lottery experienced a dramatic turnaround.

He is now in his first term as a Congressman.

Campaign Website: http://www.petersforcongress.com/

Aaron Bailey - Candidate for Michigan State Senate, District 13

Oakland County, Michigan native and Royal Oak resident Aaron Bailey is running to represent Michigan's 13th Senate District. Aaron has spent his entire adult life serving our country and our community through military service and as a business strategy consultant and advocate for new technologies and job growth in Michigan.

Having grown up in the automotive industry, Aaron became the first member of his family to earn a college degree, graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1999, where he was commissioned as an Infantry Officer. Throughout his time in the military, Aaron served our nation as a platoon leader, executive officer, and company commander, culminating his active duty service with the rank of Captain. In September 2001, shortly after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Aaron was assigned to the U.S. Army's prestigious 3rd Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard) in Washington D.C., where he was responsible for leading Soldiers in both ceremonial and security missions throughout our nation's Capital.

After leaving active military service in 2004, Aaron continued to serve our nation as a member of the U.S. Army Reserve, and was recalled to active duty in 2007. Although a graduate student at the University of Michigan at the time, Aaron eagerly accepted the opportunity to again serve our nation, and left school to serve as an Operations Officer in Afghanistan with a Special Operations Task Force.

Since leaving the military, Aaron has continued his public service, and is a noted figure on several issues critical to Michigan and our nation, including economic growth, clean energy, and national security.

In his professional life, Aaron most recently served as a strategy consultant for McKinsey & Company, helping businesses, non-profit groups, and government organizations develop operational and strategic plans for success. During his tenure in the private sector, Aaron has helped Michigan companies and non-profit institutions overcome economic challenges and reposition themselves for growth.

Aaron holds a Bachelor of Science in Systems Engineering from the U.S. Military Academy and a MBA from the University of Michigan, where he graduated with distinction. Aaron is the third generation of his family to serve as an Infantryman during wartime, and his military decorations include the Bronze Star for his service in Afghanistan, the Army Commendation Medal, the Afghanistan Campaign Medal, the NATO Medal, and the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal. Aaron is also a graduate of the U.S. Army's Airborne, Air Assault, and Infantry officer courses, and he is qualified as a United States Army Airborne Ranger.

Aaron Bailey is currently a candidate for the Michigan State Senate in the 13th District, which includes the cities of Birmingham, Bloomfield, Bloomfield Hills, Troy, Madison Heights, Clawson, Berkley, and Royal Oak.

Website: http://www.voteaaronbailey.com/

NEW JERSEY:

Steven Fulop - Jersey City, NJ City Council (Ward “E”)

Website: http://www.stevenfulop.com/

In September 2001, Steven was a 25 year old associate at the prestigious investment bank Goldman Sachs in downtown New York. At that time, he was uninvolved in politics and even unregistered to vote. However, after the attacks on 9/11, Steven chose to leave a high paying job at Goldman Sachs and enlist in the Marine Corps Reserve to be deployed. His unit was amongst the first deployed to Iraq in 2003.

In 2005, Steven Fulop decided to run for public office and was an upset winner against an incumbent councilman in Jersey City, the largest city in NJ. When Steven was sworn into office at 28 years old, he was the youngest member of the city council by more than 17 years and the third youngest in the nearly 200 year existence of the city.

Steven graduated from Binghamton University in 1999 and in 2006 completed both his Masters in Business Administration at the New York University Stern School of Business and his Masters in Public Administration at Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA). While attending Binghamton University, he spent time abroad studying at Oxford University in England.

Steven has served in several board positions including currently on the Board of Directors of both the Columbia University Alumni Association as well as The Learning Community Charter School in Jersey City which has distinguished itself with superior academic performance statewide.

MAINE:

Alex Cornell du Houx - Candidate for Maine State Legislature (HD-66)

Website: http://www.alexcornell.org

Alex Cornell du Houx is currently running for the Maine State Legislature in district 66. He has worked as a tutor in area schools for the past six years and served on the board of the local Habitat for Humanity chapter. Alex also led a service trip to Guatemala with the program Safe Passage to help kids move from the city dump into the classroom. Similarly he worked in Peru to help build a playground for kids in Lima and completed a year of service in Brunswick with the AmeriCorps program.

He was deployed to Iraq with the Marines in 2006 and serves as a 0351 assaultman, working with demolitions and rockets. After a yearlong deployment patrolling the streets in and around Fallujah he returned safely to continue his work serving the community through military, political and community service

Alex grew up in the small town of Solon Maine where he attended Carrabec High School. He was accepted to Bowdoin College as a Mitchell Scholar and joined the Marine Reserves in 2002. Originally an Astronomy and Government major, he spent most of his time founding and building the Community Service Council, working for Habitat for Humanity and running track.

Alex became politically engaged after returning from eight months of training with the Marines in 2004. He worked for the Office of Health Policy and Finance where he assisted the Dirigo Health program, which aims to provide health insurance to every citizen of Maine. He is currently working with the Legislative Youth Advisory Commission, which has submitted legislation to encourage civic participation and improve school athletic policy.

Alex also serves as the National Council Chair for the College Democrats of America and was fohttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifrmally the co-president of the Maine College Democrats, which grew from 3 to 23 chapters within a year, published the only statewide college Dems paper in the nation and have become one of the strongest political organizations in Maine. In addition, he worked to block a bill that would have prevented college students from registering to vote on campus.

MASSACHUSETTS:

Harold Naughton, Jr. - Massachusetts State Representative (HD-12)

Website: http://www.haroldnaughton.org/

Harold P. Naughton, Jr. was born at Hahneman Hospital in Worcester on July 4, 1960. He was raised in the Town of Clinton and attended Clinton High School.

After graduating from Clinton High School in 1978, Harold attended Assumption College in Worcester, concentrating his studies on Political Science and earning the degree of Bachelor of Arts in 1982. Harold began his career of public service while still an undergraduate at Assumption College. In 1980 he was elected to the Clinton Planning Board and served on the board until 1985. He was then elected in 1984 to the Clinton School Committee, holding the position of Chairman from 1986-1987.

In 1991 he received his Juris Doctor from Suffolk University School of Law in Boston. During his time at Suffolk, Harold studied at Notre Dame Law School in London, England studying International Human Rights, European Law and Soviet Law. Following his graduation from Suffolk, Harold began his legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in Worcester County serving from 1992 to 1995. Throughout his years with the District Attorney’s office Harold prosecuted a wide gamut of cases ranging from vehicular homicide to narcotics trafficking to assault and battery. From 1995 to the present Harold has practiced law in Clinton, MA, building his practice from one attorney to a multiple lawyer and employee firm. The firm concentrates on litigation, criminal defense, local, national and international development issues and government relations.

After the events of September 11, 2001, at the age of 43 and feeling a need to further serve and protect his country, Harold joined the United States Army Reserve. Harold currently serves as a Captain with the Judge Advocate General’s Corps. He volunteered for a tour of active duty serving in Kuwait and Baghdad, Iraq, deployed from September, 2005 until May, 2006.

As a member of the House of Representatives since 1995, Harold currently serves on the Ways and Means and Judiciary Committees as well as vice chair of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Committees. Most recently he was appointed to the Governor’s Commission on Corrections Reform. He is the former Chairman of the Judiciary Sub-Committee on Drug Courts and the Supreme Judicial Court Standing Committee on Substance Abuse in the Courts. His legislative priorities include local affairs, education, environment, veteran’s affairs and constituent outreach.

NORTH CAROLINA:

Phillip Gilfus - Candidate for County Commissioner, Cumberland County, NC

A native of Fayetteville, NC, Commissioner Gilfus graduated from East Carolina University in three years with a major in communications and a minor in public administration. After working as a staff member in the North Carolina Senate in Raleigh after graduation, he joined the U.S. Army after the September 11 attacks. He was commissioned through Officer Candidate School and served as an officer in the Ordnance Corps, stationed at the Army's National Training Center in Fort Irwin, Calif., with the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment (ACR). Gilfus served in Mosul, Iraq, with the 1/25 Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) in 2005.

After returning from the deployment, he was promoted to Captain and soon left the military to attend law school. Commissioner Gilfus earned his law degree from the Norman Adrian Wiggins School of law at Campbell University. He is a criminal and traffic attorney with The Mitchell Law Group in Fayetteville, NC. Gilfus is an active member of Holy Trinity Episcopal Church, where he serves as a lay reader, usher, and a member of its Vestry. He is currently pursuing his master's degree in public administration through Golden Gate University. Gilfus was sworn-in as a county commissioner on March 1, 2010, and is one of two at-large commissioners, representing all citizens of Cumberland County, home to Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base.

Website: phillipgilfus.com

ARIZONA:

Ruben Gallego - Candidate for Arizona House of Representatives

Ruben Gallego is a Democratic Candidate for the Arizona House of Representatives in Legislative District 16.

Ruben is the son of Hispanic immigrants and was raised by a single mother. As a young boy, Ruben lived and worked on his family’s bean farm in Chihuahua, Mexico.

Ruben Gallego became the first in his family to attend college when he enrolled at Harvard University. He graduated from Harvard with a degree in International Relations and was the recipient of the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies grant. Ruben was also the first in his family to serve his country in the Armed Forces.

Ruben Gallego was a Barack Obama Delegate to the National Convention and an early member of the Arizona Leadership Team for Obama. He was recently named by the Phoenix Business Journal as one of Phoenix’s 40 people under the age of 40 who are leading the way in Phoenix.

Before beginning his campaign, Ruben Gallego served as the Chief of Staff for Phoenix City Councilman Michael Nowakowski. Ruben was responsible for crafting the Councilman’s economic development and education policy.

To fulfill his call to duty and country, Ruben enlisted as an infantryman in the Marine Corps. He served in Iraq with Lima Company 3/25. Lima 3/25 was involved in some of the hardest combat of the Iraq War. He received a Combat Action Ribbon for his service. He remains close to his fellow Marines and is an advocate for Veterans’ rights. He has served on Congressman Harry Mitchell’s Veterans Advisory Committee and Governor Janet Napolitano’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Veteran Affairs.

Since returning from the war Ruben Gallego has been the Arizona VoteVets state captain. In this capacity he has recruited OIF and OEF veterans to participate in different causes including GI Bill reform and Climate Change policy. Ruben has also been an outspoken critic of the Military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy.

Ruben was recently married to Kate Widland his college sweetheart. Kate and Ruben Gallego have been through two deployments and look forward to starting a family in an Arizona that cares for its children.

Website: www.gallegoforarizona.com

IDAHO:

Congressman Walt Minnick, Idaho-1

Walt Minnick served as a 1st Lieutenant in the Army in the Vietnam war, and then came to Idaho to continue his life of service.

Serving in the White House during the Nixon administration, he was instrumental in the creation of the DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) and consolidation of all U.S. Border Patrol functions into a single agency.

He is former chair of the College of Idaho board of trustees, and served as chair of the Boise State University Business School Advisory Council, and co-founder and board member of the Idaho Business Coalition for Education Excellence, a group of Idaho business leaders dedicated to improving education in the state. He has also served in leadership roles in many other civic, charitable and business organizations.

Campaign Website: WaltForCongress.org

New Jersey Focus: Tod Theise for Congress

2010-10-13T04:02:00.000-07:00

Tod Theise for Congress:

Here is Tod Theise's statement on why he is running:

I'm running for Congress in the 5th Congressional District because I believe Scott Garrett is out of touch with the values we share. While I harbor no personal animosity toward Scott, I am often left scratching my head at the votes he casts and the priorities he pursues.

Our nation's economic collapse thoroughly exposed Scott Garrett's disconnect with the working familes he was elected to represent. Even in the face of Wall Street's unbridled fleecing of the American economy, Scott continues to serve as the apologist-in-chief for Big Finance.

He continues to push the same discredited agenda of reckless deregulation that drove our economy off a cliff. He continues to advocate for privatizing social security. He even voted against extending unemployment benefits for families suffering through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression while advocating for millionaire Wall Street execs to get lucrative bonuses because, according to Scott, they "earned" them.

If you're looking for a logical reason for Scott's servitude to Wall Street, you need only look at the sources that fund his campaign. His campaign finance reports read like a who's who of corporate lobbyists and entities that directly benefit from his lock-step votes. Moreover, Scott sits on the United States House Committee on Financial Services (or House Banking Committee), which oversees the entire financial services industry, including the securities, insurance, banking, and housing industries. The Committee also oversees the work of the Federal Reserve, the United States Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and other financial services regulators (see sourcewatch.org). How can anyone objectively regulate Big Finance when their political lifeblood flows from these very sources?

For Scott Garrett the golden rule is "Wall Street plays and Main Street pays."

Aside from national issues like financial reform, New Jersey faces a particular challenge that has plagued us for decades. New Jersey gets only 61 cents back on every federal tax dollar we send to Washington. For decades we have ranked dead last out of all 50 states in this regard. Given our current financial crisis and the brutal budget cuts we are enduring, we can't go on paying the freight for other states -- some of whom get back as much as twice what they pay in federal taxes. It's about time someone took the gloves off in Congress and fought for New Jersey taxpayers.

My FAIR SHARE TAX ACT will require that any state receiving less than 75 cents back on each federal tax dollar be refunded the difference between their return and the 75 cent baseline. In new Jersey's case, taxpayers would be refunded the difference between our pathetic 61 cents and the 75 cent baseline, which comes to 14 cents.

That 14 cent per tax dollar refund represents $9.8 billion that would come back to New Jersey. Can you imagine what an impact these funds would have on preserving our quality of life? I've outlined the plan in full detail (including a funding mechanism that won't cause other states to oppose the bill) in the "Tax Fairness" section. I will go to Washington and do something no on else has had the guts to do -- get back our fair share!

I look forward to meeting my friends and neighbors during the campaign and listening to your concerns.

To find out more, go to Tod's website.

Nevada Endorsements for 2010

2010-10-12T19:35:00.000-07:00

Elliot Anderson for Nevada Assembly

Elliot Anderson is running for Nevada's state Assembly (District 15) in Clark County. Anderson is a unique candidate in that he has been endorsed by a wide spectrum of Nevada's organizations: from Las Vegas LGBT Publications and Nevada Conservation League all the way to the National Rifle Association. More importantly to my interests in his campaign, VoteVets.org and Howard Dean's Democracy for America have also endorsed Elliot Anderson for Nevada Assembly. He is a true progressive who also can talk to the NRA...that is a rare opportunity! Here is Anderson's campaign statement to DFA:

Before graduating from high school, Elliot Anderson signed up for the U.S. Marine Corps. Serving as a machine gunner for four years on active duty and three years in the inactive reserve (including a combat deployment to Afghanistan), he returned a decorated marine. He received numerous medals awarding his service, including the Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, three Sea Service Deployment Ribbons, a Combat Action Ribbon, and the Rifle Expert Badge. After his return from duty, Elliot began searching for a place to call home and build his future. Nevada turned out to be the perfect fit.

Once moving to Nevada in 2005, Elliot immediately became recognized by many as an individual with a strong work ethic who was dedicated to improving our community. . While serving as the Interim Chair of the Nevada Democratic Veterans and Military Families Caucus, he helped to raise funds in order to send care packages to America’s men and women overseas.

Currently serving as the Nevada State Captain for VoteVets.org, Elliot works to empower and elect to office America’s veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Elliot has also worked hard with the community to address our service men and women’s needs. Recently, Elliot has successfully fought for the people in Assembly District 15 at the Nevada legislature. While working for our current Assemblywoman, Kathy McClain, Elliot was able to develop and present language for a Bipartisan veterans bill that passed unanimously in both the Senate and the Assembly. Elliot not only continues to work hard at all he does, but has made a commitment to use these experiences in order to advocate for better communication between residents and the elected officials who represent them.

In the military, in school, and in his civilian life, Elliot gained unique qualifications which differentiate him from others. While serving our country, he learned how to negotiate in order to find common ground between disagreeing parties, and also the importance of fighting for those who don’t have a voice of their own. While working for Assembly 15, he quickly grasped the ins and outs of the legislative process, while proving himself as someone who listens and believes in working towards a goal that benefits the people. His involvement with numerous community organizations established him as a leader in grassroots and community outreach. Elliot has become the perfect choice to represent the people of Assembly 15.

Anderson has also been endorsed by VoteVets.org, the AFL-CIO, IBEW 357, Southern Nevada Building and Construction Trades, Senator Bob Coffin, Assemblywoman Ellen Koivisto, Assemblyman Harvey Munford, Assemblyman Joe Hogan, Assemblywoman Kathy McClain, and Assemblyman Paul Aizley.

If you live in the 15th Assembly district, please volunteer for Eliot Anderson's campaign. And if you can't do that, please donate to his campaign.

Re-elect Nevada State House Representative John Oceguera

Representative John Oceguera is the kind of candidate I love to support. From the Indigenous Democratic Network (INDN List):

Representative Oceguera, an enrolled member of the Walker River Paiute Tribe, has spent his life serving the community as a firefighter and member of the IAFF. In 2008, he was named Assistant Fire Chief of the North Las Vegas Fire Department. In the state legislature John has been an effective leader and most political insiders believe he is on track to be the next Speaker of the House.

John is being challenged for reelection by a Republican for the Nevada State House of Representatives in District 16.

I love to see firefighters, cops and teachers elected to public office and more often than not they wind up being better at representing actual people than do the lawyers that are generally elected. Oceguera is an excellent legislator and deserves re-election.

More on Oceguera from Daily Kos:

In 2000, John Oceguera was elected to the Nevada State Legislature as Assemblyman for District 16 in Southeast Las Vegas. The voters in District 16 have returned John to office every two years since that time.

Oceguera served on four legislative committees in his freshman year: Commerce and Labor, Constitutional Amendments, Judiciary, and Transportation.

By 2003, Oceguera was named Assistant Majority Leader and Vice-Chair of the Assembly Judiciary Committee. He also served on both the Commerce and Labor Committee and the Transportation Committee. During the period between legislative sessions, he served on the Legislative Subcommittee to Study the Death Penalty and Related DNA Testing. Additionally, he was one of a select number of young legislators appointed to a Toll Fellowship, a bipartisan organization which trains new legislators nationwide.

In the 2005 session of the Nevada Legislature, he continued as Assistant Majority Leader, chaired the Transportation Committee, served as vice chair of the Committee on Commerce and Labor, and continued to serve on the Judiciary Committee.

Following that session, Oceguera chaired interim committees to review regulations and study legislative security. He was vice chair of the Legislative Commission, and continues to hold that position. Trusted with additional leadership duties, John served in 2005 and 2006 on the Committee to Consult With the Director and the Legislative Counsel Bureau Biennial Budget Review Committee.

At the beginning of the 2007 legislature, Oceguera became Assembly Majority Leader and took over the reins as chair of the Committee on Commerce and Labor. He continued working on the Judiciary Committee.

In Carson City, Oceguera has a reputation for being thoroughly informed on the issues, ready to ask the tough questions and willing to go the extra mile for the district he represents. Back in his district, he is known for keeping the lines of communication open to the residents and businesses there. He takes a grass roots approach to both campaigning and representation, often going door-to-door, meeting with the voters and hearing their concerns first-hand.

Find out more at John Oceguera's website.

Rory Reid for Nevada Governor:

Rory Reid has been endorsed by Democracy for America. Here's what they have to say about him:

Rory Reid is running for governor because he believes that Nevada needs a fundamental change in direction to realize its potential and compete in the 21st Century economy.

He's won the support of DFA members across the state and is DFA's Nevada All-Star. Join the campaign today and help put it over the top in November.

Here is Rory Reid's statement to DFA:

I am a Nevadan through and through. I grew up here, went to school here, raised my family here, and built a successful career devoted to public service here. My three children have gone through the public school system and my wife, Cindy, is a longtime educator.

An attorney by trade, I have served as leader of one of the largest and most complex counties in the nation, serving more than 2 million residents – more than 70% of the state’s population – and more than 40 million visitors each year.

Clark County covers more than 8,000 square miles, providing social services, overseeing businesses in the region – including the Las Vegas Strip, and managing the nation’s fifth busiest airport - with a budget nearly equal to the State of Nevada’s entire general fund.

As chairman of the Clark County Board of Commissioners, I have worked to ensure fiscal discipline during difficult times, while promoting job creation and economic development.

One of my first initiatives when elected to the Clark County Commission in 2002 was to reform government ethics and transparency. I led the groundbreaking effort to crack down on lobbying, conflicts of interests and gifts.

Clark County’s smart fiscal planning helped to avert the drastic budget cuts that have plagued the rest of the state. Clark County has reserved 8-10% of its revenues in a rainy day fund, hedging against economic downturns. Under my leadership, Clark County has never raised taxes, and balanced its budget every year.

Goals:

I am running for governor because I believe that Nevada needs a fundamental change in direction to realize its potential, compete in the 21st Century economy, and provide a high quality of life for all residents – present and future.

Nevada is at the bottom of important lists because for too long our state has suffered without leadership, and with no discernible plan for the future – not for economic diversification, not for jobs, and certainly not for education. And we can no longer survive, let alone thrive, with an economy solely dependent on the volatile fortunes of the tourism industry.

My campaign is built around real ideas, calling upon experts in Nevada and around the country, and citing proven successes and lessons from other states that might be adapted and applied successfully here.

Issues:

My top three priorities are to put Nevadans back to work by diversifying our economy, transforming our schools and addressing our state’s difficult budget crisis.

We must do more to diversify our economy. The day I announced my candidacy, I introduced a 30-page plan, The Virtual Crossroads, to create a new economy in Nevada. This document proposes a fundamentally new direction for Nevada. It is a new approach to economic development that captures the full potential of the state, and new leadership that has been sorely lacking in Carson City. I also plan to release an energy plan this summer that will create better ways to tap into Nevada’s vast renewable energy potential.

Earlier this year, I released my EDGE plan, which will totally transform our schools. It will give educators the ability to create professional learning environments in our schools. Everyone – the governor, parents, teachers and principals – must be part of the solution to ensure our children are ready for the 21st Century economy. I believe that we can create a stronger economy by focusing on stronger schools, while providing our children with the education they need to succeed in the 21st Century.

Finally, I will work to address our state’s difficult budget crisis. We must grow our economy in order to generate more revenue. And to grow our economy in the current competitive global climate, we must invest in education. It’s that simple.

To free up the resources necessary to improve our schools, upgrade our workforce, attract higher-paying jobs, and pay down the past decades’ debts, we will need to cut back in other areas. That will require finding efficiencies wherever we can and cutting waste, reinventing Nevada’s outdated state government for the 21st Century, using new thinking to do better with less, and eliminating unnecessary expenditures.

Find out more from Rory Reid's website.

Progressive Candidates in Arizona

2010-10-12T19:27:00.000-07:00

Here are some candidates endorsed by major progressive organizations like the Indigenous Democratic Network, Progressive Majority and Democracy for America.

First, here is a particularly great candidate, a brilliant astrophysicist. I find the result is often excellent when a scientist enters politics:

Angela Cotera
Candidate for State House - District 12 (Challenger)
Avondale, Buckeye, El Mirage, Goodyear, Litchfield Park, Luke AFB, Youngtown and parts of Phoenix, Glendale & Surprise

Angela Cotera, an astrophysicist, garnered 47.5% of the vote in the 2008 elections. This district is in the fast growing far western portion of Maricopa County and is part of our strategic plan. She holds a Ph.D. in applied physics from Stanford University and is a research astrophysicist for the Carl Sagan Center, SETI Institute. She has volunteered in schools for years to bring her passion for astronomy to students. She and her husband have lived in Avondale since 1991. During the 2006 elections, her frustration with elected political leaders at the local, state and national levels compelled her to do whatever she could to help change the political landscape of Arizona. She is a graduate of Emerge program and has participated in the Center for Policy Alternatives training, attended the Take Back America Confernece and gotten messaging help from us.

Click here to support and learn more about Angela.

Next I would like to highlight some candidates endorsed by Democracy for America:

Raul Grijalva for Congress (AZ-07)

Raul Grijalva is a progressive champion. As Chairman of the Progressive Caucus he's fought for us time and again -- And his work has made him the number one target of Wall Street interests and Republicans across the country.

Join the campaign today to help a progressive champion fight back.

Here is Raul Grijalva's statement to DFA:

I was born and raised in Tucson, Arizona. My father emigrated from Mexico in 1945 as a bracero, a laborer brought in by the U.S. government to help offset the loss of skilled American ranch hands serving in World War II. My parents stressed the importance of education to their three children. It was that encouragement that led me to my career in public service. My wife, Ramona, and I have been married for almost 40 years. We have three daughters, Adelita, Raquel and Marisa, as well as two grandchildren, Adelina and Raúlito.

From 1974 to 1986, I served on the Tucson Unified School District Governing Board, serving as chairman during my last three years on the board. During my tenure at TUSD, I worked with the courts, Superintendent, and educators on a desegregation plan and was the lead Board member in implementing the integration plan. Upon my retirement, an elementary school was named after me in order to honor his service and contributions to education in TUSD.

I served on the Pima County Board of Supervisors from 1989 to 2002. My leadership led to the creation of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, an innovative approach to species and habitat protection in concert with land-use planning in the community. As a Supervisor, I led a successful campaign for a $10 million bond package to reinvest in older, poorer neighborhoods and to fund a county housing trust.

I was elected to Congress in 2002. It was a true grassroots campaign – I was outspent 3:1, but defeated my opponents by staying true to progressive values and standing up for what’s right. Currently, I am member of the House Education and Labor Committee and the House Natural Resources Committee, where I serve as Chairman for the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands. I am an active member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

This year, I was proud to introduce many bills, including HR 5355, the “no cap” bill, which would eliminate the cap on economic damages for companies drilling offshore. Well before the Deepwater Horizon disaster, I was actively pushing for oil rig safety and oversight. I called out government agencies’ pathological coziness with the oil industry and prioritized transparency and accountability. Recently, I led the markup of H.R. 3534, the Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources (CLEAR) Act, which will break up the outdated Minerals Management Service, require full environmental reviews of drilling proposals, and make it possible for the public to recoup more royalties from companies working on public land.

I also introduced HR 5028, the Right to Rent Act of 2010, which would stem the nation’s tide of foreclosures by allowing families to stay in the houses that are their homes at a fair market rent, while also lowering the family’s monthly housing costs, and allowing the mortgage holder to receive a fair-market return on their property.

Goals:

I believe that public service can and should be an honorable career that makes life better for the greatest possible number of people. This value has been my guiding star since I first decided to run for public office. We are living in a defining period for our great nation. The history books will praise or condemn us based on how we invest in people, reestablish our moral standing in the world, and create a better direction for America. I am running for re-election to Congress because what the government does now can permanently improve the well-being of our people.

Issues:

Education—As a member of the Education and Labor Committee, I will continue to prioritize significant reforms of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act re-authorization to improve education for Arizona children, provide the resources that were originally promised by No Child Left Behind, and advocate for smaller classes, greater teacher support and increased involvement of parents in their children’s education. I will closely monitor implementation the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, passed this session as part of health care reform, especially in terms of how it lowers costs at colleges and universities and increases access to student loans for higher education.

Immigration/Border security—Comprehensive immigration and border security reform continues to be exploited as a wedge issue instead of being seen as a major national and international question sorely in need of an answer. A lack of administration prioritizing and of Congressional political courage has led to the divisive, mean-spirited and unconstitutional approaches of local and state governments: deriding and targeting all undocumented people, and those who may appear to be undocumented, as a threat to our security and the survival of our nation. The debate has become about how much unaccountable, symbolic enforcement we can carry out: bigger border walls, more armed troops, spending sprees on failed technology. Elected officials continue to avoid tackling the tough issues they were sent to Washington to address. I remain committed to supporting comprehensive immigration and border security reform as the top priority in the next session of Congress, if not sooner.

Environment—My top priorities for Arizona are protecting our public lands and national treasures from assault by foreign mining companies around the Grand Canyon and ensuring that land swaps do not benefit private industry at public expense. As chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee’s National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands subcommittee, I will remain focused on reforming federal agencies that oversee resource extraction on public lands and coastal waterways. I will also continue working to end the cozy relationship between federal oil drilling regulators and the industry they are paid to oversee.

Some of what Raul Grijalva has been doing recently:

Raúl Leads House Effort to Vote on Middle Class Tax Cuts

Raúl Joins EnergizeUS Coalition To Call For Green Jobs, Better Infrastructure for American Workers

Raúl Wins “Best of Congress” Award From Corporate Voices for Working Families

University of Arizona Veterans Rehabilitation Program Started With Grijalva’s Help Receives $500,000 Funding Stream

Find out more from Raul's website.

Penny Kotterman (AZ Superintendent of Public Instruction)

As a parent, a teacher, and a teacher mentor, Penny Kotterman has spent more than thirty years devoted to fulfilling the promise of a quality public education for every child.

Penny understand that the success of our students today will determine our quality of life tomorrow. Arizona must do better -- from critical early learning for young children, to the higher education necessary to prepare the next generation of state leaders. That's why Penny earned the support of DFA members across the state and DFA's Arizona All-Star endorsement.

Here is Penny Kotterman's statement to DFA:

My name is Penny Kotterman. I am seeking the office Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2010 because I can make a real difference for our schools and for public education in the state of Arizona. There is no greater foundation for our children and young adults than an excellent education that prepares them to be successful and thrive and gives them the opportunity to make choices about their future. As Superintendent of Public Instruction, I can help create those opportunities for the next generation of Arizona students.

A lifelong educator with over 30 years of experience as a classroom teacher, mentor, and district program facilitator, I currently work providing policy and program support in the areas of teacher quality and professional development for K-12 educators. In addition to nearly 20 years of practical classroom experience, I have a decade’s worth of experience in education advocacy and policy development here in Arizona.

As president of the Arizona Education Association for 6 years, I helped build many of the policies central to education in Arizona today, including work on student standards and assessments, Proposition 301, and teacher certification. I have provided policy advice and support Governor Napolitano’s committee on Teacher Quality, the Arizona P-20 Council, and the State Board of Education, among others.

If we believe in high standards and high expectations for our children, our teachers and our schools, we must invest our efforts and resources in their success. I encourage you to go to our website www.PennyKotterman.com to find out more about our campaign.

Goals:

I believe it is time to change the conversation about public education. The superintendent of public instruction needs to be an educational leader, armed with a depth of knowledge gained over a lifetime of experience in education, not a politician with an ideological formula gained over a lifetime of running for office. We do not need anymore attorneys, politicians, bureaucrats or consultants, we need a committed teacher and educator leading the public education effort in our state. We need to move from polarizing political stances to conversations and solutions about what Arizona students need to be successful in the world they will face. High standards and high expectations for our schools, our teachers and our students are essential to our success. In order to be sure we are not just engaging in rhetoric, we also need to talk about the importance of investing in our schools for the future and providing the resources our children need to be competitive and successful. I believe I have the experience, dedication, passion, skill and knowledge to serve this state as a true educational leader and superintendent of public instruction.
There is a great deal to be considered in the public education arena in Arizona. Arizona is 49th in per pupil funding and as a state we have one of the largest per-capita budget deficits in the nation. Public education has been underfunded and over-regulated for much of the last two decades. At the same time we have allowed a largely unregulated system of Tuition Tax Credits and Charter Schools to expand. Student achievement has improved in some areas, but as a whole is virtually flat, and the achievement and resource gap between our poorest schools and the wealthiest continues to grow. Teacher quality has been eroded by an "anyone can teach" mentality. Given this set of circumstances, my first major goal is to change the conversation about public education in Arizona and advocate for our public schools as the foundation for a strong democracy, opportunity, and economic development. The Superintendent of Public Instruction must be the voice of advocacy for our schools, our educators and our students. It is the responsibility of the Superintendent to seek efficient and effective program and financial policies, and this is more important than ever in tough economic times. My second goal is to improve the relationship of the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) and the 225+ school districts in Arizona. The establishment of reasonable policies that are informed by local needs, listening and collaborating with local district and county entities, and reinforcing a public service ethic and purpose in the ADE can return the ADE to a place of providing service and technical support to districts and schools. The third broad goal I have is to systematically improve student success in schools across Arizona. This will require attention to the use of data, assessments, teacher effectiveness and school improvement support in a very connected and systematic manner, constantly developing and managing systems of continuous improvement and adjusting to meet the needs of our most struggling schools and student populations. I believe the answers and expertise to do this lie within the vast experiences our best educators. We must work to replicate programs that work and support the elimination of those that do not.

Issues:

Our campaign is focused on the issues of High Standards and High Expectations for students, teachers and schools. This translates into issues of educational opportunity for ALL of our students, improved (not MORE) student assessments and their uses, and effective, research-based programs and policies for supporting student and school improvement. For teachers this means a concerted effort to recruit and retain our best teachers through aggressive recruitment of individuals who are committed to the profession of teaching, the development of programs like quality mentoring for new teachers, professional development for existing teachers, and performance evaluation systems that lead to reflective practice and on-going and continuous improvement.

Find out more from Penny's website.

And here are some other Progressive Majority endorsed candidates in Arizona:

Andrei Cherny
Candidate for State Treasurer (Open Seat)

Andrei Cherny most recently was an Arizona Assistant Attorney General before becoming a full time candidate. He worked as a White House aide for President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, and served as the youngest Presidential speechwriter in history. He is also the author of two top selling books, The Next Deal: The Future of Public Life in the Information Age, and most recently, The Candy Bombers: The Untold Story of the Berlin Airlift and America's Finest Hour. He is an officer in the Naval Reserve and is a member of SEIU. Andrei is already garnering national support for his election, including having Clinton host a fundraiser, and Gore writing a solicitation for his campaign.

Click here to support and learn more about Andrei.

Rae Waters
Candidate for State House - District 20 (Incumbent)
Maricopa County

Rae Waters picked up a traditionally Republican-held state House seat in District 20. Rae was a late entrant into this race because the Democratic Party's previous candidate, Corey Harris, was recalled to active duty in Iraq and cannot stand for election. District 20 is a traditionally Republican district that, due to changing registration numbers, is trending Democratic, however, Rae is the only Democrat elected in the district and is one the Republicans top targets. In 2008, Rae only won by 700 votes. Rae is running on her record fiscal responsibility, and strengthening health care and education. Professionally, most recently she served as a community columnist for the Arizona Republic. For the last 12 years, Rae has also served as an elected m ember of the Kyrene School District governing board, where she held a variety of leadership positions, including chairing the state association. She is running as a clean election candidate.

Rae Waters has also been endorsed by:

Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona

"The Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona are proud to endorse Rae Waters for the House in Arizona, legislative District 20. Rae Waters understands the need for core government services like public safety, education, and health care. She has demonstrated her ability to deal with difficult problems and arrive at the best solution possible. We need more people like Rae Waters in the Arizona State Legislature."

Arizona Education Association

"The Arizona Education Association is proud to endorse Representative Rae Waters for the House of Representatives in Legislative District 20. Rae has been a strong advocate for students, schools, and teachers. Arizona's students and families need more legislators like Rae who care about quality public education."

AZ Correctional Peace Officers Association

"Rae Waters has shown clear and consistent support for law enforcement. Her dedication to keeping our neighborhoods safe and her commitment to staying tough on crime are traits that are desperately needed in the Arizona legislature."

And:
Fraternal Order of Police
Arizona Medical Association
National Association of Social Workers

Click here to support and learn more about Rae.

Pat Fleming
Candidate for State House - District 25 (Incumbent)
Bisbee, Douglas, Gila Bend, Marana, Nogales and the Tohono O'odham Reservation

Progressive Majority fielded Pat for her in her first bid for the House in District 25 in 2006 against an entrenched incumbent. While unsuccessful, Pat ran a great race and ran again in 2008, this time successfully. In 2010, she is running for reelection and is a top target of the Republicans, as they have control of the other state house seat in this district and the district is trending Republican. District 25 is a sprawling rural district that runs along much of the Mexican border where illegal crossing is occurring. Pat is retired from the Department of the Defense, where she oversaw multi-million dollars budgets. She is a retired member of American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). Pat is a graduate of the Emerge program, has worked with Jennie Blackton on messaging, has attended the Take Back America conference and has worked with Progressive Majority on all aspects of her campaign.

Pat Fleming has also been endorsed by:

The Tucson Weekly
Greater Sierra Vista Chamber of Commerce
Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona
Arizona Nurses Association Political Action Committee
Arizona Education Association
Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association
Arizona League of Conservation Voters
Arizona Women’s Political Caucus
Las Adelitas Arizona
AFSCME Arizona
Sierra Club, Grand Canyon Chapter
Planned Parenthood of Arizona
Arizona State Building and Construction Trades Council
Arizona AFL-CIO
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, IBEW 640

And many others

Click here to support and learn more about Pat.

Cheryl Cage
Candidate for State House - District 26 (Challenger)
Pima County

Cheryl Cage is a repeat candidate for a House seat in Legislative District 26. The seat had been held by a Democrat between 2006 and 2008; Cheryl's close loss (she garnered 49% of the vote) allowed the Republicans to win the seat. A retired member of the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), Cheryl is now a consultant in the aviation industry. As a small business owner, she understands the need for fiscal responsibility, and wants to rein in the irresponsible budget practices of the Republican majority in Phoenix. Her opponent is the extreme right-wing Sen. Al Melvin, upset a popular, moderate, well-funded in Republican House member in the primary in 2008. This district has featured very close elections in recent years, but all three seats (this and the two house seats) were all captured by Republicans in 2008. Year in and year out, LD 26 has been a top-tier target for all progressive stakeholder groups and the Democratic Party. Cheryl received a significant amount of training in 2008; this year she has honed her fundraising messages with us, as she ran as a clean election candidate last time.

Click here to support and learn more about Cheryl.

Andrea Dalessandro
Candidate for State House - District 30 (Challenger)
Southern Pima County, Santa Cruz County & Cochise County

Andrea on Education from Andrea Dalessandro on Vimeo.

Andrea Dalessandro is another of our repeat candidates who ran in 2008. This year, she's running for the House of Representatives in District 30, which has two seats currently held by Republicans. Andrea garnered 47.5% of the vote in 2008. Andrea is a graduate of Emerge, our partner organization, that trains women. There is one open seat and one conservative running for reelection. This is a targeted district for taking control of the Statehouse, and a viable race due in large part to Andrea's tireless campaigning in the last year. She is a certified public accountant and a former high school math teacher. Andrea and her husband, a retired letter carrier, moved to Arizona in 2004 from New Jersey. She is a retired member of the Arizona Education Association, the New Jersey Education Association and the New Jersey Federation of Teachers. She attended numerous trainings, including Center for Policy Alternatives' values training and Progressive Majority's messaging training.

Click here to support and learn more about Andrea.

This comes from the Indigenous Democratic Network (INDN's List), an organization that helps Native American Democrats run for office:

INDN's List is proud to announce our endorsement of an unprecedented slate of highly qualified Indian candidates for office in Arizona. This election, more than any other, it is vital the Indian voice be heard in elected office in Arizona. A recent law passed this year allows police to racially profile American Indians, and others, because they "look like illegal aliens." This radical law directly impacts the Indian communities in Arizona and we need strong Indian voices to stand up for ALL of our civil rights. Luckily, we have the best slate of Indian candidates Arizona has ever seen, including the chance to elect the first Indian statewide.

We need your donation to help us fund these amazing candidates! Every contribution helps us provide the funding these American Indian candidates need to win their elections.

Secretary of State

INDN's List is so excited to join the Arizona Republic in endorsing Chris Deschene for Secretary of State. Chris Deschene attended our "From the Table to the Ticket" training in 2006 where he impressed all of our staff and as well as Congressman Mike Honda (D-CA), the Vice Chair of the DNC, who is also supporting Chris. He has served in the State House with distinction and is ready to bring his experience to the Secretary of State’s office.

Chris Deschene was inspired to service by his grandfather, who served as a Navajo Codetalker during World War 2. Chris followed in his grandfather’s footsteps and dedicated his life to serving his country. He attended the US Naval Academy and served two tours of duty overseas in the Marine Corps, ultimately serving as the Executive Officer for a reconnaissance team of 160 Marines.

Upon completing his military service, Chris returned to Arizona and simultaneously earned a law degree and a Masters in Mechanical Engineering with an emphasis in renewable and alternative energy development. He also has been a member of the United Steelworkers Union and knows the importance of standing up for working Americans.

Chris is running a hotly contested primary for Secretary of State, and, if victorious, would be the first American Indian to hold statewide office in Arizona.

Deschene has also been endorsed by:

Arizona Education Association:
"Public education has been a priority for Chris Deschene throughout his career in the state Legislature, and we in the Arizona Education Association are thrilled and proud to support him for the office of Secretary of State."

SEIU Arizona:
"SEIU Arizona is pleased to endorse Chris Deschene for Secretary of State. A tireless supporter of quality public services and the employees who deliver them, Chris is well qualified to represent the citizens of Arizona in this essential office."

Retired General John Adams:
"Chris is a proven leader with a track record of success in one of our nation's most important institutions, the United States Marine Corps, and Arizona needs his leadership. I served more than 30 years in the U.S. Army dedicated to defending the Constitution and its protections guaranteed to everyone. No one understands better the importance of these guarantees, especially as they relate to fair elections, than Represenatative Chris Deschene. He will be a great Secretary of State for all of Arizona."

Among many others.

Please visit Chris's website and learn more about his campaign.

State Senate

INDN's List is thrilled to endorse Jack Jackson, Jr. for State Senate in the Second Legislative District. Jack has spent his entire career fighting for Indian rights, including representing the Navajo Nation for 12 years in Washington, DC. He then moved on to the National Indian Education Association, where he represented the educational concerns of over 3,000 American Indian and Alaskan Native educators, school administrators, parents and students. During the Fiscal Year 1996 budget negotiations, he worked tirelessly with tribal leadership to reinstate full funding of $81 million to the Office of Indian Education in the Department of Education.

In 1997, Jack became the Director of Governmental Affairs for the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), the oldest, largest and most representative Indian advocacy organization in the nation for over 250 tribal governments. His main responsibility was overseeing legislative and appropriation measures before the United States Congress affecting Indian Country.

While at NCAI, Jack helped create a strong and credible Native influence at the national, state and local levels. He assisted in the design of a comprehensive government-to-government strategy, which resulted in three unprecedented Executive Orders issued by President Clinton and several Presidential Memorandums and Directives relevant to the needs and concerns of Indian Country. These actions protected Native American sacred sites and required appropriate consultation with tribal governments.

From 2003 to 2005, Jack served in the 46th Arizona State Legislature in the House of Representatives. In 2005, Jack was appointed by Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano as the Executive Director of the Arizona Commission of Indian Affairs (ACIA). His main duty was to ensure that the Commission provided assistance to the State of Arizona in fulfilling its responsibilities to Arizona’s 22 Indian Nations and Tribes by making recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature. He conferred and coordinated with officials and agencies of other governmental units regarding Indian issues, and worked to provide improved relationships and a greater understanding between tribal governments and the State.

Please visit Jack's website to learn more about his positions and how you can help him win this vital election.

State House

INDN's List is delighted to endorse Albert Hale and Albert Tom for State House District 2. In Arizona, voters select two State House candidates to represent their district in the legislature. These two Navajo candidates have each served in the state legislature in the past with distinction and are the best choices to represent the Indian voice in the State House this next legislative cycle.

Yakoke,*
Kalyn Free
President, INDN's List

* "Thank You," in Choctaw.

Progressive Candidates in Iowa

2010-10-12T07:20:00.000-07:00

Roxanne Conlin for Senate

Republican Senator Chuck Grassley has betrayed working and middle class Americans:

Obstructionist Republican Chuck Grassley has a challenger for Senator from Iowa. Roxanne Conlin is running for US Senate:

Roxanne Conlin has been endorsed by Democracy for America:

Roxanne Conlin is running against one of the Senate's biggest Healthcare opponents -- Chuck Grassley.

Senator Grassley fought us for more than a year, working everyday to kill the public option and take down all health reform with it. He even went so far as to claim President Obama wanted to "pull the plug on grandma." America doesn't need Republicans like Chuck Grassley in the U.S. Senate.

Here is Roxanne's statement to DFA:

Battling organized crime, corruption and giant corporations, Roxanne Conlin has spent her life standing up to special interests for Iowa families who have been hurt by powerful forces. At an early age, Roxanne experienced personally the hardships many families face. She learned to never give up, no matter what the odds.
Growing up in Iowa, Roxanne's family lived paycheck to paycheck, moving from town to town in search of steady work. Her father was an alcoholic, who struggled to hold down a job, while her mother tried to put food on the table for their children. The oldest of six children, Roxanne went to work as a waitress at the age of 14 to help the family make ends meet.

At the age of 16, Roxanne entered Drake University - taking on extra classes while holding down several jobs at the same time. Roxanne worked her way through college, graduating at 19 and Drake Law School graduating at just 21 years old. She chose to dedicate her legal career to speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves.
As an Assistant Attorney General for Iowa, Roxanne fought public corruption and wrote the first law of its kind protecting rape victims. Then, as the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, she worked hand in hand with law enforcement - leading major drug busts and cracking down on violent crime.

For more than 25 years, Roxanne has owned and managed a small law firm in Iowa. Her firm is dedicated to representing everyday people who do not have a voice. She has never worked for a single corporate interest. Instead, Roxanne has chosen to fight for family farmers squeezed by big banks, police officers wronged by the system, and workers hurt by large companies. A successful small business, Roxanne Conlin & Associates was recently cited by a national magazine as one of the best firms to work for because of its family-friendly practices, welcoming the children of staff into the workplace.

With each new milestone - serving as United States Attorney in Iowa, earning the Democratic nomination for Governor of Iowa, being elected as the first woman President of the American Association of Justice, and selected as one of the first women in the Inner Circle of Advocates - Roxanne leaves behind a trail of shattered glass. Through it all, she still sees the world through the eyes of the courageous, everyday Iowan who refuses to give up in the face of overwhelming odds.
Roxanne lives in Des Moines with her husband of 45 years, James. They are most proud of their four adult children and five grandchildren.

Goals:

I’m running because I’m fed up with double-digit unemployment, endless wars and bailouts for Wall Street. Chuck Grassley has held office for 51 years and has created partisan gridlock. He tried to block health insurance reform and Iowa deserves better. As a Senator, I will work to create good paying jobs, stimulate our economy and truly leave no child behind.

Issues:

JOBS
While the big banks got bailed out, Iowans got left behind. Simply put – that’s outrageous. We need a senator who will help small businesses in Iowa, not big corporations that ship jobs overseas. We must fight for relief on Main Street – with tax incentives to encourage businesses to keep and create jobs here, instead of more bailouts for Wall Street. And preserve the jobs we have, while also creating new ones with a renewable energy revolution — in wind, solar, ethanol, and biomass.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY: THE ECONOMY
The federal government should use the same practical, kitchen table budgeting principles Iowa families use every day – live within your means, save for a rainy day, and work towards a balanced budget. We need an honest budgeting process that ensures government is effective, efficient, and working for the middle-class – instead of serving as an ATM for the big banks and other special interests. We must invest in education, job training, transportation, and health care to create jobs and promote long-term economic growth. An important element of this process must include closing corporate tax loopholes for companies who ship our jobs overseas.

EDUCATION
Iowans are no longer competing with Nebraska, Minnesota, or even the East and West coasts, we are competing with the workforce and entrepreneurs in India, China, and Europe. The best way to invest in Iowa’s future is by providing our children with a world-class education. In order to grow and sustain a vibrant economy we need to ensure every American has access to a quality education – from preschool through college. The cost of a college education has risen 40% in the last five years. We must make vocational schools and college more affordable by increasing the value of Pell Grants and lowering the interest rates on student loans. We need to change No Child Left Behind, it is an unfunded mandate and encourages schools to teach to the test and punishes poorly performing schools instead of working to make them better.

To find out more about Roxanne, go here.

To volunteer, go here.

To contribute, go here.

Michael Mauro for Secretary of State in Iowa

Michael Mauro has been an excellent secretary of state for Iowa and he has been endorsed by the Secretary of State Project. Here is what they have to say about him:

Michael Mauro is seeking his second term as Iowa’s Secretary of State. He has worked to strengthen Iowa’s rich history of quality elections, which had the fifth highest voter percentage turnout in the nation in 2008. In the fall of 2009, Iowa’s election laws and procedures implemented by Secretary Mauro gained national attention when the state ranked first in a study focusing on the ease of voting for members of the military and U.S. citizens living overseas. In just his first term, he has worked with the state legislature to allow same-day voter registration and to establish a uniform voting system for all 99 counties. As a result, legislation is now in place to ensure a voter-verified paper trail for all future elections. He has also helped create electronic poll books available for use across the state, enhancing precinct officials’ ability to process voters effectively and consistently and adding another layer of security to Iowa’s voting process.

Among Mauro's accomplishments is to encourage and bring out the military vote, as outlined here (PDF):

REPORT NAMES IOWA TOP STATE IN MILITARY AND OVERSEAS VOTING

Please take some time to volunteer for Michael Mauro's campaign. You can help keep Iowa's elections fair and accurate.